AMD Radeon Pro 570X vs NVIDIA Quadro GV100 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data presents a decisive comparison between the NVIDIA Quadro GV100 and the AMD Radeon Pro 570X. Across the shared benchmark suite, the NVIDIA Quadro GV100 secures victory in every applicable test, with margins that are nothing short of commanding. The head-to-head results are limited to two benchmarks where both cards have recorded scores, and in both instances, the GV100 demonstrates a level of performance that places the Radeon Pro 570X in a different competitive tier entirely.

In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the NVIDIA Quadro GV100 posts a score of 150,004, while the AMD Radeon Pro 570X manages 27,604. This translates to a delta of 443.4% in favor of the GV100. To put this in perspective, the GV100 is not merely faster; it is nearly five and a half times as fast in this compute-oriented workload. The scale of this advantage is such that it reflects fundamental differences in memory bandwidth, compute unit count, and raw processing capability. The Radeon Pro 570X, with its GCN 4.0 architecture and 3.960 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput, is simply outclassed by the GV100's 16.66 TFLOPS.

The second shared benchmark, Geekbench Vulkan, shows a similar pattern. The GV100 achieves 139,526 points, compared to the Radeon Pro 570X's 28,859. The delta here is 383.5%. While the absolute gap is slightly smaller than in OpenCL, the relative dominance remains overwhelming. Vulkan is a low-level API that tends to expose architectural efficiencies, and the Volta architecture's design, with its dedicated tensor cores and massive memory subsystem, clearly outperforms the older GCN design in this context. The Radeon Pro 570X's score of 28,859 is respectable for its class, but it stands as a distant second to the GV100's result.

It is worth remembering the AMD Radeon Pro 570X has a benchmark in Geekbench Metal, where it scores 40,066, but no corresponding Metal result exists for the NVIDIA Quadro GV100 in the database. Similarly, the NVIDIA card has extensive Passmark results, including a G3D score of 19,650 and a GPU compute score of 9,069, for which the Radeon Pro 570X has no recorded entries. These additional data points, while not directly comparable, reinforce the GV100's position as a high-performance compute device. The GV100's average benchmark score across all tests is 35,520, placing it at the 80th percentile of all GPUs. The Radeon Pro 570X, by contrast, holds a 76th percentile ranking with an average score of 32,176.

Examining the nearest rivals in the database provides further context. The GV100's average score of 35,520 sits within 0.2% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti Mobile (35,435) and 0.9% below the AMD Radeon Pro Duo (35,860). It is 2.1% ahead of the NVIDIA T1000 (36,289, note the delta is negative, meaning the T1000 is actually higher) and 2.4% above the NVIDIA A2 (34,690). This places the GV100 in a performance band populated by modern high-end mobile and professional parts, despite its age. The Radeon Pro 570X's average score of 32,176 is within 0.7% of the AMD FirePro S10000 (32,388), 0.9% of the AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE (32,456), and 0.9% above the Intel Arc Pro A30M (31,894). It sits 1.1% below the AMD FirePro S9300 X2 (32,540). This clustering suggests the Radeon Pro 570X is competitive with a range of mid-to-upper tier GPUs, but the gap to the GV100 is not a matter of minor tuning; it is a chasm.

The data shows a clear hierarchy. In the two directly comparable workloads, the NVIDIA Quadro GV100 wins outright with deltas of 443.4% and 383.5%. There are no benchmark results in the database where the AMD Radeon Pro 570X surpasses the NVIDIA card. The wins tally is 2-0 in favor of the GV100, and the margin of victory is consistent across different API environments.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the recorded benchmark data, the choice between these two cards is unambiguous for any workload represented in the database. The NVIDIA Quadro GV100 is the superior performer in every head-to-head comparison. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 150,004 is more than five times the Radeon Pro 570X's 27,604, and its Vulkan score of 139,526 is nearly five times the competitor's 28,859. For users whose applications rely on OpenCL or Vulkan compute, the GV100 delivers a level of performance that the Radeon Pro 570X cannot approach.

The AMD Radeon Pro 570X does have a recorded Metal score of 40,066, which is a workload the GV100 does not have a recorded result for in this database. This is a relevant consideration for users locked into Apple's Metal API, particularly in macOS environments where the Radeon Pro 570X is designed to operate. However, the database shows no Metal result for the GV100, so no direct comparison can be made. For all benchmarks where both cards are measured, the GV100 wins.

The percentile rankings support this conclusion. The GV100 sits at the 80th percentile of all GPUs, while the Radeon Pro 570X sits at the 76th percentile. While both are above average, the GV100's position in the upper quintile, combined with its average score of 35,520, indicates a card that competes with modern high-end parts like the GeForce RTX 5070 Ti Mobile and the AMD Radeon Pro Duo. The Radeon Pro 570X, with an average score of 32,176, is closer to the performance of an Intel Arc Pro A30M or an AMD FirePro S10000.

For a user selecting a GPU for maximum compute throughput in OpenCL or Vulkan, the NVIDIA Quadro GV100 is the clear pick. Its memory bandwidth of 868.4 GB/s versus 217.0 GB/s, its 32 GB of HBM2 versus 4 GB of GDDR5, and its 5120 shading units versus 1792 all contribute to the massive performance delta. For a user whose primary workload is Metal-based, the Radeon Pro 570X has at least one recorded benchmark, but without a GV100 Metal score, the data cannot support a cross-comparison. The verdict from the available data is straightforward: the GV100 dominates the shared benchmark suite, and the Radeon Pro 570X is only a viable alternative in the specific niche of Metal compute, where the GV100 has no recorded presence.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro GV100 scores 150,004 in Geekbench OpenCL, compared to the AMD Radeon Pro 570X's 27,604, a difference of 443.4%.

