AMD Radeon Pro 570 vs AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits these two AMD GPUs along clear generational and capability lines. The AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 wins the only direct head-to-head comparison recorded in the database, taking the Geekbench Metal test with a score of 73,512 against the Radeon Pro 570's 39,945, a difference of 84%. That single result is decisive for any workload that relies on Apple's Metal API, but the story does not end there.

The Radeon Pro 570 has its own recorded strengths in the database, though they are not directly compared against the RX Vega 56. It posts a Geekbench OpenCL score of 27,702 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 31,974, while the RX Vega 56 has no OpenCL or Vulkan entries in the head-to-head set. This means the Pro 570 is the only one of the two with measurable cross-API versatility in the recorded data. For users whose applications target OpenCL or Vulkan, the Pro 570's results are the only available reference points.

The average benchmark scores tell a broader story. The RX Vega 56 averages 37,507 across its recorded tests, while the Pro 570 averages 33,207. That is a 12.9% gap in overall performance, placing the RX Vega 56 in the 81st percentile of all GPUs in the database, versus the Pro 570's 78th percentile. The RX Vega 56 also sits close to the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070, which averages 37,648, a delta of only -0.4%. The Pro 570, by contrast, sits near the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile, which averages 33,170, a delta of just 0.1%. The data positions the RX Vega 56 in a higher performance tier overall, while the Pro 570 competes with lower-end mobile parts.

For compute-heavy tasks, the RX Vega 56's FP32 output of 10.54 TFLOPS is 2.66 times the Pro 570's 3.960 TFLOPS. The RX Vega 56 also reaches 21.09 TFLOPS in FP16 with a 2:1 ratio, whereas the Pro 570 maxes at 3.960 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio. Any workload that can exploit FP16 will see an even larger relative advantage for the RX Vega 56. The Pro 570 wins only in portability and integration, being an IGP-class part with no power connectors and a 150 W TDP, versus the RX Vega 56's dual-slot design with two 8-pin connectors and a 210 W TDP.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different generations of AMD's Graphics Core Next architecture. The RX Vega 56 uses the Vega 10 chip built on GCN 5.0, while the Pro 570 uses the Ellesmere chip built on GCN 4.0. Both are manufactured on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, but the silicon differs dramatically in scale. Vega 10 packs 12,500 million transistors across a 495 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 25.3M per mm². Ellesmere contains only 5,700 million transistors on a 232 mm² die, with a density of 24.6M per mm². The RX Vega 56's die is more than twice the area and holds more than twice the transistors.

The compute resources scale accordingly. The RX Vega 56 has 3,584 shading units, 224 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs. The Pro 570 has half of each: 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Clock speeds also favor the RX Vega 56, with a base of 1156 MHz and a boost of 1471 MHz, versus the Pro 570's 1000 MHz base and 1105 MHz boost. The combination of more units and higher clocks explains the large gap in fill rates and compute throughput.

Memory architecture is a fundamental split. The RX Vega 56 uses 8 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus, delivering 409.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The Pro 570 uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 217.0 GB/s. That is roughly half the capacity and slightly more than half the bandwidth. The memory clocks also differ: the RX Vega 56 runs at 800 MHz with 1600 Mbps effective, while the Pro 570 runs at 1695 MHz with 6.8 Gbps effective. The GDDR5 part clocks much higher, but the HBM2 part's wider bus wins on total bandwidth.

Feature support differs in API level. The RX Vega 56 supports DirectX 12_1, while the Pro 570 only reaches DirectX 12_0. Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.3. The RX Vega 56 is a dual-slot card with 2x 8-pin power connectors and a suggested 550 W power supply, while the Pro 570 is an integrated graphics processor with no power connectors and no suggested PSU listed. The RX Vega 56 has explicit display outputs (1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a), whereas the Pro 570's outputs are described as "Portable Device Dependent." The Pro 570 is clearly designed for mobile or all-in-one Mac systems, while the RX Vega 56 is a standalone add-in board.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records one direct comparison between these two GPUs: Geekbench Metal. The RX Vega 56 scores 73,512, and the Pro 570 scores 39,945. The RX Vega 56 wins by 84%. That is a massive margin, nearly doubling the Pro 570's result. In the context of other GPUs in the database, the Pro 570's Metal score is closer to what one would expect from a mid-range mobile part, while the RX Vega 56's score approaches enthusiast-class territory.

The average benchmark scores reinforce this. The RX Vega 56's average of 37,507 is 4,300 points higher than the Pro 570's 33,207. The RX Vega 56's nearest rivals in the database are the NVIDIA Tesla P4 at 37,628 (-0.3%), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 at 37,648 (-0.4%), the AMD Radeon PRO W6400 at 37,157 (+0.9%), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile at 38,135 (-1.6%). The RX Vega 56 sits essentially at parity with the RTX 4070 in average score, which is a strong indicator of its overall capability. The Pro 570, by contrast, sits alongside the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile at 33,170 (+0.1%), the NVIDIA T550 Mobile at 33,161 (+0.1%), the NVIDIA P104-100 at 32,982 (+0.7%), and the NVIDIA T600 Mobile at 32,849 (+1.1%). The Pro 570 is grouped with low-power mobile GPUs, not desktop parts.

