AMD Radeon Pro 575 vs NVIDIA RTX A2000 Comparison

The NVIDIA RTX A2000 and AMD Radeon Pro 575 are both end-of-life workstation graphics cards, but they represent vastly different eras and design philosophies. The data shows a clear performance hierarchy, with the RTX A2000 holding a commanding lead in the shared benchmark tests, though the Radeon Pro 575’s unique platform positioning and legacy features tell a more nuanced story.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two cards were tested against each other in two cross-platform benchmark suites, and the results are decisively one-sided. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the NVIDIA RTX A2000 scored 67,695 points against the AMD Radeon Pro 575’s 34,596 points. That translates to a delta of 95.7 percent, meaning the RTX A2000 is nearly twice as fast in raw compute throughput as measured by this test. The gap is slightly narrower but still substantial in Geekbench Vulkan, where the RTX A2000 scores 69,089 versus 37,878 for the Radeon Pro 575, a delta of 82.4 percent.

The RTX A2000 wins both head-to-head matchups, giving it a 2-0 record. Its Vulkan score of 69,089 is particularly notable because it is actually higher than its OpenCL score, suggesting the Ampere architecture scales well with modern low-level graphics APIs. The Radeon Pro 575, by contrast, scores higher in Vulkan (37,878) than OpenCL (34,596) as well, but the absolute numbers are far lower. In practical terms, the RTX A2000’s lead means that any OpenCL or Vulkan workload that runs on both cards will complete in roughly half the time on the NVIDIA solution.

Looking at the broader context, the RTX A2000’s average benchmark score across all tests is 46,043, placing it in the 85th percentile of all GPUs. The Radeon Pro 575’s average benchmark score is 39,555, which puts it in the 82nd percentile. While both are respectable positions, the 6,488-point average score difference (about 16.4 percent) reinforces the head-to-head results. The RTX A2000 also has a notable advantage in its best single benchmark: its Geekbench Vulkan score of 69,089 is nearly double the Radeon Pro 575’s best result in any test (Geekbench Metal at 46,192).

The Verdict

From the data alone, the NVIDIA RTX A2000 is the clear performance winner. It dominates both shared benchmarks with deltas exceeding 80 percent, and its average benchmark score is 16.4 percent higher. The RTX A2000 also carries a higher percentile ranking (85th versus 82nd), indicating it sits slightly higher in the overall GPU landscape. For any user whose primary concern is raw compute performance in OpenCL or Vulkan applications, the RTX A2000 is the only rational choice between these two.

However, the Radeon Pro 575 is not without its own merits, particularly for its intended platform. The Radeon Pro 575 is part of the Radeon Pro Mac series, and its display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent," indicating it was designed for integrated Mac systems where user-upgradeability is not a consideration. The RTX A2000, by contrast, is a standard dual-slot PCIe card with four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, making it a more flexible option for custom workstations.

The Radeon Pro 575 also has a unique specification that the RTX A2000 lacks: a Geekbench Metal score of 46,192. Since the RTX A2000 has no Metal benchmark listed, the Radeon Pro 575 wins that specific test by default, which could be significant for macOS users who rely on Metal-accelerated applications. Ultimately, the RTX A2000 is for users who need maximum compute performance in a traditional PC workstation, while the Radeon Pro 575 is for those who need a GPU that works within Apple’s ecosystem and can leverage Metal.

Architecture Differences

The two cards are built on fundamentally different architectures that are separated by multiple generations. The NVIDIA RTX A2000 uses the GA106 chip based on the Ampere architecture, manufactured on an 8 nm process at Samsung. It contains 12,000 million transistors on a die size of 276 mm², yielding a transistor density of 43.5 million per square millimeter. The AMD Radeon Pro 575 uses the Ellesmere chip based on the GCN 4.0 architecture, manufactured on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It contains 5,700 million transistors on a die size of 232 mm², yielding a transistor density of 24.6 million per square millimeter.

The RTX A2000’s architecture is significantly more advanced in several key areas. It features 26 dedicated ray tracing cores and 104 tensor cores, neither of which exist on the Radeon Pro 575 (both are listed as null). This means the RTX A2000 supports hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI-accelerated tensor operations, while the Radeon Pro 575 lacks both capabilities entirely. The RTX A2000 also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), whereas the Radeon Pro 575 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_0), reflecting the newer feature set of the Ampere architecture. The RTX A2000 also supports Vulkan 1.4, while the Radeon Pro 575 supports Vulkan 1.3, a minor but present difference.

The process node difference is substantial: 8 nm versus 14 nm. This allows the RTX A2000 to pack more than twice the transistors (12,000 million versus 5,700 million) into a slightly larger die (276 mm² versus 232 mm²). The resulting transistor density difference (43.5M/mm² versus 24.6M/mm²) is a direct consequence of the newer manufacturing process. The memory technology also differs, with the RTX A2000 using GDDR6 and the Radeon Pro 575 using GDDR5, though the Radeon Pro 575’s memory runs at a higher effective clock speed (6.8 Gbps versus 12 Gbps effective for the NVIDIA card in terms of data rate, though the actual memory clock values are 1695 MHz versus 1500 MHz).

