AMD Radeon Pro 575 vs NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only directly comparable benchmark between the AMD Radeon Pro 575 and the NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB is Geekbench OpenCL, and the result is decisive. The NVIDIA card scores 66,998, while the AMD card scores 34,596. This represents a 48.4% deficit for the Radeon Pro 575, meaning the RTX A2000 delivers nearly double the raw compute throughput in this workload. The delta is stark: the AMD part trails by almost half, a gap that no other metric in this comparison can offset.

Looking at the broader database context, the RTX A2000's OpenCL result aligns with its average benchmark score of 34,154, which places it in the 79th percentile of all GPUs. The Radeon Pro 575, by contrast, has an average benchmark score of 39,555 and sits in the 82nd percentile. This creates an interesting tension: the AMD card has a higher aggregate percentile ranking, yet in the one head-to-head test available, it loses by a wide margin. The explanation lies in the benchmark mix. The Radeon Pro 575's average is buoyed by strong Geekbench Metal (46,192) and Vulkan (37,878) results, tests that the RTX A2000 does not have recorded in the database. The NVIDIA card's average is pulled down by its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1,309, a heavy workload that likely drags its mean lower despite its OpenCL dominance.

The nearest rivals for each card further illustrate their positioning. The Radeon Pro 575's closest competitor is the NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile, which scores 39,568, a delta of 0%. The AMD Radeon Pro 575X scores 39,116 (1.1% behind), the AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 scores 40,063 (1.3% ahead), and the AMD Radeon Pro 580 scores 40,318 (1.9% ahead). These are tight margins, indicating the Radeon Pro 575 is competitive within its own generation but not a standout. The RTX A2000's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 560 XT at 34,133 (0.1% behind), the NVIDIA RTX A1000 at 34,207 (0.2% ahead), the AMD Radeon RX 480 at 33,997 (0.5% behind), and the NVIDIA TITAN V at 34,355 (0.6% ahead). The A2000 is clustered tightly around these cards, suggesting its average score is representative of a mid-range workstation part, not a flagship.

The head-to-head data shows one win for the RTX A2000 and zero for the Radeon Pro 575. That single win is the OpenCL test, and it is not a narrow victory. The 48.4% delta is the kind of margin that defines a generational leap, not a minor refinement.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear conclusion for users who rely on OpenCL compute: the NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB is the superior choice. It delivers 66,998 in Geekbench OpenCL versus 34,596 for the AMD Radeon Pro 575, a 48.4% advantage. For any workload that leverages OpenCL, the NVIDIA card will complete tasks in roughly two-thirds of the time, assuming linear scaling. This is a massive practical difference for rendering, simulation, or data processing.

However, the Radeon Pro 575 is not without its merits. Its average benchmark score of 39,555 exceeds the RTX A2000's 34,154, and its 82nd percentile ranking beats the NVIDIA card's 79th. This suggests that in the aggregate, across all recorded tests, the AMD card performs better per benchmark. The Radeon Pro 575 also shows strength in Metal (46,192) and Vulkan (37,878), scores that are not available for the RTX A2000, meaning users in those API ecosystems would likely see competitive or superior performance from the older AMD card.

Who should pick which? If the primary application is OpenCL-based, the RTX A2000 is the only rational choice. The 48.4% lead is too large to ignore. But if the user works across a variety of APIs and values the higher percentile ranking, the Radeon Pro 575 may hold its own, especially in Metal environments where it posts its best score. The RTX A2000 also has the advantage of a 12 GB memory pool versus 4 GB on the AMD card, which matters for large datasets, though that is covered in the specification section. The verdict, strictly from the data, is that the RTX A2000 wins the head-to-head decisively, but the Radeon Pro 575 remains a viable option for non-OpenCL workloads.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural eras. The AMD Radeon Pro 575 is built on GCN 4.0, using the Ellesmere chip, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The NVIDIA RTX A2000 uses the Ampere architecture with the GA106 chip, manufactured on an 8 nm process at Samsung. This node difference is significant: the Samsung 8 nm process is newer and denser, allowing the GA106 to pack 12,000 million transistors into a 276 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 43.5 million per square millimeter. The Ellesmere chip, by contrast, contains 5,700 million transistors on a 232 mm² die, for a density of 24.6 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA chip has more than double the transistor count and nearly double the density.

The Radeon Pro 575 belongs to the Radeon Pro Mac (500 Series) generation, while the RTX A2000 is part of the Workstation Ampere (Ax000) family. This generational gap is reflected in feature support. The RTX A2000 includes 26 ray tracing cores and 104 tensor cores, neither of which exists on the AMD card. These are hardware units specifically designed for ray-traced rendering and AI acceleration, respectively. The AMD card lacks these entirely, meaning any workload that leverages RT cores or tensor cores will simply not run optimally on the Radeon Pro 575.

The API support also differs. The RTX A2000 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Radeon Pro 575 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_0). The NVIDIA card also supports Vulkan 1.4, whereas the AMD card is capped at Vulkan 1.3. Both support OpenGL 4.6. The DX12 Ultimate designation implies support for features like ray tracing and mesh shaders, which are absent on the older AMD part. The Vulkan version difference is minor but indicates a newer driver stack on the NVIDIA side.

