AMD Radeon Pro 575X vs NVIDIA TITAN V Comparison

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA TITAN V dominates the AMD Radeon Pro 575X across every shared benchmark, and the delta is enormous. In Geekbench OpenCL, the TITAN V scores 157,265 against 34,773 for the Radeon Pro 575X, a 77.9% gap in favor of NVIDIA. In Geekbench Vulkan, the TITAN V posts 152,117 versus 37,919, a 75.1% lead. The Radeon Pro 575X wins zero head-to-head tests, while the TITAN V wins both.

The Radeon Pro 575X is an end-of-life integrated-class part (the slot width is listed as IGP, with no power connectors), aimed at portable Mac systems. Its average benchmark score is 39,116, placing it in the 82nd percentile of all GPUs. The TITAN V, despite being an end-of-life desktop card with a 250 W TDP, achieves an average score of 34,355, which lands in the 79th percentile. That percentile similarity hides the real story: the TITAN V's average includes several Passmark tests where it scores low (for example, 153 in DirectX 10 and 81 in DirectX 12), dragging down its aggregate. On the compute-heavy Geekbench tests, the TITAN V is in a different class entirely.

Who should pick which? If the requirement is a low-power, integrated solution for a portable system where the GPU must run without external power, the Radeon Pro 575X is the only viable choice in this comparison. Its 150 W TDP, IGP slot width, and "None" power connector requirement make it suitable for that niche. If the requirement is maximum raw compute throughput, particularly for OpenCL or Vulkan workloads, the TITAN V is the overwhelming choice, provided the system can supply a 6-pin and 8-pin connector and a suggested 600 W PSU. The data shows no scenario where the Radeon Pro 575X outperforms the TITAN V on any recorded metric.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different design eras and process nodes. The AMD Radeon Pro 575X uses the Ellesmere chip built on GCN 4.0 architecture, manufactured by GlobalFoundries on a 14 nm process. The NVIDIA TITAN V uses the GV100 chip on Volta architecture, built by TSMC on a 12 nm process. This process difference is modest, but the chip scale is not.

The TITAN V packs 21,100 million transistors on an 815 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 25.9M per mm². The Radeon Pro 575X has 5,700 million transistors on a 232 mm² die, for a density of 24.6M per mm². The TITAN V's die is 3.5 times larger and holds nearly 4 times as many transistors, a scale advantage that shows up directly in the compute resources.

Compute unit counts differ sharply. The Radeon Pro 575X has 2,048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The TITAN V has 5,120 shading units, 320 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, plus 640 tensor cores that the AMD part lacks entirely. The TITAN V also has no ray tracing cores, same as the AMD part, but the tensor core presence is a defining Volta feature.

The memory architecture is a generation apart. The Radeon Pro 575X uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 217.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The TITAN V uses 12 GB of HBM2 on a 3072-bit bus, delivering 651.3 GB/s. That is exactly 3 times the bandwidth, which matters for large datasets and compute workloads.

Clock behavior also differs. The Radeon Pro 575X lists no base or boost clock, only a memory clock of 1695 MHz (6.8 Gbps effective). The TITAN V lists a base clock of 1200 MHz, a boost of 1455 MHz, and a memory clock of 848 MHz (1696 Mbps effective). The AMD part's FP32 throughput is 4.489 TFLOPS, with FP16 at the same 4.489 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio). The TITAN V's FP32 is 14.90 TFLOPS, and FP16 is 29.80 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), meaning the TITAN V has 3.3 times the FP32 throughput and 6.6 times the FP16 throughput of the AMD part.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records only two shared tests between these GPUs, and the TITAN V wins both decisively.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the TITAN V scores 157,265 against the Radeon Pro 575X's 34,773. That is a 77.9% delta in favor of NVIDIA. To put that in context, the Radeon Pro 575X's nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon Pro 580X at 38,706 (1.1% higher) and the AMD Radeon Pro 575 at 39,555 (1.1% lower than the 575X). The TITAN V's nearest rivals, by contrast, are the NVIDIA RTX A1000 at 34,207 (0.4% lower) and the NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB at 34,154 (0.6% higher). The TITAN V's OpenCL score is roughly 4.5 times the Radeon Pro 575X's score, a margin that no single architectural tweak can close.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the pattern repeats. The TITAN V scores 152,117, the Radeon Pro 575X scores 37,919, a 75.1% delta. Vulkan is often more favorable to lower-overhead drivers, but here the raw compute disparity overwhelms any driver efficiency advantage. The Radeon Pro 575X's Vulkan score is actually higher than its OpenCL score (37,919 vs 34,773), suggesting the AMD driver handles Vulkan reasonably well. But the TITAN V's Vulkan score is slightly lower than its OpenCL score (152,117 vs 157,265), suggesting NVIDIA's OpenCL implementation is marginally stronger. Even with those relative shifts, the absolute gap remains massive.