Specification Differences

The most striking specification difference is in compute resources. The NVIDIA RTX A2000 has 3,328 shading units, 104 texture mapping units, and 48 render output units. The AMD Radeon Pro 575 has 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. This means the RTX A2000 has 62.5 percent more shading units and 50 percent more ROPs, but the Radeon Pro 575 has 23.1 percent more TMUs. These differences manifest in the calculated pixel and texture rates: the RTX A2000 achieves 57.60 GPixel/s and 124.8 GTexel/s, while the Radeon Pro 575 achieves 35.07 GPixel/s and 140.3 GTexel/s. The RTX A2000 is faster at pixel fill, but the Radeon Pro 575 is faster at texture fill.

The FP32 and FP16 compute figures are equally lopsided. The RTX A2000 delivers 7.987 TFLOPS in both FP32 and FP16 (at a 1:1 ratio), while the Radeon Pro 575 delivers 4.489 TFLOPS in both, also at a 1:1 ratio. This gives the RTX A2000 a 77.9 percent advantage in raw floating-point throughput. The memory subsystems diverge as well: the RTX A2000 has 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, yielding 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth, while the Radeon Pro 575 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, yielding 217.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX A2000 has more memory and higher bandwidth, but the Radeon Pro 575 has a wider bus.

The power and physical characteristics are also quite different. The RTX A2000 has a TDP of 70 W and requires no external power connectors, with a suggested PSU of 250 W. The Radeon Pro 575 has a TDP of 150 W and also uses no external power connectors, but has no suggested PSU listed. The RTX A2000 is a dual-slot card measuring 167 mm in length and 69 mm in height, while the Radeon Pro 575 is an MXM module with no listed dimensions. The RTX A2000 uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the Radeon Pro 575 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. The release dates are separated by over four years: the RTX A2000 launched on 2021-08-09, while the Radeon Pro 575 launched on 2017-06-04.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A2000 has an average benchmark score of 46,043, which is higher than the AMD Radeon Pro 575’s average of 39,555. This represents a 16.4 percent difference in favor of the RTX A2000.

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

A: No. The Radeon Pro 575 has no ray tracing cores listed (null), whereas the NVIDIA RTX A2000 has 26 dedicated RT cores. The RTX A2000 is the only one of the two that supports hardware-accelerated ray tracing.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two cards?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A2000 has a memory bandwidth of 288.0 GB/s, while the AMD Radeon Pro 575 has a bandwidth of 217.0 GB/s. The RTX A2000’s bandwidth is 32.7 percent higher, despite using a narrower 192-bit bus compared to the Radeon Pro 575’s 256-bit bus.

Q: Which card is better for macOS users?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 575 has a Geekbench Metal score of 46,192, while the NVIDIA RTX A2000 has no Metal benchmark listed. This suggests the Radeon Pro 575 is the only one of the two with verified Metal performance, making it the likely choice for macOS-centric workflows.

Q: What are the transistor counts of each card?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A2000 contains 12,000 million transistors, while the AMD Radeon Pro 575 contains 5,700 million transistors. The RTX A2000 has more than double the transistor count of the Radeon Pro 575.

Q: Which card has a higher FP32 compute capability?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A2000 delivers 7.987 TFLOPS in FP32, compared to the AMD Radeon Pro 575’s 4.489 TFLOPS. The RTX A2000 is 77.9 percent faster in single-precision floating-point performance.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA RTX A2000 wins in nearly every measurable category. It dominates the shared OpenCL and Vulkan benchmarks with deltas of 95.7 percent and 82.4 percent, respectively. It has more shading units, ROPs, and transistors, and it delivers higher pixel rates, FP32/FP16 throughput, and memory bandwidth. Its 6 GB of GDDR6 memory is 50 percent larger than the Radeon Pro 575’s 4 GB, and its lower 70 W TDP makes it more power-efficient on paper. The RTX A2000 also supports ray tracing and tensor cores, features entirely absent from the Radeon Pro 575. For users running compute-heavy workloads, modern graphics APIs, or any form of AI-accelerated tasks, the RTX A2000 is the definitive choice.

The AMD Radeon Pro 575 wins in a narrower set of areas. It has more texture mapping units (128 versus 104) and a higher texture rate (140.3 GTexel/s versus 124.8 GTexel/s), making it potentially better suited for texture-bound workloads. Its 256-bit memory bus is wider than the RTX A2000’s 192-bit bus, even though the actual bandwidth is lower. The Radeon Pro 575 also has a Geekbench Metal score of 46,192, a benchmark in which the RTX A2000 has no recorded result, giving it a unique win in Apple-centric environments. Its MXM module form factor makes it suitable for portable or integrated systems where a standard PCIe card cannot fit, even though the RTX A2000’s compact 167 mm length is already quite small. For users confined to a specific Mac platform or those prioritizing texture throughput, the Radeon Pro 575 has a case, but the overall data overwhelmingly favors the RTX A2000.