Chip comparison
Google TPU v7 (Ironwood) vs Meta MTIA v2
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 | Google TPU v7 (Ironwood) | Meta MTIA v2 |
|---|---|---|
| Process node | — | TSMC N5 |
| TDP | 700 W | 90 W |
| Memory | 192 GB HBM3e | 128 GB LPDDR5 |
| Memory bandwidth | 7,400 GB/s | 205 GB/s |
| BF16 (dense) | 4,614 TFLOPS | — |
| FP8 (dense) | 9,228 TFLOPS | — |
| INT8 (dense) | — | 708 TOPS |
| Form factor | OAM (Ironwood pod, up to 9,216 chips) | PCIe (internal Meta) |
| Announced | 2025-04-09 | 2024-04-10 |
| Released | 2025-12-01 | 2024-05-01 |
Robots running Google TPU v7 (Ironwood)
No robots publicly running it yet.
Robots running Meta MTIA v2
No robots publicly running it yet.
Data centers with Google TPU v7 (Ironwood)
No data centers publicly running it yet.
Data centers with Meta MTIA v2
Common questions
Google TPU v7 (Ironwood) vs Meta MTIA v2: which has more memory?
Google TPU v7 (Ironwood) carries more HBM (Google TPU v7 (Ironwood): 192 GB HBM3e; Meta MTIA v2: 128 GB LPDDR5). Memory capacity sets the largest model that fits on one chip without partitioning; memory bandwidth sets inference throughput.
Google TPU v7 (Ironwood) vs Meta MTIA v2: which is more widely used?
Google TPU v7 (Ironwood): 0 robots and 0 data centers publicly running it. Meta MTIA v2: 0 robots and 2 data centers. Empty here means no operator has said publicly, not zero adoption in the market.
See also: every chip comparison · Google TPU v7 (Ironwood) full page · Meta MTIA v2 full page.