AMD Radeon RX 560 XT vs NVIDIA A2 Comparison

FAQ

Q: How does the NVIDIA A2 compare to the AMD Radeon RX 560 XT in average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA A2 has an average benchmark score of 34,690, which is 1.6% higher than the AMD Radeon RX 560 XT's 34,133. Both cards sit at the 79th percentile among all GPUs, indicating they are closely matched overall.

Q: Which card wins in OpenCL performance?

A: The NVIDIA A2 wins Geekbench OpenCL with a score of 35,357 versus 31,387 for the RX 560 XT, a 12.6% advantage. This is the A2's strongest benchmark result.

Q: Which card wins in Vulkan performance?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 560 XT wins Geekbench Vulkan with a score of 36,879 versus 34,023 for the NVIDIA A2, a 7.7% advantage. This flips the overall comparison in AMD's favor for Vulkan workloads.

Q: What are the memory specifications for each card?

A: The NVIDIA A2 has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 200.1 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD Radeon RX 560 XT has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 224.0 GB/s bandwidth. The A2 has four times the capacity but lower bandwidth.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The NVIDIA A2 has a 60 W TDP, requires no power connectors, and suggests a 250 W PSU. The AMD Radeon RX 560 XT has a 150 W TDP, needs one 6-pin connector, and suggests a 450 W PSU.

Q: How do the nearest rivals compare to each card?

A: The NVIDIA A2's closest rival is the NVIDIA T1000 8 GB, which scores 34,561 (0.4% behind). The AMD Radeon RX 560 XT's closest rival is the NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB at 34,154 (0.1% ahead), followed by the RTX A1000 at 34,207 (0.2% ahead).

The Verdict

The data splits cleanly by workload. For OpenCL compute tasks, the NVIDIA A2 is the clear pick, delivering 12.6% higher performance than the RX 560 XT. For Vulkan-based applications, the AMD Radeon RX 560 XT takes the lead by 7.7%. If you need 16 GB of memory for large datasets, the A2 is the only choice — the RX 560 XT's 4 GB is a hard limitation. If you're building a system with strict power or space constraints, the A2's 60 W TDP and single-slot design are decisive advantages. The RX 560 XT, by contrast, requires a 150 W TDP, a dual-slot cooler, and a 6-pin power connector. For a general-purpose GPU where Vulkan is more common, the RX 560 XT's higher texture rate (137.3 GTexel/s vs 70.80 GTexel/s) and wider 256-bit memory bus make it the better value in raw throughput. But for anyone prioritizing memory capacity, compute in OpenCL, or low-power deployment, the NVIDIA A2 wins outright.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two benchmark results tell a story of specialization. In Geekbench OpenCL, the NVIDIA A2 scores 35,357 against the RX 560 XT's 31,387 — a 12.6% margin. That's a substantial gap, roughly equivalent to the A2 being one full tier above its rival in compute-heavy OpenCL workloads. The A2's nearest rivals in this range include the NVIDIA T1000 8 GB (34,561) and AMD Radeon HD 7970 (34,541), both of which the A2 beats by 0.4%. The RX 560 XT, meanwhile, sits 7.7% behind the A2 in OpenCL, but its own nearest rivals — RTX A2000 12 GB (34,154) and RTX A1000 (34,207) — are actually ahead of it by 0.1–0.2%.

The Vulkan benchmark flips the script. The AMD Radeon RX 560 XT scores 36,879, which is 7.7% higher than the NVIDIA A2's 34,023. This is a meaningful lead, and it puts the RX 560 XT in the same performance neighborhood as GPUs like the RTX A2000 12 GB (34,154) and RTX A1000 (34,207), though the RX 560 XT actually beats both of those in Vulkan by 8% or more. The NVIDIA A2's Vulkan score of 34,023 is closer to its OpenCL result, suggesting the A2 maintains consistent performance across APIs, but it loses ground to the RX 560 XT specifically because AMD's GCN architecture handles Vulkan particularly well.

The head-to-head record is one win each. The A2's OpenCL victory is larger in percentage terms (12.6% vs 7.7%), but the RX 560 XT's Vulkan win is still decisive. When you average the two, the A2 edges ahead overall by 1.6%, but that average hides the fact that these cards are not interchangeable — they excel at different things.

Specification Differences

The NVIDIA A2 and AMD Radeon RX 560 XT differ across nearly every major specification. The A2 uses an 8 nm process from Samsung with 8,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 43.5 million per mm². The RX 560 XT uses a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries with 5,700 million transistors on a larger 232 mm² die, yielding just 24.6 million transistors per mm². The A2 has a base clock of 1440 MHz and boost clock of 1770 MHz, while the RX 560 XT runs at 1074 MHz base and 1226 MHz boost — the A2 is 34% faster at base and 44% faster at boost.

