★
Menú
Inicio Cómo se construye Lista de seguimiento El stack
Hardware ChipsComparar chips Servidores y sistemasRedes MemoriaFundiciones y empaquetado Refrigeración
Instalaciones Centros de datosEnergía ProyectosCloud y cómputo GPU
Inteligencia Modelos de IASoftware Productos de IABenchmarks Artículos de investigaciónConjuntos de datos Conceptos
Ecosistema EmpresasAcciones PersonasCronología TendenciasEl futuro de la IA
Aprender Noticias Consulta los datos Agentes IA
Acerca de Sobre nosotros Metodología Datos y API Aviso legal
Opciones
DATOS Y API

Acceso JSON gratuito de solo lectura a los datos en caché del sitio.

Modo oscuro

Vista guiada
¿Nuevo en el mundo de los chips, los centros de datos y la jerga de modelos? Explicamos los términos clave mientras navegas, en lenguaje claro. Los mismos datos, con la ayuda integrada.

Vista experta
Ya conoces el stack. Solo los datos: limpios, rápidos y compactos, sin explicaciones adicionales. Esta es la vista predeterminada.

Idioma de la interfaz
‹ Atrás
Análisis en profundidad 8 min de lectura · ← Todas las noticias

Chip marketing is a fog of petaflops. Here is how to read a spec sheet like the ones in our chip database — and which numbers to trust.

FLOPS come with a precision label

A floating-point operation can use 64 bits of precision or 4. Halve the bits and you roughly double the speed, so the same chip lists wildly different numbers: an H100 does 34 TFLOPS at FP64 but nearly 2,000 TFLOPS ("2 petaflops") at FP8. AI tolerates low precision surprisingly well — weights at 8 or even 4 bits still work — which is why each hardware generation adds a lower format: FP8 in Hopper, FP4 in Blackwell. When comparing chips, compare the same precision.

Watch for the sparsity asterisk

NVIDIA headline figures usually assume "structured sparsity" — half the values are zero and skipped — which doubles the quoted number. Real workloads rarely qualify fully. This site lists dense figures and notes sparsity separately; when a vendor slide says 20 PFLOPS and our record says 9–10, that is the difference you are seeing.

Memory is usually the real spec

Two numbers dominate real performance: memory capacity (can the model fit close to the compute?) and memory bandwidth (how fast can weights stream in?). Generating each token requires touching essentially all active weights, so tokens per second track bandwidth almost linearly. This is why the H200 — identical compute to H100, 76% more memory, 43% more bandwidth — served large models nearly twice as fast, and why HBM supply decides product roadmaps.

TDP and the system tax

Thermal design power is the chip's budgeted draw: 700 W for an H100 SXM, up to 1,400 W for a MI355X. Roughly double per-GPU power to estimate the full server share (CPUs, networking, fans, power-conversion losses), then add ~10–30% facility overhead (PUE). A 1,000 W GPU is really a ~2 kW commitment at the meter.

Interconnect: the number that makes clusters

Per-chip specs stop mattering the moment models span chips. Scale-up bandwidth (NVLink: 900 GB/s on Hopper, 1.8 TB/s on Blackwell) sets how well 8–72 GPUs pool memory; scale-out networking (InfiniBand/Ethernet, 400–800 Gb/s per GPU) sets cluster efficiency. A mediocre chip with a great fabric often beats the reverse.

The honest hierarchy

For training: interconnect, then memory bandwidth, then dense BF16/FP8 FLOPS. For inference: memory capacity and bandwidth, then FP8/FP4 throughput, then cost per token. For everything: MLPerf results beat datasheets — measured beats claimed.

Más en Fundamentos

How Modern AI Actually Works Leer → Training vs Inference: The Two Economies of AI Leer → GPU, TPU, ASIC: What's Actually Different? Leer →