← Lab notes

RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell: what 96 GB at $1–2.50 an hour buys you for LLMs and video

We rented the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell (96 GB) and ran the same tests as on our H100, H200, A100 and RTX 4090 nodes. Serving Qwen3-8B under a latency target, it handled 3.09 requests per second, $0.56 per million output tokens at $2.49 an hour, close to an H100 NVL and half the cost of an A100. A 15-second 720p Wan2.2 video took 12.6 minutes with SageAttention 2 on one card, 31% slower than an H200 but 39% cheaper per clip. At the ~$1/hour some marketplaces advertise, both costs fall by more than half.

Choosing GPUs? Compare GPUs for your traffic · Get your node measured, free

The RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell is showing up everywhere in GPU rental listings: 96 GB of memory, a 600 W board, and prices from about $1 an hour on marketplaces to $2.50 on managed clouds. It isn't a datacenter flagship, so the question is simple: per token and per video, how does it compare with the cards we've already measured?

We rented one on RunPod Secure Cloud ($2.49/h) and ran the same tests we use everywhere else: a health check, the same 8B LLM under the same latency target, and the same image-to-video model as our H200 video test.

The card itself

tokenwatt-check passed on both editions we could rent:

Server Edition Workstation Edition
Power limit 600 W (full) 600 W (full)
Dense BF16 matmul 378–408 TFLOPS* 376 TFLOPS
Memory copy bandwidth 1.46 TB/s 1.47 TB/s
PCIe Gen5 x16 Gen5 x16

* 378 with PyTorch 2.8 (CUDA 12.8), 408 with PyTorch 2.13 (CUDA 13.0) on a second node.

For reference, our healthy H100 SXM measures about 680 TFLOPS and 3.0 TB/s, an A100 260 TFLOPS and 1.75 TB/s, an L40S 170 TFLOPS and 0.65 TB/s. So the RTX PRO 6000 has more than half an H100's compute and about half its memory bandwidth, with more memory than either.

A third edition, the Max-Q, runs the same chip at 300 W. It was out of stock when we tried, so we have no numbers for it. Check which edition a listing means before comparing prices.

LLM serving: close to an H100 NVL, half the cost of an A100

Same setup as our other Qwen3-8B measurements: BF16 weights, vLLM 0.31.0 with default settings, a chat-like workload, and a latency target of p99 time to first token ≤ 2 s and p99 time per output token ≤ 50 ms.

GPU (price per hour) Capacity within the target Output tokens/s Cost per million output tokens
H100 SXM ($3.99) 8.79 req/s 3,581 $0.31
H100 PCIe ($2.89) 4.61 req/s 1,851 $0.43
RTX PRO 6000 ($2.49) 3.09 req/s 1,234 $0.56
H100 NVL, set to 310 W ($3.19) 3.91 req/s 1,560 $0.57
RTX 4090, FP8 ($0.89) 0.74 req/s 276 $0.90
A100 SXM 80 GB ($1.79) 1.13 req/s 469 $1.06

At $2.49 an hour it lands next to an H100 NVL per token and costs about half as much as an A100. At the roughly $1 an hour some marketplaces advertise for this card, the same throughput works out to about $0.23 per million tokens, below even the H100 SXM at its price. That's arithmetic on the measured throughput, not a measurement on a $1 node. Accuracy on our GSM8K check was 94%, in line with every other card.

It also served 2.7× as many requests as the A100 with less memory bandwidth (1.46 vs 1.75 TB/s). As on the A100, the limit is the slowest tokens during long prompts, and that depends on compute, where the Blackwell card has 1.5× the A100's.

Video: a 15-second 720p clip on one card

The 15-second 720p Wan2.2 clip from our video tests peaks at 68.5 GB of GPU memory with FP8 weights. It fits on one 96 GB RTX PRO 6000 with room to spare. (With the official BF16 weights the model is larger: in a separate test, one and four 80 GB H100s ran out of memory on the same clip and only eight worked.)

Same model (a Wan2.2 14B image-to-video FP8 fine-tune, 8 distilled steps), same ComfyUI version, input, prompts and seeds as on the H200:

1280×720 H200 ($5.29/h) RTX PRO 6000 ($2.49/h)
5 s, PyTorch attention 155 s 223 s
5 s, SageAttention 2 95 s 171 s
15 s, SageAttention 2 9.6 min 12.6 min
Cost per 15 s clip $0.85 $0.52
Cost per second of video $0.056 $0.035

The Blackwell card is 31% slower on the 15-second clip and 39% cheaper per clip. At ~$1 an hour, a clip would cost about $0.21, or $0.014 per second of video. For comparison, hosted APIs for Wan2.2 14B image-to-video list $0.036–0.08 per second of 720p video, mostly for clips of 5–8 seconds.

One difference: SageAttention 2 sped the 5-second clip up 1.3× here, against 1.6× on the H200. It built and ran on Blackwell, but appears less tuned for it.

Should you rent one?

  • For video generation and models that need 80–96 GB on one card, yes. One RTX PRO 6000 replaces a multi-GPU setup and costs less per clip than an H200.
  • For LLM serving at a latency target, it's competitive on price per token, not on speed. An H100 SXM still serves 2.8× as much per card and is cheaper per token at the prices we paid. The RTX PRO 6000 wins when it's rented near $1 an hour.
  • Check the edition and the node. "RTX PRO 6000" covers 600 W and 300 W boards. nvidia-smi -q -d POWER or pip install tokenwatt-check shows which one you got.

Limits

One node per test on one platform (RunPod Secure Cloud, EUR-IS-2), quick-mode LLM measurement (2-minute windows, 2 repeats), one LLM, one video model and one reference image. Prices are RunPod's on the day. The $1/hour figures are arithmetic on the advertised price, not measurements. The Max-Q edition was not tested. Power is GPU board power.

Raw data: Qwen3-8B report · Method: how we measure · Prices across providers: RTX PRO 6000 price per hour · all GPU prices.

Keep reading

4 min read

Wan2.2 image-to-video on an H200: a 15-second 720p clip takes 18 minutes, or 9.6 with one change

We deployed a Wan2.2 14B image-to-video model with ComfyUI on rented H200s and measured clip length, resolution, attention backend and PyTorch build on the same machine. A 15-second 720p clip took 18.1 minutes with PyTorch attention and 9.6 minutes with SageAttention 2 (1.89x), at 68.5 GB peak GPU memory. Upgrading PyTorch to CUDA 13 alone gained 6%. Output stayed visually the same. On short clips, two H200s of the same model differed by 1.5x or more.

video generationWan2.2H200
3 min read

Do inference providers really make $10–20 per GPU-hour? We measured DeepSeek V4.1 Flash on H200s

A widely shared post says inference providers earn $10–20 per GPU-hour serving open models on rented GPUs. We served DeepSeek V4.1 Flash on 4× H200 with vLLM's published recipe and measured what it can sell within a latency target. At the prices 38 OpenRouter endpoints charge, a fully loaded H200 earns $1.80–8.84 an hour, $4.42 at the most common price, against $5.29 rent. At 100 tokens per second per user it earns $0.24. Margins exist, but they depend on hardware, tuning and pricing, not on showing up.

inference economicsDeepSeekH200
3 min read

H100 vs A100 for LLM inference: 7.8× the capacity for 2.2× the price

We served Qwen3-8B with vLLM on a rented H100 SXM and a rented A100 SXM 80GB under the same latency target. The H100 served 8.79 requests per second against 1.13 on the A100: 7.8× the capacity for 2.2× the hourly price, so each token cost 71% less ($0.31 against $1.06 per million output tokens). On raw specs the H100 is only 1.7–2.6× faster. The rest of the gap comes from slow tokens on the A100, which a serving setting can partly fix.

H100A100LLM inference