DEPLOYDatabase

Chip comparison

Biren BR100 vs Tenstorrent Blackhole

Side-by-side specs

Straight from each vendor's datasheet. Winner in bold: higher throughput, memory, or transistor count; lower power draw or price. Sparse (2:4) throughput roughly doubles the FP8/INT8 numbers shown.

FieldBiren BR100Tenstorrent Blackhole
Process nodeTSMC N7TSMC N6
Transistors (B)77
TDP550 W300 W
Memory64 GB HBM2e32 GB GDDR6
Memory bandwidth2,300 GB/s512 GB/s
FP16 (dense)1,024 TFLOPS745 TFLOPS
BF16 (dense)1,024 TFLOPS
INT8 (dense)2,048 TOPS2,980 TOPS
Form factorOAMPCIe
Announced2022-08-092024-07-01
Released2025-01-01

Robots running Biren BR100

No robots publicly running it yet.

Robots running Tenstorrent Blackhole

No robots publicly running it yet.

Data centers with Biren BR100

No data centers publicly running it yet.

Data centers with Tenstorrent Blackhole

No data centers publicly running it yet.

Common questions

Biren BR100 vs Tenstorrent Blackhole: which is faster for training?

Biren BR100 has 1.37x the dense FP16/BF16 throughput of the other (Biren BR100: 1,024 TFLOPS; Tenstorrent Blackhole: 745 TFLOPS). Real-world training speed also depends on memory bandwidth, interconnect, and software stack: see the spec diff for those inputs.

Biren BR100 vs Tenstorrent Blackhole: which has more memory?

Biren BR100 carries more HBM (Biren BR100: 64 GB HBM2e; Tenstorrent Blackhole: 32 GB GDDR6). Memory capacity sets the largest model that fits on one chip without partitioning; memory bandwidth sets inference throughput.

Biren BR100 vs Tenstorrent Blackhole: which is more power-efficient?

Dense FP16/BF16 TFLOPS per watt: Biren BR100 1.86 (1,024 ÷ 550 W); Tenstorrent Blackhole 2.48 (745 ÷ 300 W). Tenstorrent Blackhole wins at the die level; system-level efficiency also depends on cooling and interconnect.

See also: every chip comparison · Biren BR100 full page · Tenstorrent Blackhole full page.