The Radeon Pro 575X recorded zero wins across the head-to-head set. The TITAN V recorded two wins. There are no other shared benchmarks in the database, so this comparison rests entirely on these two compute-oriented tests.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two parts:

• Chip: Ellesmere (AMD) vs GV100 (NVIDIA)
• Architecture: GCN 4.0 vs Volta
• Generation: Radeon Pro Mac (500X Series) vs GeForce 10
• Process node: 14 nm (GlobalFoundries) vs 12 nm (TSMC)
• Transistors: 5,700 million vs 21,100 million
• Die size: 232 mm² vs 815 mm²
• Transistor density: 24.6M / mm² vs 25.9M / mm²
• Base clock: not listed vs 1200 MHz
• Boost clock: not listed vs 1455 MHz
• Memory clock: 1695 MHz (6.8 Gbps effective) vs 848 MHz (1696 Mbps effective)
• Memory size: 4 GB GDDR5 vs 12 GB HBM2
• Memory bus: 256 bit vs 3072 bit
• Memory bandwidth: 217.0 GB/s vs 651.3 GB/s
• Shading units: 2048 vs 5120
• TMUs: 128 vs 320
• ROPs: 32 vs 96
• Tensor cores: none vs 640
• Pixel rate: 35.07 GPixel/s vs 139.7 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 140.3 GTexel/s vs 465.6 GTexel/s
• FP32: 4.489 TFLOPS vs 14.90 TFLOPS
• FP16: 4.489 TFLOPS (1:1) vs 29.80 TFLOPS (2:1)
• TDP: 150 W vs 250 W
• Slot width: IGP vs Dual-slot
• Power connectors: None vs 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin
• Suggested PSU: not listed vs 600 W
• Display outputs: Portable Device Dependent vs 1x HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
• DirectX support: 12 (12_0) vs 12 (12_1)
• Vulkan support: 1.3 vs 1.4
• Dimensions: not listed vs 267 mm length, 112 mm height, 40 mm width
• Release date: 2019-03-17 vs 2017-12-06
• Predecessor: not listed vs GeForce 900
• Successor: not listed vs GeForce 20
• Launch MSRP: not listed vs 2,999 USD

The TITAN V predates the Radeon Pro 575X by over a year, yet it carries far more compute resources. The Radeon Pro 575X is a mobile-oriented part with no external power requirement, while the TITAN V is a full-length dual-slot desktop card.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 575X has an average benchmark score of 39,116, which is higher than the NVIDIA TITAN V's average of 34,355. However, the TITAN V's average is pulled down by low Passmark scores (153 in DirectX 10, 81 in DirectX 12), while its Geekbench scores are far higher.

Q: How does the Radeon Pro 575X compare to its closest rivals?

A: The Radeon Pro 575X is 1.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro 580X (38,706) and 1.1% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A (38,691). It trails the AMD Radeon Pro 575 (39,555) and NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile (39,568) by 1.1% each.

Q: How does the TITAN V compare to its closest rivals?

A: The TITAN V is 0.4% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX A1000 (34,207) and 0.6% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB (34,154). It trails the AMD Radeon HD 7970 (34,541) by 0.5% and the NVIDIA T1000 8 GB (34,561) by 0.6%.

Q: What memory types and capacities do the two GPUs use?

A: The Radeon Pro 575X uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 217.0 GB/s bandwidth. The TITAN V uses 12 GB of HBM2 on a 3072-bit bus with 651.3 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What is the FP16 throughput difference?

A: The Radeon Pro 575X delivers 4.489 TFLOPS FP16 with a 1:1 ratio to FP32. The TITAN V delivers 29.80 TFLOPS FP16 with a 2:1 ratio, which is 6.6 times the AMD part's FP16 throughput.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The Radeon Pro 575X has a 150 W TDP, an IGP slot width, and no power connectors. The TITAN V has a 250 W TDP, a dual-slot width, requires one 6-pin and one 8-pin power connector, and has a suggested PSU rating of 600 W.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA TITAN V wins every recorded benchmark in the head-to-head set. In Geekbench OpenCL, it leads by 77.9%, and in Geekbench Vulkan, by 75.1%. Its wins extend across the compute hierarchy: 5,120 shading units versus 2,048, 320 TMUs versus 128, 96 ROPs versus 32, and 640 tensor cores where the AMD part has none. The TITAN V also wins on memory bandwidth by exactly 3 times (651.3 GB/s vs 217.0 GB/s), on pixel rate (139.7 GPixel/s vs 35.07 GPixel/s), on texture rate (465.6 GTexel/s vs 140.3 GTexel/s), and on FP32 (14.90 TFLOPS vs 4.489 TFLOPS). For any workload that stresses compute, memory bandwidth, or FP16 throughput, the TITAN V is the clear winner.

The AMD Radeon Pro 575X wins on one decisive axis: power and physical integration. Its 150 W TDP is 100 W lower than the TITAN V's 250 W. It requires no power connectors, while the TITAN V needs a 6-pin and an 8-pin. Its slot width is listed as IGP, meaning it is designed to be integrated into a portable system, whereas the TITAN V is a dual-slot card measuring 267 mm in length. The Radeon Pro 575X also holds a higher average benchmark score (39,116 vs 34,355) and sits in the 82nd percentile of all GPUs versus the TITAN V's 79th percentile, though this is an artifact of the TITAN V's low Passmark scores. The Radeon Pro 575X supports Vulkan 1.3, while the TITAN V supports Vulkan 1.4, giving NVIDIA a marginal API version advantage.

The use-case split is stark. For portable Mac systems where the GPU must run without external power and fit an integrated form factor, the Radeon Pro 575X is the only option in this comparison. For desktop workstations with a 600 W PSU, a dual-slot slot, and a demand for maximum compute throughput in OpenCL or Vulkan, the TITAN V wins without contest. The data shows no scenario where the Radeon Pro 575X outperforms the TITAN V on any recorded performance metric; its advantages are purely in power consumption, physical size, and integration requirements.