AMD Radeon RX 480 vs NVIDIA GeForce MX570 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only directly comparable benchmark in the database is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and the results are remarkably close. The NVIDIA GeForce MX570 scores 38,299, while the AMD Radeon RX 480 scores 37,998. The margin is just 0.8%, making this a statistical tie rather than a decisive victory. The MX570 claims the win on paper, but the delta is well within run-to-run variance for most workloads.

The MX570's position in the broader database is revealing. Its average benchmark score of 38,299 places it in the 81st percentile of all GPUs, just 0.1% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 Mobile (38,349) and 0.4% ahead of the RTX 4080 Mobile (38,135). This clustering suggests the MX570's performance profile is competitive with mobile flagship parts from NVIDIA's recent lineup, at least in compute-oriented OpenCL tasks. The MX570 A variant sits 1% higher at 38,691, while the AMD Radeon Pro 580X trails by 1.1% at 38,706.

The RX 480's numbers tell a different story. Its average benchmark score is 33,997, placing it in the 78th percentile. That average is dragged down by additional workloads: the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 966, Geekbench Metal is 51,057, and Geekbench Vulkan is 45,968. The OpenCL figure, at 37,998, is actually close to its Metal and Vulkan scores, but the 3DMark result indicates a significant gap in modern DX12 rasterization workloads. The RX 480's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon HD 7950 (33,951, 0.1% lower), the RX 560 XT (34,133, 0.4% higher), the RX 7700S (33,849, 0.4% lower), and the RTX A2000 12 GB (34,154, 0.5% higher). This places the RX 480 in a performance tier that is effectively interchangeable with several older and newer cards.

What stands out is that the MX570, despite being a low-power mobile part, matches or slightly exceeds a desktop GPU from 2016 in raw OpenCL compute. However, the RX 480's additional benchmark results suggest it is a more balanced performer across different API workloads, especially when considering its Vulkan score of 45,968, which is substantially higher than its OpenCL result. The MX570 has no recorded Vulkan, Metal, or DX12 entries in the database, so any comparison beyond OpenCL is speculative.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is substantial, reflecting their different design goals and release eras. The MX570 is built on NVIDIA's Ampere architecture using the GA107S chip, fabricated on Samsung's 8 nm process. It packs 8,700 million transistors into a 200 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 43.5 million per mm². The RX 480 uses AMD's GCN 4.0 architecture with the Ellesmere chip, built on GlobalFoundries' 14 nm process, with 5,700 million transistors across a 232 mm² die, for a density of 24.6 million per mm². The MX570's newer process node allows nearly double the transistor density, which is a key factor in its ability to deliver competitive compute performance at a fraction of the power draw.

The compute resources differ significantly. The MX570 has 2,048 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. It also includes 16 ray tracing cores and 64 tensor cores, features that are entirely absent from the RX 480, which has 2,304 shading units, 144 TMUs, and 32 ROPs but no dedicated RT or tensor hardware. The RX 480's higher TMU count (144 vs. 64) and texture rate (182.3 GTexel/s vs. 73.92 GTexel/s) indicate that it is better suited for texture-heavy rasterization workloads. The MX570's pixel rate is 36.96 GPixel/s, slightly lower than the RX 480's 40.51 GPixel/s.

Memory configurations are polar opposites. The MX570 uses 2 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, delivering 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth with memory clocked at 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective). The RX 480 uses 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 256.0 GB/s at 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective). The RX 480 has more than 2.6 times the memory bandwidth and four times the capacity, which is critical for high-resolution textures and modern game assets. The MX570's 2 GB capacity is a severe limitation for contemporary workloads, even if its compute throughput is competitive.

