AMD Radeon Pro 575 vs NVIDIA RTX A6000 Comparison

The NVIDIA RTX A6000 and AMD Radeon Pro 575 occupy opposite ends of the workstation GPU spectrum, and the benchmark data reflects a decisive performance gap. The RTX A6000 wins both head-to-head tests, with a 460.6% higher score in Geekbench OpenCL and a 334.2% higher score in Geekbench Vulkan. These are not marginal differences; the A6000 delivers over five times the OpenCL performance and over four times the Vulkan performance of the Radeon Pro 575. The A6000’s average benchmark score of 44,075 places it in the 84th percentile of all GPUs, while the Radeon Pro 575’s average of 39,555 sits in the 82nd percentile. Despite similar percentiles, the absolute score gap is substantial, driven primarily by the A6000’s much larger compute and memory resources.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench OpenCL test is the most lopsided comparison in the dataset. The RTX A6000 scores 193,937, while the Radeon Pro 575 scores 34,596. This 460.6% delta highlights the A6000’s raw compute throughput advantage, which stems from its 10,752 shading units versus the Radeon’s 2,048. In practical terms, the A6000 processes OpenCL workloads at a rate that is 5.6 times faster, making it suitable for massively parallel compute tasks that would bottleneck the Radeon Pro 575.

Geekbench Vulkan results follow a similar pattern, though the margin narrows slightly. The RTX A6000 scores 164,462, compared to the Radeon Pro 575’s 37,878, a 334.2% difference. Vulkan’s lower-level API overhead reduces some of the architectural disparity, but the A6000 still maintains a 4.3x advantage. This suggests that even in API-optimized scenarios, the Radeon Pro 575’s older GCN 4.0 architecture cannot compensate for its smaller shader count and lower memory bandwidth.

The A6000 also dominates in the broader benchmark suite, though the Radeon Pro 575 has no corresponding scores for comparison. The A6000 posts 22,577 in Passmark G3D, 14,110 in Passmark GPU Compute, and 913 in Passmark G2D. Its best relative performance is in Passmark DirectX 9 (245) and DirectX 11 (191), while DirectX 12 (87) and DirectX 10 (155) are lower. The Radeon Pro 575 only has Geekbench results, so direct cross-referencing is limited to OpenCL and Vulkan, where the A6000 wins outright.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures and process nodes. The RTX A6000 uses the GA102 chip on NVIDIA’s Ampere architecture, fabricated on Samsung’s 8 nm process. It packs 28,300 million transistors into a 628 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 45.1 million per mm². In contrast, the Radeon Pro 575 uses the Ellesmere chip on AMD’s GCN 4.0 architecture, built on GlobalFoundries’ 14 nm process. It contains 5,700 million transistors on a 232 mm² die, with a density of 24.6 million per mm². The A6000’s newer node and larger die explain its massive compute advantage, but also its higher power draw.

Memory configurations differ dramatically. The A6000 features 48 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 384-bit bus, delivering 768.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon Pro 575 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, with 217.0 GB/s. That is a 12x capacity difference and a 3.5x bandwidth difference. For large datasets or high-resolution textures, the A6000’s memory subsystem is in a different class entirely.

Compute resources are equally lopsided. The A6000 has 10,752 shading units, 336 TMUs, and 112 ROPs, along with 84 RT cores and 336 tensor cores. The Radeon Pro 575 has 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, with no RT or tensor cores. This translates to 38.71 TFLOPS FP32 performance for the A6000 versus 4.489 TFLOPS for the Radeon Pro 575 — an 8.6x difference. Both GPUs offer FP16 at 1:1 rates relative to FP32, but the A6000’s absolute FP16 output is also 38.71 TFLOPS.

API support differs as well. The A6000 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Radeon Pro 575 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The A6000’s newer DirectX feature level and higher Vulkan version reflect its more modern architecture, while the Radeon Pro 575 is limited to baseline DirectX 12.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher memory capacity?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A6000 has 48 GB of GDDR6 memory, while the AMD Radeon Pro 575 has 4 GB of GDDR5. That is a 12x difference in capacity.

Q: How do the two compare in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The RTX A6000 scores 193,937, which is 460.6% higher than the Radeon Pro 575’s 34,596. The A6000 is over five times faster in this workload.

Q: Does the Radeon Pro 575 support ray tracing?

A: No. The Radeon Pro 575 has no RT cores listed, whereas the RTX A6000 includes 84 RT cores for hardware-accelerated ray tracing.

Q: What is the transistor count difference?

A: The RTX A6000 has 28,300 million transistors, compared to 5,700 million for the Radeon Pro 575. The A6000’s count is roughly five times higher.

