Chip comparison
Cambricon MLU370-X8 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.
| Field | Cambricon MLU370-X8 | Tenstorrent Blackhole |
|---|---|---|
| Process node | TSMC N7 | TSMC N6 |
| TDP | 250 W | 300 W |
| Memory | 48 GB LPDDR5 | 32 GB GDDR6 |
| Memory bandwidth | — | 512 GB/s |
| FP16 (dense) | 96 TFLOPS | 745 TFLOPS |
| INT8 (dense) | 256 TOPS | 2,980 TOPS |
| Form factor | PCIe | PCIe |
| Announced | 2022-03-25 | 2024-07-01 |
| Released | — | 2025-01-01 |
Robots running Cambricon MLU370-X8
No robots publicly running it yet.
Robots running Tenstorrent Blackhole
No robots publicly running it yet.
Data centers with Cambricon MLU370-X8
No data centers publicly running it yet.
Data centers with Tenstorrent Blackhole
No data centers publicly running it yet.
Common questions
Cambricon MLU370-X8 vs Tenstorrent Blackhole: which is faster for training?
Tenstorrent Blackhole has 7.76x the dense FP16/BF16 throughput of the other (Cambricon MLU370-X8: 96 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.
Cambricon MLU370-X8 vs Tenstorrent Blackhole: which has more memory?
Cambricon MLU370-X8 carries more HBM (Cambricon MLU370-X8: 48 GB LPDDR5; Tenstorrent Blackhole: 32 GB GDDR6). Memory capacity sets the largest model that fits on one chip without partitioning; memory bandwidth sets inference throughput.
Cambricon MLU370-X8 vs Tenstorrent Blackhole: which is more power-efficient?
Dense FP16/BF16 TFLOPS per watt: Cambricon MLU370-X8 0.38 (96 ÷ 250 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 · Cambricon MLU370-X8 full page · Tenstorrent Blackhole full page.