AMD Radeon Pro 580 vs NVIDIA RTX A1000 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains two directly comparable benchmark results for these cards, and the NVIDIA RTX A1000 wins both. The largest gap appears in Geekbench OpenCL, where the RTX A1000 scores 52,078 against the Radeon Pro 580's 38,457. That is a 26.2% advantage for NVIDIA, a substantial margin that shows up in compute-heavy workloads. In Geekbench Vulkan, the RTX A1000 again leads, scoring 49,574 versus 43,285, a 12.7% difference. While the Vulkan gap is smaller, it is still a clear and consistent win for the newer card.

Looking at the broader average benchmark score, the picture becomes more nuanced. The Radeon Pro 580 has an average benchmark score of 40,318, while the RTX A1000 sits at 34,207. That means the AMD card actually holds a higher overall average across all recorded tests, despite losing both head-to-head matchups. This is because the Radeon Pro 580 has results in Geekbench Metal (39,213) and additional OpenCL and Vulkan runs that pull its average up, while the RTX A1000's average is dragged down by its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 969, which is a very different type of workload.

The Radeon Pro 580's percentile ranking among all GPUs is 82, compared to the RTX A1000's 79. So in the database's overall hierarchy, the AMD card sits slightly higher. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 (average score 40,377, just 0.1% ahead), the AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 (40,063, 0.6% behind), and the AMD Radeon Pro 5300 (40,870, 1.4% behind). The RTX A1000, by contrast, trades blows with the NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB (34,154, 0.2% behind), the AMD Radeon RX 560 XT (34,133, 0.2% behind), and the NVIDIA TITAN V (34,355, 0.4% ahead).

Where Each One Wins

The RTX A1000 is the clear winner in raw compute throughput as measured by OpenCL and Vulkan. If your work involves GPGPU tasks like rendering, simulation, or data processing that rely on these APIs, the data shows a 26.2% and 12.7% advantage respectively. It also benefits from a much more modern feature set, which is covered in the architecture section below. For users running DirectX 12 Ultimate workloads, the RTX A1000 supports the full 12_2 feature level, whereas the Radeon Pro 580 only reaches 12_0. That matters for newer games or applications that use advanced DX12 features.

The Radeon Pro 580, on the other hand, holds a higher average benchmark score and a better percentile ranking. It also has a Geekbench Metal score of 39,213, which is not available for the RTX A1000 in this data. For macOS or Metal-based applications, the Radeon Pro 580 is the only one of the two with recorded results in that API. Its average score of 40,318 places it in the same league as the GeForce RTX 5070, which is a much newer and more powerful card in most respects. This suggests the Radeon Pro 580 punches above its age in overall synthetic benchmarks.

In terms of memory bandwidth, the Radeon Pro 580 has a wider 256-bit bus and delivers 217.0 GB/s, compared to the RTX A1000's 128-bit bus and 192.0 GB/s. For bandwidth-sensitive tasks like large texture streaming or certain compute kernels, the AMD card has an edge. However, the RTX A1000 uses faster GDDR6 memory at 12 Gbps effective, which partially compensates for the narrower bus.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different eras and foundries. The Radeon Pro 580 uses the Ellesmere chip built on GlobalFoundries' 14 nm process with GCN 4.0 architecture. It packs 5,700 million transistors on a 232 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 24.6 million per mm². The RTX A1000 uses the GA107 chip on Samsung's 8 nm node with Ampere architecture. It has 8,700 million transistors on a smaller 200 mm² die, resulting in a much higher density of 43.5 million per mm². This density advantage is a direct result of the more modern process node.

Both cards have 2,304 shading units, but the similarity ends there. The Radeon Pro 580 has 144 texture mapping units (TMUs) and 32 ROPs. The RTX A1000 has only 72 TMUs but the same 32 ROPs. This means the AMD card has a higher texture rate of 172.8 GTexel/s versus the NVIDIA card's 105.3 GTexel/s. Pixel rates are closer: the Radeon Pro 580 achieves 38.40 GPixel/s, while the RTX A1000 reaches 46.78 GPixel/s.

The RTX A1000 introduces dedicated hardware that the Radeon Pro 580 completely lacks: 18 ray tracing cores and 72 tensor cores. This is a fundamental architectural difference. The Radeon Pro 580 has no RT or tensor cores at all, so any ray tracing or AI acceleration must be handled by the general-purpose shaders. The RTX A1000 also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the Radeon Pro 580 only supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Clock speeds tell a story of power efficiency versus raw frequency. The Radeon Pro 580 has a base clock of 1100 MHz and a boost of 1200 MHz, with memory running at 1695 MHz (6.8 Gbps effective). The RTX A1000 has a much lower base clock of 727 MHz but boosts to 1462 MHz, with memory at 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective). Despite the higher boost clock, the RTX A1000's FP32 throughput of 6.737 TFLOPS is only modestly above the Radeon Pro 580's 5.530 TFLOPS. Both have 1:1 FP16 to FP32 ratios.

