AMD Radeon Pro 580X vs NVIDIA RTX A2000 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clear and consistent margin in favor of the NVIDIA RTX A2000 across the two shared benchmark tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX A2000 scores 67,695 against the AMD Radeon Pro 580X's 36,426. This translates to an 85.8% advantage, a massive gap that indicates the NVIDIA card is delivering nearly double the raw compute throughput in this API workload. The delta is not marginal; it is a categorical difference in processing power.

The second shared test, Geekbench Vulkan, tells a similar story. The RTX A2000 posts 69,089 points versus the Radeon Pro 580X's 40,115. Here the NVIDIA card leads by 72.2%. While the relative gap shrinks compared to OpenCL, it remains overwhelming. The Vulkan result suggests that both architectures can utilize the low-level API, but the NVIDIA implementation still extracts substantially more performance from the same type of workload. The overall head-to-head tally stands at 2 wins for the RTX A2000 and 0 for the Radeon Pro 580X.

Looking at the average benchmark scores, which aggregate across all recorded tests, the picture stays consistent. The RTX A2000 averages 46,043, placing it at the 85th percentile among all GPUs. The Radeon Pro 580X averages 38,706, which lands at the 82nd percentile. The percentile rankings are close (85 vs 82), but the average score difference of over 7,000 points is notable. The RTX A2000's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA RTX 5880 Ada Generation (0.2% delta) and the Intel Arc A730M (1% delta), while the Radeon Pro 580X sits near the NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A (0% delta) and the RTX 5080 Mobile (0.9% delta). This context shows that the Radeon Pro 580X is competing in a lower performance tier, while the RTX A2000 rubs shoulders with much newer, more powerful hardware despite its older release.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from entirely different architectural lineages, which explains the performance chasm. The NVIDIA RTX A2000 is built on the Ampere architecture using a GA106 chip, fabricated on an 8 nm process at Samsung. The die contains 12,000 million transistors packed into 276 mm², yielding a transistor density of 43.5 million per square millimeter. In contrast, the AMD Radeon Pro 580X uses the older GCN 4.0 architecture with the Ellesmere chip, made on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. That die holds 5,700 million transistors across 232 mm², resulting in a much lower density of 24.6 million per square millimeter. The process node difference alone explains a large part of the efficiency and clock behavior, but the raw transistor count is also double on the NVIDIA side.

Compute resources differ substantially. The RTX A2000 has 3,328 shading units, 104 texture mapping units, and 48 ROPs. It also brings dedicated hardware: 26 RT cores and 104 tensor cores. The Radeon Pro 580X has 2,304 shading units, 144 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, but no RT cores and no tensor cores at all. The TMU count favors AMD (144 vs 104), but the sheer number of shaders and the presence of specialized cores on the NVIDIA card dominate the compute equations. The fp32 throughput is 7.987 TFLOPS for the RTX A2000 versus 5.530 TFLOPS for the Radeon, and both are listed at 1:1 for fp16, meaning the RTX A2000 also has the edge in half-precision work.

Memory subsystems differ too. The RTX A2000 uses 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, achieving 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon Pro 580X has 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, but that only reaches 218.9 GB/s. More memory capacity on the AMD side, but less bandwidth. The clock speeds are also telling: the RTX A2000 has a base clock of 562 MHz and a boost of 1200 MHz, while the Radeon Pro 580X has a base of 1100 MHz and the same 1200 MHz boost. The NVIDIA card's lower base clock underlines its more efficient design, relying on boost states to reach parity, while the AMD card needs a higher idle clock. The pixel rate is 57.60 GPixel/s for NVIDIA versus 38.40 GPixel/s for AMD, and the texture rate is 124.8 GTexel/s versus 172.8 GTexel/s, showing AMD has an edge in texture fill but loses elsewhere.

Where Each One Wins

The data points to a very split use case profile. The NVIDIA RTX A2000 wins every single recorded benchmark where both are present. Its 85.8% lead in OpenCL shows that it is the stronger choice for any compute-heavy application that relies on this API, such as video encoding, rendering, or scientific simulation. The Vulkan win by 72.2% reinforces that it is also the better pick for modern game engines and GPU-accelerated workloads that use low-level graphics interfaces. The presence of RT cores and tensor cores means that ray-tracing and AI-accelerated tasks are possible, even if specific ray-tracing benchmarks are not in the recorded data. The 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs suggest multi-display workstations, and the 70 W TDP indicates it can be placed in systems with a modest 250 W suggested PSU.