The memory architecture is fundamentally different as well. The Radeon Pro 575 uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, while the RTX A2000 uses 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus. The NVIDIA card has three times the memory capacity, which is critical for large textures, complex scenes, or multi-application workflows. The AMD card's wider bus partially compensates for the older memory type, but the bandwidth figures tell the story: 217.0 GB/s for AMD versus 288.0 GB/s for NVIDIA. The RTX A2000 has 32.7% more bandwidth. The process node, transistor count, ray tracing, and tensor cores are the headline architectural differences, and they all favor the NVIDIA card.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every specification field. The most obvious is memory: the Radeon Pro 575 has 4 GB of GDDR5, while the RTX A2000 has 12 GB of GDDR6. The bus widths differ as well, 256-bit versus 192-bit, but the bandwidth favors NVIDIA at 288.0 GB/s versus 217.0 GB/s. The clock speeds are also distinct: the AMD card's memory runs at 1695 MHz (6.8 Gbps effective), while the NVIDIA card's memory runs at 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective). The effective data rate is higher on the NVIDIA card due to the GDDR6 standard.

The compute units show a mixed picture. The RTX A2000 has 3,328 shading units, 104 texture mapping units, and 48 render output units. The Radeon Pro 575 has 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The NVIDIA card has 62.5% more shading units and 50% more ROPs, but the AMD card has 23% more TMUs. This explains the texture rate figures: the AMD card achieves 140.3 GTexel/s, while the NVIDIA card achieves 124.8 GTexel/s, a 12.4% advantage for AMD. However, the pixel rate favors NVIDIA at 57.60 GPixel/s versus 35.07 GPixel/s, a 64.2% lead. The FP32 throughput is 7.987 TFLOPS for NVIDIA versus 4.489 TFLOPS for AMD, a 77.9% advantage. Both cards have 1:1 FP16 to FP32 ratios, meaning FP16 performance matches FP32.

The power and physical specifications are also divergent. The Radeon Pro 575 has a TDP of 150 W, while the RTX A2000 draws only 70 W. The NVIDIA card is far more power efficient, delivering higher performance at less than half the power draw. The AMD card uses an MXM module form factor, while the NVIDIA card is dual-slot with dimensions of 167 mm (6.6 inches) in length and 69 mm (2.7 inches) in height. Neither card requires external power connectors, but the RTX A2000 suggests a 250 W power supply, while the AMD card has no suggested PSU listed. The bus interface differs as well: PCIe 3.0 x16 for AMD versus PCIe 4.0 x16 for NVIDIA. Display outputs are portable-device dependent on the AMD card, while the NVIDIA card offers 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a.

The release dates are separated by over four years: June 2017 for the Radeon Pro 575 and November 2021 for the RTX A2000. The NVIDIA card has a launch MSRP of 449 USD. The production status for both is end-of-life. The RTX A2000 lists a predecessor (Quadro Turing) and successor (Workstation Ada), while the AMD card has neither listed.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher FP32 performance?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB achieves 7.987 TFLOPS, while the AMD Radeon Pro 575 achieves 4.489 TFLOPS. The NVIDIA card is 77.9% faster in this metric.

Q: How much memory does each card have?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 575 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, while the NVIDIA RTX A2000 has 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus. The NVIDIA card has triple the capacity.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 575 has a TDP of 150 W, while the NVIDIA RTX A2000 has a TDP of 70 W. The NVIDIA card draws less than half the power.

Q: Does the Radeon Pro 575 support ray tracing?

A: No. The Radeon Pro 575 has no ray tracing cores listed in the database. The RTX A2000 has 26 RT cores and 104 tensor cores.

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 575 has an average benchmark score of 39,555, placing it in the 82nd percentile. The NVIDIA RTX A2000 has an average of 34,154, in the 79th percentile.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth comparison?

A: The RTX A2000 provides 288.0 GB/s, while the Radeon Pro 575 provides 217.0 GB/s. The NVIDIA card has a 32.7% bandwidth advantage.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB wins in raw compute, memory capacity, bandwidth, and power efficiency. Its 48.4% lead in Geekbench OpenCL is the single most important data point in this comparison. For users running OpenCL-based workloads, the A2000 is the clear winner. It also offers 12 GB of memory versus 4 GB, which is essential for large models, high-resolution textures, or multi-tasking. The 288.0 GB/s bandwidth supports this larger memory pool effectively. The 70 W TDP means it can fit into compact systems with minimal cooling, and the PCIe 4.0 interface provides double the bandwidth of the AMD card's PCIe 3.0. The inclusion of 26 RT cores and 104 tensor cores makes it future-proof for ray tracing and AI workloads, even if those are not the primary use case today. The pixel rate of 57.60 GPixel/s also indicates stronger fill-rate performance, beneficial for high-resolution displays.

The AMD Radeon Pro 575 wins in specific niche areas. Its average benchmark score of 39,555 is 15.8% higher than the RTX A2000's 34,154, and its 82nd percentile ranking beats the NVIDIA card's 79th. This suggests that across a broader set of tests, the AMD card is more consistently competitive. Its Geekbench Metal score of 46,192 is its strongest result, indicating that in macOS or Metal-based applications, the Radeon Pro 575 may outperform expectations. The Vulkan score of 37,878 also shows reasonable cross-API capability. The texture rate of 140.3 GTexel/s exceeds the NVIDIA card's 124.8 GTexel/s, meaning texture-heavy workloads might favor the AMD card. The MXM module form factor allows for specialized laptop or compact workstation integration where dual-slot cards like the RTX A2000 cannot fit.

For a user deciding between these two, the choice hinges on the workload. If OpenCL compute, large memory footprints, or modern API features (DX12 Ultimate, ray tracing) are priorities, the RTX A2000 is the only option. If the user is on a Metal-centric platform like macOS, or if texture throughput and aggregate benchmark consistency matter more than peak compute, the Radeon Pro 575 remains relevant. The data shows a clear generational gap, but the older AMD card still holds its own in specific scenarios. The RTX A2000 is the more capable all-rounder, but the Radeon Pro 575 has not been rendered obsolete in every dimension.