Power consumption is a major differentiator. The Radeon Pro 580 is rated at 185 W and is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with no power connectors and portable-device-dependent display outputs. The RTX A1000 is a single-slot card drawing only 50 W, also with no power connectors, and it suggests a 250 W power supply. It has four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The RTX A1000 also uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the Radeon Pro 580 uses PCIe 3.0 x16.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in compute workloads?

A: The RTX A1000 wins both recorded head-to-head tests. It leads by 26.2% in Geekbench OpenCL (52,078 vs 38,457) and by 12.7% in Geekbench Vulkan (49,574 vs 43,285).

Q: Does the Radeon Pro 580 have any advantages?

A: Yes. It has a higher average benchmark score of 40,318 versus 34,207, a better percentile ranking (82 vs 79), and higher memory bandwidth at 217.0 GB/s compared to 192.0 GB/s. It also has a Geekbench Metal score of 39,213, which the RTX A1000 does not have recorded.

Q: What about ray tracing and AI features?

A: The RTX A1000 has 18 ray tracing cores and 72 tensor cores. The Radeon Pro 580 has none. This is a fundamental architectural difference that favors NVIDIA for ray-traced workloads and AI acceleration.

Q: How do their power requirements compare?

A: The Radeon Pro 580 is rated at 185 W and is an IGP with no power connectors. The RTX A1000 is a single-slot card rated at 50 W, also with no power connectors, and suggests a 250 W power supply.

Q: Which card is better for DirectX 12 Ultimate?

A: The RTX A1000 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Radeon Pro 580 only supports DirectX 12 (12_0). If you need the latest DX12 features, the RTX A1000 is the only option.

Q: Are these cards still in production?

A: The Radeon Pro 580 is end-of-life and was released in June 2017. The RTX A1000 is active and was released in April 2024.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon Pro 580 | NVIDIA RTX A1000 |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | Ampere |

| Process Node | 14 nm (GlobalFoundries) | 8 nm (Samsung) |

| Transistors | 5,700 million | 8,700 million |

| Die Size | 232 mm² | 200 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 24.6M / mm² | 43.5M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1100 MHz | 727 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1200 MHz | 1462 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1695 MHz, 6.8 Gbps effective | 1500 MHz, 12 Gbps effective |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 217.0 GB/s | 192.0 GB/s |

| TMUs | 144 | 72 |

| Pixel Rate | 38.40 GPixel/s | 46.78 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 172.8 GTexel/s | 105.3 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 5.530 TFLOPS | 6.737 TFLOPS |

| RT Cores | None | 18 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 72 |

| TDP | 185 W | 50 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Single-slot |

| Suggested PSU | None | 250 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a |

| DirectX Support | 12 (12_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.3 | 1.4 |

| Dimensions | Not specified | 163 mm length, 69 mm height |

| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release Date | June 2017 | April 2024 |

| Predecessor | None | Quadro Turing |

| Successor | None | Workstation Ada |

The Verdict

The data points to two different use cases. If you need raw compute performance in OpenCL or Vulkan, the RTX A1000 is the stronger choice, with a 26.2% lead in the former and a 12.7% lead in the latter. It also brings ray tracing cores, tensor cores, DirectX 12 Ultimate support, and a drastically lower 50 W power draw. For a workstation card that runs cool, fits in a single slot, and handles modern APIs, the RTX A1000 is the more capable and future-proof option. Its 6.737 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput and 8 GB of GDDR6 memory make it competitive in its class, as shown by its near-identical average score to the RTX A2000 12 GB and TITAN V.

The Radeon Pro 580 is not without merit. Its higher average benchmark score of 40,318 and 82nd percentile ranking place it above the RTX A1000 in the overall database hierarchy. It also offers more memory bandwidth (217.0 GB/s) and a higher texture rate (172.8 GTexel/s), which can matter for specific workloads. Its Geekbench Metal score of 39,213 is the only Metal result in this comparison, making it the pick for macOS environments. However, it is an end-of-life product from 2017, built on a 14 nm process, and it consumes 185 W. The lack of RT and tensor cores limits its usefulness for modern AI and ray tracing tasks.

Choose the RTX A1000 if you prioritize compute performance, modern API support, and power efficiency. Choose the Radeon Pro 580 if you rely on Metal, need higher memory bandwidth, or care about the overall average benchmark standing. The recorded data does not crown a single winner; it separates them by workload. The RTX A1000 wins the head-to-head tests, but the Radeon Pro 580 holds a higher position in the broader database.