AMD Radeon Pro 575 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile Comparison

The Verdict

The data presents a decisive generational mismatch. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile outperforms the AMD Radeon Pro 575 in the only shared benchmark, delivering a 143.3% higher Geekbench OpenCL score. The RTX 5050 Mobile’s average benchmark score of 43,268 places it at the 83rd percentile of all GPUs, while the Radeon Pro 575’s 39,555 average sits at the 82nd percentile—a narrow overall gap despite the massive single-test disparity. The verdict is straightforward: the RTX 5050 Mobile is the choice for any workload leveraging OpenCL compute, and its active production status suggests it remains relevant for current systems. The Radeon Pro 575, marked end-of-life, still offers competitive standing among its immediate peers—it matches the NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile exactly, sits 1.1% above the Radeon Pro 575X, and trails the Radeon Pro WX 7100 by only 1.3%. However, those are small margins within an older generation. For new purchases or modern application support, the RTX 5050 Mobile is the only rational selection from this comparison.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gulf between these two mobile GPUs is vast, reflecting nearly a decade of separate design philosophies. NVIDIA’s RTX 5050 Mobile uses the GB207 chip built on Blackwell 2.0 architecture, manufactured on a 5 nm process at TSMC. AMD’s Radeon Pro 575 employs the Ellesmere chip with GCN 4.0 architecture, produced on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The transistor counts tell the story of density: NVIDIA packs 16,900 million transistors into a 149 mm² die, achieving 113.4 million transistors per square millimeter. AMD places 5,700 million transistors across a larger 232 mm² die, yielding just 24.6 million per square millimeter. That density advantage is a direct result of the process node difference.

Feature support diverges sharply. The RTX 5050 Mobile includes 20 ray tracing cores and 80 tensor cores, while the Radeon Pro 575 lists neither—it has no dedicated RT or tensor hardware. API compatibility follows this trend: NVIDIA supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while AMD reaches DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3. Both support OpenGL 4.6. The memory subsystems reflect different priorities: NVIDIA uses 8 GB of GDDR7 on a 128-bit bus, while AMD uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus. NVIDIA’s memory clock runs at 1500 MHz with 24 Gbps effective, versus AMD’s 1695 MHz with 6.8 Gbps effective. The RTX 5050 Mobile’s 384.0 GB/s bandwidth exceeds AMD’s 217.0 GB/s despite the narrower bus, thanks to newer memory technology.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The sole direct comparison in the data is Geekbench OpenCL, and the result is lopsided. NVIDIA scores 84,171 against AMD’s 34,596—a 143.3% advantage. This is not a marginal win; it is a near-tripling of compute throughput in a widely used cross-platform benchmark. The RTX 5050 Mobile’s FP32 peak of 7.680 TFLOPS versus AMD’s 4.489 TFLOPS explains much of this gap, though real-world OpenCL scaling rarely maps perfectly to theoretical peak. The RTX 5050 Mobile also shows 1:1 FP16 performance at 7.680 TFLOPS, matching its FP32 rate, which suggests balanced compute design. AMD’s FP16 also runs 1:1 at 4.489 TFLOPS, so neither card favors half-precision workloads in the raw specs.

