Qwen 3.5 397B-A17B · GPU comparison

Qwen 3.5 397B-A17B — B200 vs H200

Head-to-head AI inference benchmark comparison of B200 (NVIDIA Blackwell) and H200 (NVIDIA Hopper) on Qwen 3.5 397B-A17B. Latency, throughput, and cost across LLM workloads. Use the chart controls below to switch sequences, precisions, and metrics — same interactions as the main inference chart.

B200 posts 3226 tok/s/GPU for $0.17 per million tokens at 69 tok/s/user on Qwen 3.5 397B-A17B; H200 posts 485 tok/s/GPU for $0.81. B200 is 377% cheaper per token; B200 delivers 565% more tok/s/GPU.

Throughput at 107 tok/s/user on Qwen 3.5 397B-A17B: B200 hits 1555 tok/s/GPU, H200 hits 349. Per-million costs land at $0.35 and $1.11 respectively. B200 is 217% cheaper per token; B200 delivers 346% more tok/s/GPU.

B200 / H200 on Qwen 3.5 397B-A17B at 145 tok/s/user: 1001 / 282 tok/s/GPU, $0.54 / $1.39 per million tokens. B200 is 157% cheaper per token; B200 delivers 255% more tok/s/GPU. (Numbers reflect the default 1k/1k · fp8 selection for this URL — table and chart below update if you change sequence, precision, or model in the controls.)

View performance-per-dollar view →

Interpolated from real benchmark data. Edit target interactivity values below to compare at different operating points.
Metric
Interactivity (tok/s/user)
Interactivity (tok/s/user)
Interactivity (tok/s/user)
Throughput (tok/s/gpu)
B200:3225.9H200:485.3
B200:1554.9H200:348.8
B200:1001.4H200:282.0
Cost ($/M tok)
B200:$0.169H200:$0.807
B200:$0.349H200:$1.108
B200:$0.540H200:$1.387
tok/s/MW
B200:1486611H200:280535
B200:716542H200:201595
B200:461491H200:163002
Concurrency
B200:~102H200:~28
B200:~33H200:~13
B200:~15H200:~8

Inference Performance

Inference performance metrics across different models, hardware configurations, and serving parameters.

Vendor:
Aggregation:
Spec Decoding: