AMD Radeon Pro 570 vs AMD Radeon Pro 575X Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a clear and consistent hierarchy between these two AMD workstation GPUs. Across all three recorded Geekbench compute tests, the AMD Radeon Pro 575X finishes ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro 570, with the margin varying significantly by workload type. The largest gap appears in the OpenCL test, where the 575X scores 34,773 against the 570's 27,702, a 25.5% advantage. This is the widest delta in the entire comparison and suggests a substantial throughput advantage in general-purpose compute tasks that leverage OpenCL.

The Vulkan test shows the second-largest separation. Here, the 575X records 37,919 while the 570 posts 31,974, giving the newer card an 18.6% lead. This result indicates that the 575X also holds a decisive edge in cross-platform graphics and compute APIs, which is notable for a workstation part where Vulkan adoption continues to grow in professional applications.

The Metal benchmark, which is often the most relevant API for macOS-based workflows given the target platform of these cards, shows the narrowest gap. The 575X scores 44,655 against the 570's 39,945, a still-solid 11.8% advantage. While this is the smallest relative win for the 575X, it remains a meaningful margin, and the absolute Metal score of the 575X is the highest of any test result for either card. This suggests that the architectural enhancements in the 575X translate well to Apple's graphics API.

Looking at the broader context, the average benchmark score for the 575X is 39,116, while the 570 averages 33,207. That difference of roughly 5,900 points in the database's aggregate metric places the 575X in the 82nd percentile of all GPUs, whereas the 570 sits in the 78th percentile. The nearest rivals for each card further contextualize their standing. The 575X's average score is just 1.1% above the AMD Radeon Pro 580X and the NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A, while it trails the AMD Radeon Pro 575 and NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile by 1.1%. The 570, by contrast, sits within a tighter cluster: it is 0.1% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile and NVIDIA T550 Mobile, 0.7% ahead of the NVIDIA P104-100, and 1.1% ahead of the NVIDIA T600 Mobile.

In direct head-to-head terms, the 575X wins all three benchmark tests. The recorded data shows no test where the 570 manages to pull ahead. This is a comprehensive sweep, and the magnitude of each win is substantial enough that the results are unlikely to be noise. The 25.5% OpenCL gap, in particular, points to a fundamental throughput difference rather than a minor clock-speed adjustment.

Where Each One Wins

The data splits cleanly by workload type, with the 575X taking every category. For users prioritizing Metal-based rendering, the 11.8% advantage in geekbench_metal is the relevant figure. This is the closest contest, but it still represents a clear win for the 575X, and the absolute score of 44,655 is the strongest result across the entire comparison. For compute-heavy tasks that rely on OpenCL, the 575X is the standout choice, delivering a 25.5% improvement that will be felt in longer-running simulation or rendering jobs. The Vulkan result, sitting between the other two at 18.6%, reinforces the 575X's position as the more capable card across all measured APIs.

The 570, while losing every test, is not without a role. Its Metal score of 39,945 is respectable and places it within 12% of the 575X's best result. For users whose primary workload is Metal-based and who do not push heavy OpenCL or Vulkan compute, the 570's performance may be sufficient. The 570's average score of 33,207 places it in a competitive neighborhood with the NVIDIA RTX 3050 Mobile, which it edges by 0.1%, and the NVIDIA T550 Mobile, also by 0.1%. This suggests that the 570 is a competent mid-range workstation part, even if it is clearly outclassed by its newer sibling in the same product family.

The use-case split is therefore straightforward: the 575X is the choice for any workload where compute throughput matters, especially OpenCL. The 570 remains viable for lighter Metal-centric tasks where the extra performance of the 575X is not required, but the data does not reveal a single benchmark where the 570 offers a practical advantage.

Architecture Differences

Both cards share the same fundamental silicon. The AMD Radeon Pro 575X and AMD Radeon Pro 570 are built on the Ellesmere chip using the GCN 4.0 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. Both feature 5,700 million transistors on a 232 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 24.6M per mm². Memory configurations are identical: 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, with 217.0 GB/s of bandwidth and memory clocked at 1695 MHz, or 6.8 Gbps effective.

The differences emerge in the compute pipeline. The 575X carries 2,048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 32 raster output units. The 570, by contrast, has 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and the same 32 ROPs. This configuration directly explains the performance deltas: the 575X has 256 more shaders and 16 more TMUs, which translates into higher texture and pixel throughput. The 575X achieves 140.3 GTexel/s and 35.07 GPixel/s, while the 570 manages 123.8 GTexel/s and 35.36 GPixel/s. Interestingly, the 570 has a marginally higher pixel rate despite the lower texture rate, a result of its slightly different clock behavior.

Clock speeds are only partially listed in the database. The 570 has explicit base and boost clocks of 1000 MHz and 1105 MHz, respectively. The 575X has no base or boost clock listed, but its higher shader count and superior benchmark results imply a higher effective throughput. The FP32 performance tells the story: the 575X delivers 4.489 TFLOPS, while the 570 delivers 3.960 TFLOPS, a 13.4% advantage for the 575X in raw single-precision compute. Both cards offer FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, meaning the 575X also leads there by the same margin.

Both cards share a 150 W TDP, an IGP slot width, no power connectors, and a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface. Display outputs are listed as portable device dependent, reflecting their intended integration into Mac systems. API support is identical: DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The 575X was released in March 2019, while the 570 dates to June 2017, and both are end-of-life products. The 575X belongs to the 500X Series generation, while the 570 belongs to the 500 Series generation, which accounts for the architectural refinements that allow the 575X to extract more performance from the same node and chip design.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins in Metal performance?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 575X leads with a geekbench_metal score of 44,655 against the 570's 39,945, an 11.8% advantage.

Q: How large is the OpenCL gap between the two cards?

A: The 575X scores 34,773 in geekbench_opencl, while the 570 scores 27,702. That is a 25.5% lead for the 575X, the largest margin in any test.

Q: Do both cards have the same memory configuration?

A: Yes, both feature 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus with 217.0 GB/s bandwidth and 1695 MHz memory clock.

Q: What is the difference in shading units?

A: The 575X has 2,048 shading units, while the 570 has 1,792. The 575X also has 128 TMUs versus 112 on the 570, with both sharing 32 ROPs.

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The 575X averages 39,116 across all recorded tests, placing it in the 82nd percentile of all GPUs. The 570 averages 33,207, placing it in the 78th percentile.

Q: How does each card compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The 575X is 1.1% above the AMD Radeon Pro 580X and NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A, and 1.1% below the AMD Radeon Pro 575 and NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile. The 570 is 0.1% above the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile and NVIDIA T550 Mobile, 0.7% above the NVIDIA P104-100, and 1.1% above the NVIDIA T600 Mobile.

The Verdict

The data leaves no ambiguity: the AMD Radeon Pro 575X is the superior GPU in every measured benchmark. With wins of 11.8% in Metal, 18.6% in Vulkan, and 25.5% in OpenCL, it outperforms the AMD Radeon Pro 570 across the board. The architectural advantages, specifically 256 additional shading units and 16 extra texture mapping units, translate directly into higher FP32 throughput (4.489 TFLOPS versus 3.960 TFLOPS) and a higher average benchmark score (39,116 versus 33,207). The 575X also sits in a higher percentile class, 82nd versus 78th, and its nearest rivals are a mix of AMD and NVIDIA parts within a narrow 1.1% band, indicating it is well-positioned among its contemporaries.

The 570, while clearly outmatched, is not an embarrassment. Its average score of 33,207 places it within 0.1% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile and NVIDIA T550 Mobile, making it a competitive option in its own tier. For users who are locked into a 570-class workload and do not require the extra compute headroom, it remains a functional part. However, the database shows no scenario where the 570 wins a benchmark, and its lower shader count and FP32 throughput cap its potential in compute-heavy tasks.

The recommendation is therefore straightforward. Choose the AMD Radeon Pro 575X if maximum compute performance is the priority, particularly for OpenCL or Vulkan workloads where the margin is largest. Choose the AMD Radeon Pro 570 only if the workload is strictly Metal-based and the 11.8% performance deficit is acceptable, or if the part is already in hand and the extra performance of the 575X is not needed. The data does not support any other conclusion.