Qwen 3.5 397B-A17B · GPU comparison

Qwen 3.5 397B-A17B — B200 vs MI325X

Head-to-head AI inference benchmark comparison of B200 (NVIDIA Blackwell) and MI325X (AMD CDNA 3) 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 / MI325X on Qwen 3.5 397B-A17B at 46 tok/s/user: 4415 / 403 tok/s/GPU, $0.12 / $0.86 per million tokens. B200 is 601% cheaper per token; B200 delivers 996% more tok/s/GPU.

Around the middle of the 37–72 tok/s/user interactivity band, at 55 tok/s/user on Qwen 3.5 397B-A17B: B200 runs 3811 tok/s/GPU at $0.14/M tokens, MI325X runs 219 at $1.63/M. B200 is 1047% cheaper per token; B200 delivers 1637% more tok/s/GPU.

Setting 64 tok/s/user as the target on Qwen 3.5 397B-A17B, B200 produces 3271 tok/s/GPU ($0.17 per million tokens) and MI325X produces 134 ($2.64). B200 is 1491% cheaper per token; B200 delivers 2337% 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)
B200:4415.5MI325X:402.9
B200:3810.6MI325X:219.4
B200:3271.4MI325X:134.3
Cost ($/M tok)
B200:$0.123MI325X:$0.864
B200:$0.142MI325X:$1.631
B200:$0.166MI325X:$2.638
tok/s/MW
B200:2034784MI325X:184830
B200:1756045MI325X:100633
B200:1507578MI325X:61591
Concurrency
B200:~215MI325X:~37
B200:~155MI325X:~16
B200:~110MI325X:~9

Inference Performance

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