Q: Are there any benchmarks where the AMD Radeon Pro 570X wins?

A: In the head-to-head results, the NVIDIA Quadro GV100 wins both shared benchmarks (OpenCL and Vulkan). The Radeon Pro 570X has a Geekbench Metal score of 40,066, but the GV100 has no recorded Metal result, so no comparison exists.

Q: How do the two cards compare in Vulkan performance?

A: The GV100 scores 139,526 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the Radeon Pro 570X scores 28,859. The GV100 is 383.5% faster in this workload.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each card?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro GV100 has an average benchmark score of 35,520 across all recorded tests, placing it at the 80th percentile. The AMD Radeon Pro 570X has an average score of 32,176, placing it at the 76th percentile.

Q: Which card has a higher memory bandwidth?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro GV100 has a memory bandwidth of 868.4 GB/s, while the AMD Radeon Pro 570X has a bandwidth of 217.0 GB/s. The GV100 also has 32 GB of HBM2 memory versus 4 GB of GDDR5.

Q: How does the GV100 compare to its nearest rivals in the database?

A: The GV100's average score of 35,520 is within 0.2% of the GeForce RTX 5070 Ti Mobile, 0.9% below the Radeon Pro Duo, 2.1% below the NVIDIA T1000, and 2.4% above the NVIDIA A2.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every core specification. The NVIDIA Quadro GV100 is built on a 12 nm process from TSMC, while the AMD Radeon Pro 570X uses a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries. The GV100 has a die size of 815 mm² with 21,100 million transistors, whereas the Radeon Pro 570X has a die size of 232 mm² with 5,700 million transistors. Transistor density is similar, at 25.9M per mm² for the GV100 and 24.6M per mm² for the Radeon Pro 570X.

Clock speeds show the GV100 with a base clock of 1132 MHz and a boost clock of 1627 MHz, while the Radeon Pro 570X has a base of 1000 MHz and a boost of 1105 MHz. Memory configurations are starkly different: the GV100 uses 32 GB of HBM2 on a 4096-bit bus with a bandwidth of 868.4 GB/s and an effective memory clock of 1696 Mbps. The Radeon Pro 570X uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, achieving 217.0 GB/s with an effective clock of 6.8 Gbps.

The compute units diverge significantly. The GV100 has 5120 shading units, 320 texture mapping units, and 128 ROPs, plus 640 tensor cores. The Radeon Pro 570X has 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, with no tensor cores. Pixel rate is 208.3 GPixel/s for the GV100 versus 35.36 GPixel/s for the Radeon Pro 570X. Texture rate is 520.6 GTexel/s versus 123.8 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput is 16.66 TFLOPS versus 3.960 TFLOPS. FP16 performance is 33.32 TFLOPS (2:1) for the GV100, while the Radeon Pro 570X offers 3.960 TFLOPS (1:1).

Power and physical specifications also differ. The GV100 has a TDP of 250 W, is a dual-slot card, requires a single 8-pin power connector, and has a suggested PSU of 600 W. The Radeon Pro 570X has a TDP of 150 W, is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) form factor, requires no power connectors, and has no suggested PSU listed. The GV100 measures 267 mm in length and 111 mm in height, while the Radeon Pro 570X has no recorded dimensions. Display outputs are 4x DisplayPort 1.4a for the GV100 and "Portable Device Dependent" for the Radeon Pro 570X. The GV100 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the Radeon Pro 570X supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The GV100 launched with an MSRP of 8,999 USD; the Radeon Pro 570X has no launch MSRP recorded.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs explains the benchmark results. The NVIDIA Quadro GV100 is based on the Volta architecture, specifically the GV100 chip. Volta introduced tensor cores, of which the GV100 has 640, designed for deep learning and AI workloads. The architecture is built for high-throughput compute, with a massive 4096-bit memory interface to feed its 5120 shading units. The GV100's process node is 12 nm at TSMC, allowing for 21,100 million transistors on an 815 mm² die. This is a large, power-hungry chip designed for professional visualization and compute tasks. Its release date is recorded as March 26, 2018, and it is now end-of-life, with a predecessor of Quadro Pascal and a successor of Quadro Turing.

The AMD Radeon Pro 570X is based on the GCN 4.0 architecture, using the Ellesmere chip. GCN 4.0 is a mature design focused on balanced gaming and compute performance, but it lacks dedicated tensor cores or ray tracing hardware. The chip is fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, with 5,700 million transistors on a 232 mm² die. The architecture uses a 256-bit GDDR5 memory bus, which is significantly narrower than the GV100's HBM2 implementation. The Radeon Pro 570X is part of the Radeon Pro Mac (500X Series) generation, indicating its design for Apple Mac systems. Its release date is March 17, 2019, and it is also end-of-life. No predecessor or successor is recorded for this card.

The API support reflects the architectural differences. The GV100 supports Vulkan 1.4, while the Radeon Pro 570X supports Vulkan 1.3. DirectX support is 12_1 for the GV100 and 12_0 for the Radeon Pro 570X. This indicates the Volta architecture's more recent feature set. The GV100's FP16 performance is double its FP32 rate (2:1 ratio), leveraging its tensor core design for mixed-precision workloads. The Radeon Pro 570X has a 1:1 FP16 to FP32 ratio, meaning it does not accelerate half-precision operations. This architectural difference is critical for AI and scientific workloads that rely on FP16. The GV100 also has a significantly higher transistor density per area, at 25.9M per mm² versus 24.6M per mm², though both are similar due to the different process nodes. The overall design philosophy differs: Volta is a compute-first architecture with a focus on maximum throughput, while GCN 4.0 is a general-purpose architecture with a more modest footprint. The data confirms that these architectural choices lead to a five-fold performance difference in compute benchmarks.