Blog

NVIDIA’s GH200 Grace Hopper Superchip fuses an Arm-based Grace CPU with a Hopper-class GPU on one module, linked by a custom, ultra-fast interconnect. For deep learning teams, the headline is simple: more usable memory, far higher CPU↔GPU bandwidth, and substantial per-chip inference gains versus previous generations—especially when models are memory-hungry.

What the Superchip Actually Is

• CPU + GPU on one “superchip” connected by NVLink-C2C at 900 GB/s—about 7× faster than PCIe Gen5—so tensors, KV-caches, and embeddings move with far less overhead.

• High-bandwidth memory on the GPU (HBM3/HBM3e) and LPDDR5X on Grace act like a shared, fast pool for large models and data pipelines.

• GH200 NVL2 = two Grace Hopper superchips fully linked: up to 288 GB HBM, ~10 TB/s memory bandwidth, and ~1.2 TB of “fast memory” per node—3.5× the GPU memory and 3× the bandwidth of an H100 server. Ideal for large embeddings and long-context language models.

Deep-Learning Performance: Real Numbers You Can Bank On

1) Inference vs H100

• In MLPerf Inference v3.1, GH200 delivered up to 17% higher per-accelerator throughput than H100 SXM across the official workloads, thanks to bigger/faster memory and the 900 GB/s CPU↔GPU link.

2) Training/Graph workloads vs H100 PCIe

• For Graph Neural Networks (GNNs), NVIDIA shows up to 8× faster training on GH200 versus H100 PCIe, attributing the lift to the combined fast memory and NVLink-C2C. (Think fraud-detection, molecular graphs, social graphs.)

3) Why memory & interconnect matter for LLMs/RAG

• RAG and vector DBs: embedding generation and vector search achieve significant speedups by avoiding CPU↔GPU copies. NVIDIA cites a ~30× faster embedding generation compared to CPU-only baselines when Grace handles preprocessing and ships tensors to Hopper over NVLink-C2C.

Bottom line: GH200 isn’t just “more FLOPS.” It’s higher tokens/sec per watt at larger batch sizes because memory bottlenecks and CPU ↔ GPU transfer costs drop significantly.

How It Compares to an Older Generation GPU (A100)

The most widely cited, apples-to-apples public benchmarks are MLPerf:

• H100 vs A100 (training): In MLPerf Training v3.0, H100 delivered up to 3.1× more performance per accelerator than A100 across workloads.

• GH200 vs H100 (inference): As noted above, GH200 adds up to +17% per-accelerator inference over H100 SXM in MLPerf v3.1.

Putting this in practical terms for deep-learning stacks:

• If you’re moving from A100 to H100, expect ~2–3× per-GPU gains on mainstream DL training/inference (workload-dependent).

• If you’re serving large models and step up to GH200, you also capture memory-driven speedups (bigger batches, fewer stalls) and +17% per-chip MLPerf inference uplift versus H100—plus major wins from the NVL2 node’s memory scale if your bottleneck is embeddings/KV cache.

In short: from A100 → H100 → GH200, you gain raw compute and a progressively better memory/interconnect story. For today’s LLMs and GNNs, that memory story often dominates.

Quick Spec & Capability Snapshot

Which One Should You Choose?

• You’re on A100 today, training LLMs/CV
  Moving to H100 provides the most significant raw compute jump (often 2–3 times per GPU). If your models are not memory-bound, H100 may be the most cost-efficient next step.

• You’re serving large models or wrestling with embeddings/KV caches
  GH200 is built for this: higher per-chip inference compared to H100, significantly larger effective memory pools, and dramatically lower CPU-to-GPU overheads. Expect higher batch sizes and better latency at steady state.

• You need a single node that behaves like a “big GPU”
  GH200 NVL2 nodes deliver 288 GB HBM and ~1.2 TB fast memory with ~10 TB/s bandwidth—ideal for recommender systems, long-context LLMs, GNNs, and RAG at scale.

Practical Tips (so you don’t leave performance on the table)

1. Utilize memory headroom by increasing batch sizes and sequence lengths; pin embeddings/KV cache in HBM where possible. GH200’s larger fast memory pool is the point.

2. Profile CPU↔GPU transfers: on H100/SXM, PCIe copies can eat >20% of inference time for some recsys workloads; GH200’s NVLink-C2C slashes that to low single digits.

3. Use current stacks: TensorRT-LLM / CUDA-X, along with mixed precision (FP8/FP16), were used in the MLPerf runs—mirror those configurations to approach the published numbers.

Conclusion

• If you’re coming from A100, the H100 jump delivers the largest pure compute uplift for deep learning—validated in MLPerf Training and Inference.

• If your workloads are memory-bound (RAG, recommenders, long-context LLMs, GNNs), GH200 goes further: +17% MLPerf inference over H100, up to 8× GNN-training speedups vs H100 PCIe in NVIDIA’s data, and NVL2 nodes with 3.5× the GPU memory of an H100 server.

One-line takeaway: for modern deep learning, GH200 turns “memory is the bottleneck” into a design advantage—and that often translates into faster models, fewer nodes, and better energy economics.