AMD Radeon Pro 570 vs AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded data separates these two AMD mobile graphics parts clearly, though not by a wide margin. The AMD Radeon Pro 570 holds a decisive advantage in every benchmark where both were measured. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Pro 570 scores 27,702 against 27,125 for the RX Vega M GH, a 2.1% lead. In Geekbench Vulkan, the Pro 570 scores 31,974 against 31,268, a 2.3% lead. The Pro 570 also carries a higher overall benchmark average of 33,207 compared to 29,197 for the Vega M GH, and it sits in the 78th percentile of all GPUs versus the 74th percentile for its rival.

The Pro 570 is the pick for users who need the strongest raw compute performance in portable devices, particularly for OpenCL and Vulkan workloads. The RX Vega M GH, while slightly behind in raw scores, offers a different tradeoff: it draws 100 W versus 150 W for the Pro 570, making it the more power-efficient option for thin-and-light systems where thermal headroom is scarce. The data does not show a single benchmark where the Vega M GH wins, so the choice hinges on whether the user prioritizes peak performance (Pro 570) or lower power draw (Vega M GH) in an integrated form factor.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs share the same GCN 4.0 architecture and are built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, but they are distinct chips with different internal designs. The Pro 570 uses the Ellesmere chip with 5,700 million transistors on a 232 mm² die, while the Vega M GH uses the Polaris 22 chip with 5,000 million transistors on a 208 mm² die. The transistor density is nearly identical: 24.6 million per mm² for the Pro 570 versus 24.0 million per mm² for the Vega M GH.

The shading engine differs. The Pro 570 packs 1,792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The Vega M GH has fewer shading units at 1,536 and fewer TMUs at 96, but it doubles the ROP count to 64. This structural difference explains the divergent pixel and texture rates. The Pro 570 achieves 35.36 GPixel/s and 123.8 GTexel/s, while the Vega M GH hits 76.16 GPixel/s and 114.2 GTexel/s. The Vega M GH's higher pixel rate comes directly from its doubled ROPs, even though its texture rate is lower.

Memory architecture is another major split. The Pro 570 uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256 bit bus, delivering 217.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Vega M GH uses 4 GB of HBM2 on a 1024 bit bus, delivering 204.8 GB/s. The Pro 570 has slightly more bandwidth despite the narrower bus, because its memory clock runs at 1695 MHz (6.8 Gbps effective) versus 800 MHz (1600 Mbps effective) for the Vega M GH. The Vega M GH compensates with a much wider bus, but the net bandwidth still falls slightly behind.

Clock speeds favor the Vega M GH. Its base clock is 1063 MHz and boost is 1190 MHz, versus 1000 MHz base and 1105 MHz boost for the Pro 570. Yet the Pro 570 still produces higher FP32 throughput at 3.960 TFLOPS versus 3.656 TFLOPS, because it has more shading units. Both GPUs offer FP16 at the same rate as FP32 (1:1 ratio). The Pro 570 also supports PCIe 3.0 x16, while the Vega M GH uses an integrated (IGP) bus interface. Both are classified as IGP in slot width and have portable device dependent display outputs.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data shows the Pro 570 winning in both recorded tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Pro 570 leads by 2.1%, and in Geekbench Vulkan, it leads by 2.3%. These are modest margins, but they are consistent across both APIs. The Pro 570 also holds a higher average benchmark score (33,207 versus 29,197), which reflects its stronger overall compute profile.

The Vega M GH does not win any recorded benchmark, but its strengths lie elsewhere. Its pixel rate of 76.16 GPixel/s is more than double the Pro 570's 35.36 GPixel/s, which suggests it can handle fill-rate heavy work, such as certain rendering passes or post-processing effects, more efficiently. Its 100 W TDP is one-third lower than the Pro 570's 150 W, making it the better choice for thermally constrained laptops where sustained performance matters more than peak scores. The Vega M GH also uses HBM2 memory, which, despite slightly lower bandwidth, offers different power and packaging characteristics that can benefit integrated designs.

