AMD Radeon Pro 570X vs NVIDIA Quadro M5000 Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro 570X and NVIDIA Quadro M5000 are both end-of-life professional workstation GPUs, yet they represent contrasting design philosophies from different eras. The data shows the Quadro M5000, a Maxwell 2.0 part from 2015, consistently outperforms the newer GCN 4.0-based Radeon Pro 570X in the shared benchmark suite, despite the latter's more advanced 14 nm process node. However, the Radeon Pro 570X counters with a unique feature set and a higher average benchmark score, painting a more nuanced picture than a simple win/loss tally.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark results indicate a clear split in application scenarios. The NVIDIA Quadro M5000 is the outright performance winner in every head-to-head test recorded, making it the stronger choice for compute-heavy workloads that rely on OpenCL or Vulkan APIs. Its OpenCL score of 29481 edges out the Radeon's 27604 by 6.4%, while its Vulkan advantage is even more pronounced at 12.4% (32931 vs 28859). This suggests the Quadro M5000 is better suited for tasks like GPU-accelerated rendering, simulation, and other professional applications that leverage these cross-platform interfaces.

Conversely, the AMD Radeon Pro 570X's sole benchmark victory comes in the Geekbench Metal test, scoring 40066. This API is exclusive to Apple's ecosystem, and given that the Radeon Pro 570X belongs to the "Radeon Pro Mac (500X Series)" generation, its design is clearly optimized for macOS environments. Users working within Apple's Metal framework would find the Radeon Pro 570X to be the superior option, as it outperforms the Quadro M5000 in this specific metric. The data implies that the choice between these two cards hinges heavily on the user's operating system and software stack, rather than raw compute power alone.

The average benchmark scores further complicate the narrative. The Radeon Pro 570X boasts an average score of 32176, which places it in the 76th percentile of all GPUs, while the Quadro M5000 sits at 31206, also in the 76th percentile. This means that while the Quadro wins the specific tests they share, the Radeon's inclusion of the high Metal score raises its overall average, making it appear more balanced across a wider range of potential workloads. The Radeon Pro 570X's nearest rivals include the AMD FirePro S10000 (deltaPct -0.7%) and AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE (deltaPct -0.9%), indicating it sits in a competitive performance tier. The Quadro M5000's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q (deltaPct 0%) and GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER (deltaPct 0.4%), showing a similar clustering of performance.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL compute tasks?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro M5000 wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 29481, which is 6.4% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro 570X's score of 27604.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon Pro 570X have any benchmark advantage over the Quadro M5000?

A: Yes, the Radeon Pro 570X achieves a Geekbench Metal score of 40066, a test that the Quadro M5000 does not have a recorded score for. This suggests a clear advantage in Metal-based applications.

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

A: The NVIDIA Quadro M5000 is significantly ahead in Vulkan, scoring 32931 compared to the Radeon Pro 570X's 28859, a delta of 12.4% in favor of the Quadro.

Q: What is the overall performance ranking of each card?

A: Both cards are in the 76th percentile of all GPUs. The AMD Radeon Pro 570X has a higher average benchmark score of 32176, while the NVIDIA Quadro M5000 averages 31206.

Q: Which card has a more recent release date?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 570X was released on 2019-03-17, which is newer than the NVIDIA Quadro M5000's release on 2015-06-28.

Q: Are these cards still in production?

A: No, both the AMD Radeon Pro 570X and the NVIDIA Quadro M5000 have a production status of "End-of-life".

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two cards share only two benchmark results, and the NVIDIA Quadro M5000 dominates both. The first is Geekbench OpenCL, where the Quadro M5000 scores 29481 against the Radeon Pro 570X's 27604. This 6.4% difference is a substantial margin in compute performance, likely reflecting the Quadro's higher shading unit count (2048 vs 1792) and higher FP32 throughput (4.252 TFLOPS vs 3.960 TFLOPS). The Quadro M5000 leverages its Maxwell architecture to extract more raw number-crunching power from its older 28 nm process node.

The second shared test, Geekbench Vulkan, shows an even larger gap. The Quadro M5000 achieves 32931, while the Radeon Pro 570X scores 28859, resulting in a 12.4% advantage for the NVIDIA card. This is a notable finding, as Vulkan is a modern, low-overhead API. The data suggests the Quadro M5000's driver optimization or architectural efficiency in handling Vulkan's draw calls is significantly better than the Radeon Pro 570X's implementation. This is despite the Radeon Pro 570X supporting Vulkan 1.3, a newer specification version than the Quadro M5000's Vulkan 1.4 support, which is curious given the Radeon's newer release date.