Looking at the broader benchmark context, the RTX 5050 Mobile achieves a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2,365, a test the Radeon Pro 575 does not appear in. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 84,171 is the higher of its two recorded results, with the 3DMark score contributing less to the average. AMD’s best result comes from Geekbench Metal at 46,192, followed by Vulkan at 37,878, and OpenCL at 34,596. The Metal score suggests the Radeon Pro 575 performs relatively better on Apple’s graphics API, but that does not translate to OpenCL parity. The RTX 5050 Mobile’s nearest rivals average around 43,300, with the GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile leading that group at 43,667 (0.9% above) and the RTX 4070 SUPER trailing slightly at 43,223 (0.1% below). The Radeon Pro 575’s closest competitor is the NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile at 39,568, with the Radeon Pro 580 just 1.9% higher at 40,318.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every measurable specification. Process node: NVIDIA uses 5 nm, AMD uses 14 nm. Transistor count: 16,900 million versus 5,700 million. Die size: 149 mm² versus 232 mm². Memory capacity: 8 GB versus 4 GB. Memory type: GDDR7 versus GDDR5. Memory bus: 128-bit versus 256-bit. Memory bandwidth: 384.0 GB/s versus 217.0 GB/s. Shading units: 2,560 versus 2,048. Texture mapping units: 80 versus 128. Raster operation units: 32 for both—a rare point of parity. Ray tracing cores: 20 versus none. Tensor cores: 80 versus none. Pixel rate: 48.00 GPixel/s versus 35.07 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 120.0 GTexel/s versus 140.3 GTexel/s. FP32 compute: 7.680 TFLOPS versus 4.489 TFLOPS. FP16 compute: 7.680 TFLOPS versus 4.489 TFLOPS. Thermal design power: 50 W versus 150 W. Slot width: IGP versus MXM Module. Bus interface: PCIe 5.0 x16 versus PCIe 3.0 x16. DirectX support: 12 Ultimate versus 12. Vulkan support: 1.4 versus 1.3. Production status: Active versus End-of-life. Release dates: June 2025 versus June 2017. The RTX 5050 Mobile’s predecessor is the GeForce 40 Mobile series; the Radeon Pro 575 has no listed predecessor or successor.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile, with 7.680 TFLOPS FP32 and FP16, versus the AMD Radeon Pro 575’s 4.489 TFLOPS in both precisions—a 71% advantage in theoretical peak throughput.

Q: How do the memory configurations compare?

A: NVIDIA offers 8 GB of GDDR7 on a 128-bit bus with 384.0 GB/s bandwidth. AMD offers 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 217.0 GB/s bandwidth. NVIDIA has more capacity and bandwidth despite a narrower interface.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon Pro 575 support ray tracing?

A: No. The Radeon Pro 575 lists no ray tracing cores, while the RTX 5050 Mobile includes 20 RT cores. This is a fundamental feature difference in modern graphics workloads.

Q: Which GPU is more power-efficient?

A: The RTX 5050 Mobile has a 50 W TDP versus the Radeon Pro 575’s 150 W TDP, while delivering higher performance—a significant efficiency gap in the data.

Q: What is the performance gap in the shared OpenCL benchmark?

A: The RTX 5050 Mobile scores 84,171 against 34,596 for the Radeon Pro 575, a 143.3% difference in NVIDIA’s favor.

Q: Are these GPUs comparable in overall standing among all GPUs?

A: Nearly so. The RTX 5050 Mobile sits at the 83rd percentile with an average score of 43,268, while the Radeon Pro 575 sits at the 82nd percentile with 39,555—a 9.4% difference in average score despite the much larger OpenCL gap.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile wins decisively in OpenCL compute, with the 143.3% advantage in the shared benchmark. Its higher FP32 and FP16 throughput (7.680 TFLOPS each) makes it suitable for general-purpose GPU compute tasks that leverage these precisions. The presence of 20 RT cores and 80 tensor cores gives it capabilities the AMD card lacks entirely, making it the choice for ray-traced rendering and AI-accelerated workloads. Its 8 GB GDDR7 memory with 384.0 GB/s bandwidth provides more capacity and speed for large datasets. The 50 W TDP makes it viable in thinner, lighter systems with integrated form factors, while the PCIe 5.0 x16 interface offers modern host connectivity. Its active production status and 2025 release date mean it is a current product.

The AMD Radeon Pro 575 wins in texture throughput, with 140.3 GTexel/s versus 120.0 GTexel/s, and has more TMUs (128 versus 80), which could benefit certain texture-bound workloads. Its 256-bit memory bus, while paired with slower GDDR5, may offer better latency characteristics in specific access patterns. The Geekbench Metal score of 46,192 suggests stronger performance on Apple’s Metal API compared to its own OpenCL or Vulkan results—a data point indicating potential macOS-related advantages. However, these wins are narrow and contextual. The Radeon Pro 575 matches its nearest rival, the RTX A500 Mobile, exactly, and sits within 1.9% of the Radeon Pro 580, showing it remains competent within its own generation. For legacy software optimized for GCN 4.0 architecture, or for systems requiring an MXM Module form factor, the Radeon Pro 575 retains relevance. But across the board, the RTX 5050 Mobile’s compute dominance, modern feature set, and efficiency make it the superior choice for any current or forward-looking workload.