The feature sets also diverge. The MX570 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The RX 480 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The MX570's DX12 Ultimate support includes hardware ray tracing and variable rate shading, while the RX 480 lacks these capabilities. Power consumption is another major differentiator: the MX570 is rated at 15 W TDP with no power connectors, while the RX 480 is rated at 150 W and requires a single 6-pin connector with a suggested 450 W PSU. The MX570 is an integrated-class part (IGP slot width), while the RX 480 is a dual-slot desktop card measuring 240 mm by 95 mm by 35 mm.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher OpenCL benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce MX570 scores 38,299 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 0.8% higher than the AMD Radeon RX 480's 37,998.

Q: Does the RX 480 support ray tracing?

A: No. The RX 480 has no ray tracing cores or tensor cores. The MX570 includes 16 RT cores and 64 tensor cores, and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does each GPU have?

A: The MX570 offers 96.00 GB/s over a 64-bit GDDR6 interface. The RX 480 offers 256.0 GB/s over a 256-bit GDDR5 interface.

Q: What is the transistor density difference?

A: The MX570 has a transistor density of 43.5 million per mm² on an 8 nm Samsung process. The RX 480 has 24.6 million per mm² on a 14 nm GlobalFoundries process.

Q: Which GPU is more power-efficient?

A: The MX570 is rated at 15 W TDP with no power connectors. The RX 480 is rated at 150 W TDP and requires a 6-pin connector plus a 450 W suggested PSU.

Q: What are the release dates?

A: The MX570 was released on 2021-12-16. The RX 480 was released on 2016-06-28.

The Verdict

The data paints a clear picture of two GPUs designed for entirely different use cases. The MX570 is a low-power mobile part that punches above its weight in compute benchmarks, matching the RX 480 in OpenCL despite consuming 135 W less power. Its 81st percentile ranking and proximity to the RTX 5080 Mobile and RTX 4080 Mobile scores in the database indicate that it is a capable compute accelerator for lightweight tasks. However, its 2 GB memory capacity and 96.00 GB/s bandwidth are bottlenecks for any memory-intensive application, and its lack of recorded DX12, Vulkan, or Metal results limits confidence in its gaming performance.

The RX 480, despite being older and built on a less dense process, offers 8 GB of memory and 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Its additional benchmark entries show strong Vulkan performance (45,968) and competitive Metal performance (51,057), though its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 966 suggests that modern DX12 titles may not run well. The 78th percentile ranking places it slightly below the MX570 in overall compute, but the RX 480's memory subsystem and texture throughput (182.3 GTexel/s) make it the better choice for traditional rasterization workloads that rely on bandwidth rather than raw FP32 compute.

For users who need a low-power, mobile-friendly GPU with modern feature support like ray tracing and DX12 Ultimate, the MX570 is the logical pick, provided workloads fit within 2 GB of VRAM. For desktop users with a PSU of at least 450 W who need more memory capacity and bandwidth, the RX 480 remains a viable option despite its age and higher power draw. The benchmark data does not show a clear winner across all scenarios; it shows two GPUs optimized for different priorities, and the choice depends entirely on the workload.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce MX570 | AMD Radeon RX 480 |

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

| Architecture | Ampere | GCN 4.0 |

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

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

| Die Size | 200 mm² | 232 mm² |

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

| Base Clock | 832 MHz | 1120 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1155 MHz | 1266 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) | 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 2 GB GDDR6 | 8 GB GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus Width | 64 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 96.00 GB/s | 256.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2048 | 2304 |

| TMUs | 64 | 144 |

| ROPs | 32 | 32 |

| RT Cores | 16 | None |

| Tensor Cores | 64 | None |

| Pixel Rate | 36.96 GPixel/s | 40.51 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 73.92 GTexel/s | 182.3 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 4.731 TFLOPS | 5.834 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 4.731 TFLOPS (1:1) | 5.834 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 15 W | 150 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 6-pin |

| Suggested PSU | Not specified | 450 W |

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

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 1x HDMI 2.0b, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a |

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

| Vulkan Support | 1.4 | 1.3 |

| Release Date | 2021-12-16 | 2016-06-28 |

| Launch MSRP | Not stated | 229 USD |

| Dimensions | Not specified | 240 mm x 95 mm x 35 mm |