Q: Which GPU has better Vulkan performance?

A: The RTX A6000 scores 164,462 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is 334.2% higher than the Radeon Pro 575’s 37,878.

Q: Are both GPUs end-of-life?

A: Yes. Both the RTX A6000 and the Radeon Pro 575 have a production status of "End-of-life."

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification field. The RTX A6000 uses an 8 nm process and Samsung foundry, while the Radeon Pro 575 uses 14 nm and GlobalFoundries. Transistor counts are 28,300 million versus 5,700 million, and die sizes are 628 mm² versus 232 mm², giving transistor densities of 45.1M/mm² and 24.6M/mm² respectively. Clock speeds are only listed for the A6000, with a base of 1410 MHz and boost of 1800 MHz; the Radeon Pro 575 has no base or boost clock data. Memory clocks also differ: the A6000 runs at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective), while the Radeon Pro 575 runs at 1695 MHz (6.8 Gbps effective).

Memory specifications are vastly different: 48 GB GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus with 768.0 GB/s bandwidth versus 4 GB GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 217.0 GB/s. Shading units are 10,752 versus 2,048; TMUs are 336 versus 128; ROPs are 112 versus 32. The A6000 has 84 RT cores and 336 tensor cores, while the Radeon Pro 575 has none. Pixel rates are 201.6 GPixel/s versus 35.07 GPixel/s; texture rates are 604.8 GTexel/s versus 140.3 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 38.71 TFLOPS versus 4.489 TFLOPS.

Power and form factor also diverge. The A6000 has a 300 W TDP with an 8-pin EPS connector and a suggested PSU of 700 W, while the Radeon Pro 575 has a 150 W TDP with no power connectors and no suggested PSU. The A6000 is a dual-slot card at 267 mm length and 112 mm height; the Radeon Pro 575 is an MXM module with no dimensions listed. The A6000 uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the Radeon Pro 575 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. Display outputs are 4x DisplayPort 1.4a for the A6000 versus "Portable Device Dependent" for the Radeon Pro 575. The A6000 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4; the Radeon Pro 575 supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3. The A6000’s launch MSRP is 4,649 USD; the Radeon Pro 575 has no launch MSRP listed.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA RTX A6000 is the superior GPU in every measurable benchmark. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 193,937 and Vulkan score of 164,462 dwarf the Radeon Pro 575’s 34,596 and 37,878, respectively. The A6000 also has 12x the memory capacity, 8.6x the FP32 throughput, and a 3.5x bandwidth advantage. For compute-heavy workstation tasks, the A6000 is the only viable choice.

The Radeon Pro 575’s only statistical edge is its percentile placement. At 82nd percentile versus the A6000’s 84th, the Radeon Pro 575 is closer than the raw scores suggest, likely because its average benchmark score of 39,555 is buoyed by its Geekbench Metal result of 46,192 — a test the A6000 does not run. However, this does not change the outcome of any head-to-head comparison. The Radeon Pro 575 is an older, lower-power mobile module designed for portability, not performance.

For buyers requiring maximum compute, memory, or ray tracing capability, the RTX A6000 is the clear pick. For those constrained by power or form factor in a portable device, the Radeon Pro 575 fits a niche the A6000 cannot. There is no benchmark scenario in the data where the Radeon Pro 575 wins.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA RTX A6000 wins in every category where both GPUs have benchmark data. It is 460.6% faster in Geekbench OpenCL and 334.2% faster in Geekbench Vulkan. It leads in memory capacity (48 GB vs 4 GB), memory bandwidth (768.0 GB/s vs 217.0 GB/s), shading units (10,752 vs 2,048), and FP32 compute (38.71 TFLOPS vs 4.489 TFLOPS). It is the only GPU of the two with RT cores and tensor cores, making it suitable for ray-traced rendering and AI workloads.

The AMD Radeon Pro 575 wins in efficiency and portability. Its 150 W TDP is half the A6000’s 300 W, and its MXM module form factor means it can fit into compact systems where the A6000’s dual-slot, 267 mm length cannot. It also has a lower transistor density (24.6M/mm² vs 45.1M/mm²), which may correlate with lower manufacturing complexity, though this is not a performance metric. The Radeon Pro 575’s only benchmark win is in Geekbench Metal, where it scores 46,192 — a test the A6000 does not participate in, so no direct comparison is possible.

In summary, the RTX A6000 dominates raw performance, while the Radeon Pro 575 is a low-power, compact solution for specialized mobile or embedded deployments. The data does not support any workstation use case where the Radeon Pro 575 outperforms the A6000 in a shared benchmark.