AMD Radeon Pro 580X vs NVIDIA A2 Comparison

AMD Radeon Pro 580X vs NVIDIA A2

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The data shows a clear and consistent victory for the AMD Radeon Pro 580X across the shared benchmark suite, securing 2 wins against 0 for the NVIDIA A2. In the Geekbench Vulkan test, the AMD card delivers a decisive 17.9% performance advantage, scoring 40115 against the A2’s 34023. This is the largest margin in the head-to-head comparison and indicates a substantial lead in compute workloads that leverage the Vulkan API. The OpenCL results are much closer, with the Radeon Pro 580X scoring 36426 versus the A2’s 35357, a modest 3% edge that still favors the AMD part.

Looking at the broader context, the AMD Radeon Pro 580X posts an average benchmark score of 38706, placing it in the 82nd percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 Mobile, which scores 38349 (a 0.9% delta), and the NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A at 38691 (a 0% delta). The NVIDIA A2, by contrast, averages 34690, sitting in the 79th percentile, with rivals like the NVIDIA T1000 8 GB at 34561 (0.4% delta) and the AMD Radeon HD 7970 at 34541 (0.4% delta). This means the Radeon Pro 580X is not just ahead of the A2 in direct competition; it occupies a higher performance tier overall, with a 10.4% lead in average benchmark score over the A2 (38706 vs 34690).

The Vulkan score gap is particularly telling. The Radeon Pro 580X’s 40115 in Vulkan is its strongest benchmark result, eclipsing its own OpenCL score by 10.1%. In contrast, the A2’s Vulkan score of 34023 is actually lower than its OpenCL score of 35357, a 4% deficit. This suggests the AMD architecture is better optimized for Vulkan workloads, while the NVIDIA card may be more balanced but ultimately slower in both APIs. For users prioritizing cross-platform compute performance, the Radeon Pro 580X is the unequivocal choice based on the head-to-head numbers.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two GPUs is stark, reflecting different design goals and generations. The AMD Radeon Pro 580X is built on the Ellesmere chip using the GCN 4.0 architecture, manufactured on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It packs 5,700 million transistors onto a 232 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 24.6 million per mm². The NVIDIA A2, on the other hand, uses the GA107 chip with the much newer Ampere architecture, fabricated by Samsung on an 8 nm process. It contains 8,700 million transistors on a smaller 200 mm² die, achieving a significantly higher density of 43.5 million per mm².

The compute resources are configured very differently. The Radeon Pro 580X fields 2304 shading units, 144 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The NVIDIA A2 has far fewer shading units at 1280, along with 40 TMUs and 32 ROPs. However, the A2 brings dedicated hardware that the AMD card completely lacks: 10 ray tracing cores and 40 tensor cores. This is a fundamental architectural split — the Radeon Pro 580X relies purely on traditional shader compute, while the A2 is designed for accelerated ray tracing and AI/ML inference tasks, even at a lower raw shader count.

Clock speeds and memory technology also diverge. The Radeon Pro 580X runs at a base clock of 1100 MHz with a boost of 1200 MHz, while the A2 starts at 1440 MHz and boosts to 1770 MHz — substantially higher frequencies. The memory subsystems are nearly opposite in design: the AMD card uses 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 218.9 GB/s of bandwidth, whereas the NVIDIA card uses 16 GB of GDDR6 on a narrower 128-bit bus, achieving 200.1 GB/s. The A2’s advantage in capacity is offset by a 8.6% bandwidth deficit. Feature support shows the A2’s newer pedigree: it supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the Radeon Pro 580X is limited to DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3. Both cards support OpenGL 4.6.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute throughput in FP32?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 580X leads with 5.530 TFLOPS FP32, which is 22% higher than the NVIDIA A2’s 4.531 TFLOPS. Both cards deliver the same FP16 throughput as FP32 at a 1:1 ratio.

Q: Does the NVIDIA A2 support ray tracing hardware?

A: Yes, the A2 includes 10 ray tracing cores and 40 tensor cores, features entirely absent from the AMD Radeon Pro 580X, which has no dedicated RT or tensor hardware.

Q: How do their memory capacities and bandwidths compare?

A: The NVIDIA A2 has double the memory capacity at 16 GB of GDDR6, but the AMD Radeon Pro 580X provides higher bandwidth at 218.9 GB/s versus the A2’s 200.1 GB/s, despite using older GDDR5 technology.

Q: What is the performance gap in the shared Vulkan benchmark?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 580X scores 40115 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is 17.9% higher than the NVIDIA A2’s 34023, making it the largest performance gap in the head-to-head comparison.

Q: Which card has a higher pixel fill rate?