The only benchmark where the Radeon Pro 570X shows a win is Geekbench Metal, with a score of 40066. Since this test is not present for the Quadro M5000, it cannot be considered a direct head-to-head victory, but it highlights a major differentiator. The Radeon Pro 570X's performance in Metal is its strongest asset, and it is the primary reason its average benchmark score of 32176 surpasses the Quadro's 31206. This data implies that for users exclusively in a macOS ecosystem, the Radeon Pro 570X is the better performer, while the Quadro M5000 is the better choice for cross-platform OpenCL and Vulkan workloads.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ significantly in their core specifications, reflecting their different target platforms and design generations. The AMD Radeon Pro 570X features 1792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 32 raster operation units (ROPs). In contrast, the NVIDIA Quadro M5000 is equipped with a higher count of 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. This gives the Quadro M5000 a clear advantage in pixel fill rate (66.43 GPixel/s vs 35.36 GPixel/s) and texture fill rate (132.9 GTexel/s vs 123.8 GTexel/s).

Memory configuration is another key differentiator. The Radeon Pro 570X comes with 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 217.0 GB/s. The Quadro M5000 doubles the capacity to 8 GB of GDDR5, also on a 256-bit bus, but with a slightly lower bandwidth of 211.6 GB/s. The effective memory speed is also close, with the Radeon at 6.8 Gbps and the Quadro at 6.6 Gbps. This means the Quadro offers double the memory capacity for larger datasets, while the Radeon has a marginal bandwidth advantage.

Clock speeds show a mixed picture. The AMD Radeon Pro 570X has a higher base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 1105 MHz, compared to the Quadro M5000's 861 MHz base and 1038 MHz boost. However, the Quadro's higher core counts compensate for its lower clocks in most compute scenarios. The Radeon Pro 570X also supports FP16 compute at a 1:1 ratio with FP32 (3.960 TFLOPS), while the Quadro M5000 has no listed FP16 capability. The power consumption is identical at 150 W TDP, but the Radeon is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with no power connectors, while the Quadro is a dual-slot card requiring a single 6-pin connector and a 450 W suggested PSU.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two cards is stark, representing a clash between a mature, refined design and a newer, more feature-rich one. The AMD Radeon Pro 570X is built on the GCN 4.0 architecture, using the Ellesmere chip manufactured on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. This chip integrates 5,700 million transistors on a die size of 232 mm², resulting in a transistor density of 24.6M / mm². The newer process node allows for higher clock speeds and better power efficiency per transistor.

The NVIDIA Quadro M5000, in contrast, uses the Maxwell 2.0 architecture with the GM204 chip, built on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It contains 5,200 million transistors on a significantly larger die size of 398 mm², yielding a lower transistor density of 13.1M / mm². The older process node explains the lower base and boost clocks but also points to a design that relies on more cores and higher memory bandwidth to achieve performance. The Quadro M5000's predecessor is "Quadro Kepler" and its successor is "Quadro Pascal", indicating its place in NVIDIA's professional product line evolution.

Feature support also differs. The Radeon Pro 570X supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The Quadro M5000 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and a newer Vulkan 1.4. The DirectX 12_1 feature level on the Quadro suggests support for more advanced rendering features than the Radeon's 12_0. Display outputs also differ, with the Radeon Pro 570X being "Portable Device Dependent" due to its IGP nature, while the Quadro M5000 provides 1x DVI and 4x DisplayPort 1.2 outputs. The physical dimensions are only listed for the Quadro M5000, which measures 267 mm in length and 111 mm in height.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear verdict for different user profiles. For professionals working in a Windows or Linux environment who rely on OpenCL or Vulkan for compute tasks, the NVIDIA Quadro M5000 is the superior choice. Its 6.4% lead in OpenCL and 12.4% lead in Vulkan, combined with double the memory capacity (8 GB vs 4 GB), makes it the more capable and flexible workstation tool for cross-platform applications.

For users deeply invested in the Apple ecosystem, the AMD Radeon Pro 570X is the obvious pick. Its strong Geekbench Metal score of 40066 reflects its optimization for macOS, and its higher average benchmark score of 32176 indicates a well-rounded performance profile. The Radeon Pro 570X's status as an IGP with no power connectors also makes it a more straightforward integration for portable devices, as its display outputs are "Portable Device Dependent." Ultimately, the choice is dictated by the software environment, not just raw performance. The Quadro M5000 wins on pure compute benchmarks, but the Radeon Pro 570X wins where it matters for its intended platform.