AMD Radeon Pro 570X vs AMD Radeon Pro 575 Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon Pro 575 outperforms the AMD Radeon Pro 570X across every recorded workload. In three head-to-head comparisons, the Pro 575 wins all three, with deltas ranging from 15.3% to 31.3%. The Pro 575 posts an average benchmark score of 39,555 across Geekbench Metal, OpenCL, and Vulkan tests, while the Pro 570X averages 32,176. That is a 23% overall gap in favor of the Pro 575.

The Pro 575 also sits higher in the global GPU percentile ranking at 82, versus 76 for the Pro 570X. For users choosing between these two, the data points clearly to the Pro 575 as the stronger option for compute-heavy tasks. The Pro 570X does have a higher boost clock of 1105 MHz versus the Pro 575's unspecified boost, but the Pro 575 compensates with more shading units, texture mapping units, and higher texture and FP32 rates. The Pro 570X is best suited for systems where its integrated form factor (IGP slot width) is a requirement, and where the workload does not demand maximum throughput. However, on pure performance, the Pro 575 is the winner in every measured category.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs are built on the same Ellesmere chip, using AMD's GCN 4.0 architecture on a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries. They share identical transistor counts of 5,700 million and a die size of 232 mm², yielding the same transistor density of 24.6M per mm². Both have 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, with 217.0 GB/s of bandwidth and a memory clock of 1695 MHz (6.8 Gbps effective). Neither has ray tracing or tensor cores, and both support DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3 via PCIe 3.0 x16.

The key differences lie in compute resources and clock behavior. The Pro 575 has 2048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. Its pixel rate is 35.07 GPixel/s, texture rate is 140.3 GTexel/s, and FP32 throughput is 4.489 TFLOPS, with FP16 at the same 4.489 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio). The Pro 570X, by contrast, has 1792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. Its pixel rate is slightly higher at 35.36 GPixel/s, but texture rate drops to 123.8 GTexel/s and FP32 falls to 3.960 TFLOPS, with FP16 also at 3.960 TFLOPS (1:1). The Pro 570X has a base clock of 1000 MHz and boost clock of 1105 MHz; the Pro 575 does not list base or boost clocks in the database, but its higher unit counts drive its performance advantage.

Both cards draw 150 W TDP and use no power connectors. The Pro 575 is an MXM Module, while the Pro 570X is an IGP. Both are end-of-life products, with the Pro 575 released in June 2017 and the Pro 570X released in March 2019, making the Pro 570X a later refresh despite its lower compute resources. Neither has a listed launch MSRP.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench Metal test shows the Pro 575 scoring 46,192 against the Pro 570X's 40,066. That is a 15.3% advantage for the Pro 575. This is the closest margin of the three tests, but still a decisive lead. In raw terms, the Pro 575 delivers over 6,000 points more in Metal performance.

The Geekbench OpenCL test widens the gap. The Pro 575 records 34,596, while the Pro 570X trails at 27,604. The delta is 25.3%. This 6,992-point difference reflects the Pro 575's higher shading unit count and texture throughput, which matter more in OpenCL compute workloads.

The largest separation appears in Geekbench Vulkan. The Pro 575 scores 37,878 versus 28,859 for the Pro 570X, a 31.3% lead. That is a 9,019-point gap, the biggest margin recorded. Vulkan performance tends to scale with raw compute resources, and the Pro 575's 2048 shading units versus 1792, plus its 140.3 GTexel/s texture rate versus 123.8, explain the substantial edge.

Across all three tests, the Pro 575's average score is 39,555. Its nearest rival in the database is the NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile at 39,568, a delta of 0%. The Pro 575 also sits within 1.1% of the AMD Radeon Pro 575X (39,116) and within 1.3% of the AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 (40,063), and it trails the AMD Radeon Pro 580 (40,318) by 1.9%. The Pro 570X, meanwhile, averages 32,176, with its closest rival being the AMD FirePro S10000 at 32,388 (0.7% higher). The AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE scores 32,456 (0.9% higher), the Intel Arc Pro A30M scores 31,894 (0.9% lower), and the AMD FirePro S9300 X2 scores 32,540 (1.1% higher).

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher compute throughput?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 575 has 4.489 TFLOPS FP32, while the AMD Radeon Pro 570X has 3.960 TFLOPS FP32. The Pro 575 is 13.4% higher in FP32 throughput.

Q: Do both cards use the same memory configuration?

A: Yes, both have 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 217.0 GB/s bandwidth and a memory clock of 1695 MHz (6.8 Gbps effective).

Q: What is the largest benchmark win for the Pro 575?

A: The largest win is in Geekbench Vulkan, where the Pro 575 scores 37,878 versus 28,859 for the Pro 570X, a 31.3% delta.

Q: How do the two compare in their global GPU percentile rankings?

A: The Pro 575 ranks in the 82nd percentile among all GPUs, while the Pro 570X ranks in the 76th percentile.

Q: What are the physical form factor differences?

A: The Pro 575 is an MXM Module, while the Pro 570X is an IGP. Neither requires power connectors, and both have a 150 W TDP.

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The Pro 575 has 2048 shading units, whereas the Pro 570X has 1792 shading units.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro 575 wins in every recorded benchmark category: Geekbench Metal (46,192 versus 40,066), Geekbench OpenCL (34,596 versus 27,604), and Geekbench Vulkan (37,878 versus 28,859). It also holds the higher average score (39,555 versus 32,176) and the higher percentile ranking (82 versus 76). For any application that stresses compute, rendering, or graphics API performance, the Pro 575 is the superior choice. Its 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 140.3 GTexel/s texture rate give it a clear edge in shader-heavy workloads and texture-bound tasks.

The AMD Radeon Pro 570X wins in one narrow regard: its pixel rate is marginally higher at 35.36 GPixel/s versus 35.07 GPixel/s for the Pro 575, a difference of less than 1%. This is a negligible advantage and does not translate into any benchmark victory. The Pro 570X also has a listed boost clock of 1105 MHz, which may help in lightly threaded or latency-sensitive scenarios, but the recorded data shows no test where this translates into a win. Additionally, the Pro 570X is an IGP form factor, which may be the only option in certain compact systems, whereas the Pro 575 requires an MXM slot. For users constrained by an IGP-only chassis, the Pro 570X is the practical choice despite lower performance.

For compute-heavy workloads such as OpenCL and Vulkan, the Pro 575's advantage is pronounced, with deltas of 25.3% and 31.3% respectively. For Metal-based workloads, the Pro 575 still leads by 15.3%, making it the better pick for macOS-oriented graphics tasks. The Pro 570X's closest rivals in the database are all within 1.1% of its average score, indicating it sits in a performance band where small differences matter, but the Pro 575 sits in a higher band entirely. The data does not support choosing the Pro 570X for performance reasons; it only makes sense where the IGP form factor is mandatory.