Users targeting OpenCL compute workloads, such as GPU-accelerated rendering or scientific simulation, should favor the Pro 570 based on its higher score. Users targeting Vulkan-based games or applications should also favor the Pro 570, as its Vulkan score is higher. The Vega M GH is not without merit, but the data does not support choosing it for raw benchmark performance.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 570 has an average benchmark score of 33,207, while the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH scores 29,197.

Q: How much faster is the Pro 570 in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The Pro 570 scores 27,702 versus 27,125 for the Vega M GH, a 2.1% advantage.

Q: What is the power draw difference between the two?

A: The Pro 570 has a TDP of 150 W, while the Vega M GH has a TDP of 100 W.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The Pro 570 has 1,792 shading units, compared to 1,536 for the Vega M GH.

Q: What memory type does each GPU use?

A: The Pro 570 uses 4 GB of GDDR5, while the Vega M GH uses 4 GB of HBM2.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data includes two benchmark comparisons, and the Pro 570 wins both. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Pro 570 scores 27,702 against the Vega M GH's 27,125. The delta is 2.1%, a narrow but clear margin. In Geekbench Vulkan, the Pro 570 scores 31,974 against 31,268, a 2.3% lead. These margins are consistent, suggesting the Pro 570's architectural advantages, namely more shading units and higher bandwidth, translate into a small but repeatable performance edge across different compute APIs.

The Vega M GH's closest rival data provides context. Its nearest rival is the AMD FirePower W8000 with an average score of 29,211 and a delta of 0%, followed by the Intel Arc A370M at 29,175 (0.1% delta) and the AMD Radeon RX 470 at 28,996 (0.7% delta). The Pro 570's nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile at 33,170 (0.1% delta), the NVIDIA T550 Mobile at 33,161 (0.1% delta), and the NVIDIA P104-100 at 32,982 (0.7% delta). This places the Pro 570 in a higher performance tier overall, as its average score sits above 33,000 while the Vega M GH sits just above 29,000.

The pixel rate difference is the largest gap in raw specifications. The Vega M GH outputs 76.16 GPixel/s versus 35.36 GPixel/s for the Pro 570, more than a 2x advantage. Yet this does not translate into a benchmark win, likely because Geekbench tests focus on general compute rather than pure fill rate. The texture rate favors the Pro 570 at 123.8 GTexel/s versus 114.2 GTexel/s. FP32 compute also favors the Pro 570 at 3.960 TFLOPS versus 3.656 TFLOPS.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD Radeon Pro 570 | AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH |

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

| Chip | Ellesmere | Polaris 22 |

| Generation | Radeon Pro Mac (500 Series) | Vega (Vega M) |

| Transistors | 5,700 million | 5,000 million |

| Die Size | 232 mm² | 208 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 24.6M / mm² | 24.0M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1000 MHz | 1063 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1105 MHz | 1190 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1695 MHz, 6.8 Gbps effective | 800 MHz, 1600 Mbps effective |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | HBM2 |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 1024 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 217.0 GB/s | 204.8 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1792 | 1536 |

| TMUs | 112 | 96 |

| ROPs | 32 | 64 |

| Pixel Rate | 35.36 GPixel/s | 76.16 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 123.8 GTexel/s | 114.2 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 3.960 TFLOPS | 3.656 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 3.960 TFLOPS (1:1) | 3.656 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 150 W | 100 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | IGP |

| Release Date | 2017-06-04 | 2018-01-31 |

| Percentile Vs All GPUs | 78 | 74 |

| Average Benchmark Score | 33,207 | 29,197 |

The two GPUs share the same architecture, process node, foundry, memory size, API support, and production status. They differ in almost every compute and memory specification. The Pro 570 favors raw throughput with more shading units, higher bandwidth, and higher FP32. The Vega M GH favors pixel fill rate with doubled ROPs and a lower power envelope. Both are end-of-life products with no launch MSRP recorded in the database. The Pro 570 was released roughly eight months earlier, and its higher percentile rank reflects its stronger position relative to all other GPUs in the database.