A: The NVIDIA A2 achieves 56.64 GPixel/s, which is 47.5% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro 580X’s 38.40 GPixel/s, despite the AMD card having a higher texture rate of 172.8 GTexel/s versus 70.80 GTexel/s.

Q: Are these cards still in production?

A: Both are end-of-life products. The AMD Radeon Pro 580X was released on 2019-03-17, while the NVIDIA A2 came later on 2021-11-09.

The Verdict

Based strictly on benchmark data, the AMD Radeon Pro 580X is the superior performer in conventional compute workloads. It wins both head-to-head benchmarks, with a 3% lead in OpenCL and a commanding 17.9% lead in Vulkan. Its average benchmark score of 38706 is 11.6% higher than the A2’s 34690, and it sits in a higher percentile (82nd vs 79th). For any task that relies on raw shader throughput, FP32 compute, or Vulkan acceleration, the Radeon Pro 580X is the clear pick from the performance data.

The NVIDIA A2, however, is not without its own distinct advantages that the benchmarks do not capture. It offers double the memory capacity (16 GB vs 8 GB), which is critical for large datasets or models that exceed 8 GB. It also brings dedicated ray tracing and tensor cores, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI inference — capabilities the Radeon Pro 580X cannot provide at all. The A2 is also far more power-efficient, with a 60 W TDP versus the Radeon’s 185 W, and it is a single-slot card with no power connectors, requiring only a 250 W suggested PSU. Its PCIe 4.0 x8 interface is also more modern than the Apple MPX bus on the AMD card.

The verdict depends entirely on workload priorities. If the task is pure compute performance, especially in Vulkan or OpenCL, the AMD Radeon Pro 580X wins decisively. If the task involves ray tracing, tensor-based AI workloads, or requires more than 8 GB of memory in a low-power, single-slot form factor, the NVIDIA A2 is the appropriate choice despite its lower benchmark scores.

Specification Differences

• Process Node: 14 nm (GlobalFoundries) vs 8 nm (Samsung)
• Transistors: 5,700 million vs 8,700 million
• Die Size: 232 mm² vs 200 mm²
• Transistor Density: 24.6M / mm² vs 43.5M / mm²
• Base Clock: 1100 MHz vs 1440 MHz
• Boost Clock: 1200 MHz vs 1770 MHz
• Memory Size: 8 GB GDDR5 vs 16 GB GDDR6
• Memory Bus Width: 256 bit vs 128 bit
• Memory Bandwidth: 218.9 GB/s vs 200.1 GB/s
• Memory Clock: 1710 MHz / 6.8 Gbps effective vs 1563 MHz / 12.5 Gbps effective
• Shading Units: 2304 vs 1280
• TMUs: 144 vs 40
• ROPs: 32 vs 32
• Ray Tracing Cores: None vs 10
• Tensor Cores: None vs 40
• Pixel Rate: 38.40 GPixel/s vs 56.64 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 172.8 GTexel/s vs 70.80 GTexel/s
• FP32 / FP16: 5.530 TFLOPS vs 4.531 TFLOPS
• TDP: 185 W vs 60 W
• Slot Width: IGP vs Single-slot
• Power Connectors: None vs None (A2 has no connectors)
• Suggested PSU: Not listed vs 250 W
• Bus Interface: Apple MPX vs PCIe 4.0 x8
• Display Outputs: 2x HDMI 2.0b vs No outputs
• DirectX Support: 12 (12_0) vs 12 Ultimate (12_2)
• Vulkan Support: 1.3 vs 1.4
• Release Date: 2019-03-17 vs 2021-11-09

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro 580X wins in raw compute benchmarks. It is 3% ahead in OpenCL and 17.9% ahead in Vulkan, making it the better choice for general-purpose GPU compute, rendering workloads that use these APIs, and any application that benefits from higher FP32 throughput (5.530 TFLOPS vs 4.531 TFLOPS). Its higher texture rate (172.8 GTexel/s) also favors texturing-heavy workloads, despite the A2’s superior pixel rate.

The NVIDIA A2 wins in specialized and efficiency-focused scenarios. Its 16 GB memory capacity is double the AMD card’s, making it suitable for larger models or data sets. The presence of 10 RT cores and 40 tensor cores gives it exclusive capabilities in ray-traced rendering and AI inference. Its 60 W TDP and single-slot design with no power connectors make it far more suitable for dense, power-constrained environments. The A2 also supports newer APIs (DirectX 12 Ultimate, Vulkan 1.4) and has a higher pixel rate (56.64 GPixel/s), which could benefit certain rasterization tasks, though its lower texture rate and compute scores suggest it is not a general-purpose performance leader.