Chip comparison
Google TPU v7 (Ironwood) vs Mobileye EyeQ6
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) | Mobileye EyeQ6 |
|---|---|---|
| Process node | — | TSMC 7nm |
| TDP | 700 W | 33 W |
| Memory | 192 GB HBM3e | — |
| Memory bandwidth | 7,400 GB/s | — |
| BF16 (dense) | 4,614 TFLOPS | — |
| FP8 (dense) | 9,228 TFLOPS | — |
| INT8 (dense) | — | 34 TOPS |
| Form factor | OAM (Ironwood pod, up to 9,216 chips) | Auto-safety SoC |
| Announced | 2025-04-09 | 2022-01-04 |
| Released | 2025-12-01 | 2024-01-01 |
Robots running Google TPU v7 (Ironwood)
No robots publicly running it yet.
Robots running Mobileye EyeQ6
Data centers with Google TPU v7 (Ironwood)
No data centers publicly running it yet.
Data centers with Mobileye EyeQ6
No data centers publicly running it yet.
Common questions
Google TPU v7 (Ironwood) vs Mobileye EyeQ6: which is more widely used?
Google TPU v7 (Ironwood): 0 robots and 0 data centers publicly running it. Mobileye EyeQ6: 1 robot and 0 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 · Mobileye EyeQ6 full page.