In raw throughput metrics, the RX Vega 56 dominates. Its pixel rate of 94.14 GPixel/s is 2.66 times the Pro 570's 35.36 GPixel/s. Its texture rate of 329.5 GTexel/s is 2.66 times the Pro 570's 123.8 GTexel/s. The FP32 compute gap is the same ratio, 10.54 TFLOPS versus 3.960 TFLOPS. In FP16, the RX Vega 56 extends its lead to 5.33 times, 21.09 TFLOPS versus 3.960 TFLOPS, because the Pro 570 cannot accelerate FP16 with a 2:1 ratio. These ratios are consistent across every compute-related metric, indicating that the RX Vega 56 is not just faster in one test but fundamentally more powerful at every level of the pipeline.

The memory bandwidth gap is 1.89 times, 409.6 GB/s versus 217.0 GB/s. The RX Vega 56 also has twice the memory capacity, 8 GB versus 4 GB. For workloads that are bandwidth-limited or require large working sets, this difference can be as important as raw compute. The Pro 570's higher memory clock of 1695 MHz versus 800 MHz does not compensate for its narrower 256-bit bus.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion for most users: the AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 is the stronger GPU in nearly every measurable way. It wins the only head-to-head benchmark by 84%, has more than double the FP32 throughput, more than double the texture and pixel rates, nearly double the memory bandwidth, and double the memory capacity. Its average benchmark score is 12.9% higher, and it sits in the 81st percentile of all GPUs in the database versus the Pro 570's 78th percentile. For gaming, compute, or any graphics workload that can use the RX Vega 56's resources, the choice is clear.

The Radeon Pro 570's case rests on its integration and efficiency. It is an IGP with no power connectors, a 150 W TDP, and no dimensions listed, meaning it is built for systems where a discrete card cannot fit or where power delivery is limited. Its OpenCL and Vulkan scores of 27,702 and 31,974 are the only recorded results for those APIs between the two cards, so users locked into those APIs on a Mac or portable system have a reference point. But the Pro 570's performance class, as shown by its nearest rivals (the RTX 3050 Mobile, T550 Mobile, and T600 Mobile), is far below the RX Vega 56's class (the RTX 4070 and RTX 4080 Mobile).

Users who need maximum performance should choose the RX Vega 56 without hesitation. Users who need an integrated, low-power GPU for a portable Mac system should choose the Pro 570, accepting that it delivers roughly half the performance in the one benchmark where both are measured. The RX Vega 56 was released on 2017-08-13, the Pro 570 on 2017-06-04, and both are end-of-life. The RX Vega 56 had a launch MSRP of 399 USD, but the database records no such figure for the Pro 570.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the Geekbench Metal test?

A: The AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 scores 73,512 versus the Radeon Pro 570's 39,945, a win by 84%.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The RX Vega 56 averages 37,507, while the Pro 570 averages 33,207, a gap of about 12.9%.

Q: What memory configurations do they use?

A: The RX Vega 56 has 8 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus with 409.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Pro 570 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 217.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same DirectX version?

A: No. The RX Vega 56 supports DirectX 12_1, while the Pro 570 only supports DirectX 12_0. Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.3.

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The RX Vega 56 delivers 10.54 TFLOPS, which is 2.66 times the Pro 570's 3.960 TFLOPS.

Q: Are both GPUs still in production?

A: No. Both are marked as end-of-life in the database.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 | AMD Radeon Pro 570 |

|---|---|---|

| Chip | Vega 10 | Ellesmere |

| Architecture | GCN 5.0 | GCN 4.0 |

| Transistors | 12,500 million | 5,700 million |

| Die Size | 495 mm² | 232 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 25.3M / mm² | 24.6M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1156 MHz | 1000 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1471 MHz | 1105 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 800 MHz (1600 Mbps effective) | 1695 MHz (6.8 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 4 GB |

| Memory Type | HBM2 | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus Width | 2048 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 409.6 GB/s | 217.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 3584 | 1792 |

| TMUs | 224 | 112 |

| ROPs | 64 | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 94.14 GPixel/s | 35.36 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 329.5 GTexel/s | 123.8 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 10.54 TFLOPS | 3.960 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 21.09 TFLOPS (2:1) | 3.960 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 210 W | 150 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | IGP |

| Power Connectors | 2x 8-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 550 W | None |

| Display Outputs | 1x HDMI 2.0b, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a | Portable Device Dependent |

| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 (12_0) |

| Dimensions | 280 mm x 111 mm x 40 mm | None listed |

| Release Date | 2017-08-13 | 2017-06-04 |

| Launch MSRP | 399 USD | None |