The AMD Radeon Pro 580X does not have a single recorded win in the head-to-head, but its strengths appear in its specification sheet. It has 8 GB of VRAM compared to 6 GB, which matters for very large datasets or heavy texture loads where capacity trumps bandwidth. The 256-bit bus is wider, and the texture rate of 172.8 GTexel/s is higher than the RTX A2000's 124.8 GTexel/s, so in texture-bound scenarios, the AMD card might have an edge. Its 2x HDMI 2.0b outputs could be preferred for direct display connections to monitors or projectors without adapter cables, especially in a Mac environment given the "Radeon Pro Mac" generation name. The 185W TDP is higher, but it is integrated as an IGP in Apple MPX form, so it may be the only viable option in that specific proprietary chassis. For pure compute and modern API performance, the NVIDIA card is the winner. For capacity and specific Mac compatibility, the AMD has its niche.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A2000 scores 67,695, which is 85.8% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro 580X's score of 36,426.

Q: Does the RTX A2000 support ray tracing?

A: Yes, it has 26 dedicated RT cores. The Radeon Pro 580X has no RT cores listed.

Q: How do the memory buses compare?

A: The RTX A2000 uses a 192-bit bus, while the Radeon Pro 580X uses a 256-bit bus. However, the NVIDIA card still achieves higher bandwidth (288.0 GB/s vs 218.9 GB/s) due to GDDR6 memory.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A2000 has 3,328 shading units, exceeding the AMD Radeon Pro 580X's 2,304.

Q: What is the power draw difference?

A: The RTX A2000 is rated at 70W, whereas the Radeon Pro 580X is rated at 185W. The NVIDIA card is much more power-efficient per unit of compute.

Q: Are they at the same performance percentile?

A: No. The RTX A2000 is at the 85th percentile of all GPUs, while the Radeon Pro 580X is at the 82nd percentile.

The Verdict

From the data, the NVIDIA RTX A2000 is the superior product for virtually all compute and graphics scenarios. It wins both shared benchmarks by massive margins and has a higher average benchmark score. Its architecture is newer, denser, and more feature-rich, with RT cores, tensor cores, and a higher memory bandwidth despite a narrower bus. The 70W power draw makes it far easier to deploy in compact systems, and its 4x mini-DisplayPort outputs are standard for professional multi-screen setups. Anyone needing raw OpenCL or Vulkan performance should pick the RTX A2000 without hesitation.

The AMD Radeon Pro 580X has a place only in specific contexts. Its 8GB of VRAM is a real advantage over the RTX A2000's 6GB, so workloads that need to fit larger textures or datasets into GPU memory could favor it. Its texture rate (172.8 GTexel/s) is higher, and its wider 256-bit bus might help in certain fill-rate tests, though the bandwidth is lower overall. The 2x HDMI 2.0b outputs are simpler for consumer displays, and the Apple MPX bus interface indicates it is designed for Mac Pro systems. If you are locked into that ecosystem, it is the only choice. Otherwise, the data says the RTX A2000 is the clear winner.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA RTX A2000 | AMD Radeon Pro 580X |

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

| Architecture | Ampere (GA106) | GCN 4.0 (Ellesmere) |

| Process Node | 8 nm | 14 nm |

| Foundry | Samsung | GlobalFoundries |

| Transistors | 12,000 million | 5,700 million |

| Die Size | 276 mm² | 232 mm² |

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

| Base Clock | 562 MHz | 1100 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1200 MHz | 1200 MHz |

| Memory Size | 6 GB GDDR6 | 8 GB GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus | 192 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 288.0 GB/s | 218.9 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 3328 | 2304 |

| TMUs | 104 | 144 |

| ROPs | 48 | 32 |

| RT Cores | 26 | None |

| Tensor Cores | 104 | None |

| Pixel Rate | 57.60 GPixel/s | 38.40 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 124.8 GTexel/s | 172.8 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 7.987 TFLOPS | 5.530 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 7.987 TFLOPS (1:1) | 5.530 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 70 W | 185 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | IGP |

| Power Connectors | None | Not specified |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | Apple MPX |

| Display Outputs | 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a | 2x HDMI 2.0b |

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

| Vulkan Support | 1.4 | 1.3 |

| OpenGL Support | 4.6 | 4.6 |

| Release Date | 2021-08-09 | 2019-03-17 |

| Length | 167 mm (6.6 inches) | Not specified |

| Height | 69 mm (2.7 inches) | Not specified |