Memory configuration differs dramatically. The A2 offers 16 GB GDDR6 at 1563 MHz (12.5 Gbps effective) on a 128-bit bus, delivering 200.1 GB/s. The RX 560 XT offers 4 GB GDDR5 at 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective) on a 256-bit bus, delivering 224.0 GB/s. The RX 560 XT has 12% more bandwidth, but the A2 has 12 GB more capacity. The A2 has 1,280 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, plus 10 RT cores and 40 tensor cores. The RX 560 XT has 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, but no RT or tensor cores. The A2's pixel rate is 56.64 GPixel/s versus 39.23 GPixel/s for the RX 560 XT, but the RX 560 XT's texture rate of 137.3 GTexel/s nearly doubles the A2's 70.80 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is close: 4.531 TFLOPS for the A2 versus 4.394 TFLOPS for the RX 560 XT, a 3.1% difference.

The A2 draws 60 W with no power connectors and a 250 W suggested PSU; the RX 560 XT draws 150 W, needs one 6-pin, and suggests a 450 W PSU. The A2 is single-slot with no display outputs; the RX 560 XT is dual-slot with 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. The A2 uses PCIe 4.0 x8, the RX 560 XT uses PCIe 3.0 x16. The A2 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), the RX 560 XT only DirectX 12 (12_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6, but the A2 has Vulkan 1.4 versus the RX 560 XT's Vulkan 1.3. The A2 measures no listed length; the RX 560 XT is 241 mm (9.5 inches).

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA A2 is built on the Ampere architecture using the GA107 chip, belonging to the Workstation Ampere generation. It's fabricated on Samsung's 8 nm process. The RX 560 XT uses AMD's GCN 4.0 architecture with the Ellesmere chip, part of the Polaris generation, on GlobalFoundries' 14 nm process. These are fundamentally different design philosophies: Ampere is a modern, efficiency-focused architecture with dedicated RT and tensor cores, while GCN 4.0 is an older, compute-oriented design without any ray tracing or AI acceleration hardware.

The A2 includes 10 RT cores and 40 tensor cores, which the RX 560 XT completely lacks. This means the A2 can handle ray-traced workloads and tensor-based operations in software that supports them, while the RX 560 XT cannot. The A2's transistor density is 43.5M per mm² versus 24.6M for the RX 560 XT, reflecting the newer process node. The A2 also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4, while the RX 560 XT is limited to DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3. The A2's memory runs at 12.5 Gbps effective versus 7 Gbps for the RX 560 XT, though the RX 560 XT compensates with a wider 256-bit bus.

The A2's GA107 chip is designed for low-power, single-slot workstation deployment — no display outputs, no power connectors, and a 60 W TDP. The RX 560 XT's Ellesmere is a traditional graphics card with a full display output suite and higher power draw. The A2 has no predecessor within the data; the RX 560 XT's predecessor is Arctic Islands and its successor is Vega. The A2's predecessor is Quadro Turing and its successor is Workstation Ada, placing it in a different product line entirely.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA A2 wins in scenarios that demand high memory capacity and compute efficiency. Its 16 GB of GDDR6 is four times the RX 560 XT's 4 GB, making it the only viable option for workloads that exceed 4 GB of VRAM — typical of large-scale inference, data processing, or multi-model rendering. The A2's OpenCL score of 35,357 is 12.6% higher, so any OpenCL-based application will favor NVIDIA. Its 60 W TDP and single-slot design mean it can be installed in systems where the RX 560 XT's 150 W requirement and dual-slot footprint simply won't fit. The A2 also supports RT cores and tensor cores, giving it a functional advantage in ray-traced or tensor-accelerated workloads, even if those features aren't directly benchmarked here. The A2's higher boost clock (1770 MHz vs 1226 MHz) and higher pixel rate (56.64 GPixel/s vs 39.23 GPixel/s) also contribute to its compute lead.

The AMD Radeon RX 560 XT wins in Vulkan-based applications, where its 36,879 score beats the A2 by 7.7%. This is meaningful for gaming or Vulkan-centric compute stacks. The RX 560 XT also has a significantly higher texture rate (137.3 GTexel/s vs 70.80 GTexel/s), which benefits texture-heavy workloads. Its wider 256-bit memory bus provides 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth — 12% more than the A2 — which helps in bandwidth-sensitive tasks. The RX 560 XT has 1,792 shading units versus 1,280, a 40% higher count, giving it more raw parallel compute capacity in certain workloads. The card also includes display outputs (1x HDMI 2.0b, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a), making it usable as a primary display adapter, whereas the A2 has no outputs at all. For any user who needs to connect a monitor, the RX 560 XT is the only choice.

The 1.6% average benchmark lead for the A2 is within the noise of card-to-card variation, so the decision should hinge on your specific workload. Vulkan and display output needs point to the RX 560 XT. OpenCL, memory capacity, ray tracing, tensor cores, or low-power constraints point to the NVIDIA A2.