AMD Radeon RX 560 XT vs NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile Comparison

FAQ

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in overall benchmark scores?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile has an average benchmark score of 39568, while the AMD Radeon RX 560 XT averages 34133. This places the NVIDIA part at the 82nd percentile among all GPUs, versus the 79th percentile for the AMD card.

Q: Which GPU wins in OpenCL performance and by how much?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 41263, compared to 31387 for the AMD Radeon RX 560 XT. The recorded delta is 31.5 percent in favor of the NVIDIA part.

Q: Is the Vulkan result closer between the two cards?

A: Yes, the Vulkan gap narrows considerably. The RTX A500 Mobile scores 37873, while the RX 560 XT scores 36879, a delta of only 2.7 percent. The NVIDIA card still wins, but the margin is much smaller than in OpenCL.

Q: What are the memory configurations of each GPU?

A: Both cards have 4 GB of memory, but they use different types. The RTX A500 Mobile uses GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 560 XT uses GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 224.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has ray tracing and tensor core support?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile includes 16 ray tracing cores and 64 tensor cores, reflecting its Ampere architecture. The AMD Radeon RX 560 XT, based on GCN 4.0, has no ray tracing cores or tensor cores listed in the database.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The RTX A500 Mobile has a 30 W TDP and uses no power connectors. The RX 560 XT has a 150 W TDP, requires a single 6-pin power connector, and the database suggests a 450 W power supply.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different design eras and philosophies. The NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile is built on the Ampere architecture using an 8 nm process at Samsung's foundry. Its chip, designated GA107S, integrates 8,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 43.5M per mm². The AMD Radeon RX 560 XT, by contrast, uses the older GCN 4.0 architecture on a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries. Its Ellesmere chip packs 5,700 million transistors on a larger 232 mm² die, resulting in a lower density of 24.6M per mm².

These architectural differences manifest in several key feature sets. The RTX A500 Mobile includes dedicated ray tracing cores (16 of them) and tensor cores (64), which are absent entirely from the RX 560 XT. This means the NVIDIA card can accelerate ray-traced workloads and AI inference tasks, while the AMD card relies purely on traditional shader compute. The NVIDIA GPU also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, whereas the RX 560 XT supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3. Both cards support OpenGL 4.6.

The compute pipelines differ substantially. The RTX A500 Mobile has 2048 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The RX 560 XT has 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The AMD card has more texture units, which helps its texture fill rate, but the NVIDIA card has more shaders. The FP32 throughput reflects this: 6.296 TFLOPS for the NVIDIA part versus 4.394 TFLOPS for the AMD part. Interestingly, both cards report FP16 performance at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, meaning neither has a dedicated half-precision boost path in the recorded data.

The memory subsystems are also architecturally distinct. The RTX A500 Mobile uses GDDR6 with a narrow 64-bit bus, while the RX 560 XT uses GDDR5 with a wide 256-bit bus. This gives the AMD card more than double the memory bandwidth (224.0 GB/s versus 96.00 GB/s), a significant advantage for bandwidth-bound workloads. The NVIDIA card compensates with higher effective memory clock signaling (12 Gbps effective versus 7 Gbps effective), but the bus width difference dominates the bandwidth calculation.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data paints a clear but nuanced picture. The RTX A500 Mobile wins both recorded tests, so it holds the overall advantage. However, the nature of each win suggests different strengths. In Geekbench OpenCL, the NVIDIA card's lead is substantial at 31.5 percent. This test likely benefits from the higher shader count and the tensor core acceleration available in the Ampere architecture. The RX 560 XT cannot match this raw compute throughput in a general-purpose compute workload.

The Vulkan test tells a different story. The RTX A500 Mobile still wins, but only by 2.7 percent. This narrow margin suggests that the RX 560 XT's superior memory bandwidth (224.0 GB/s versus 96.00 GB/s) helps close the gap in graphics-oriented workloads. The wider 256-bit bus and higher texture fill rate (137.3 GTexel/s versus 98.37 GTexel/s) likely contribute to this competitive showing. In scenarios where geometry throughput and memory bandwidth matter more than raw shader compute, the AMD card proves more capable than its overall score suggests.

For use cases involving ray tracing or AI workloads, the RTX A500 Mobile is the clear choice given its dedicated cores. For traditional rasterization at moderate resolutions, the RX 560 XT's bandwidth advantage keeps it competitive despite its older architecture. The data also shows the RTX A500 Mobile has a higher pixel rate (49.18 GPixel/s versus 39.23 GPixel/s), which supports its fill-rate advantage.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification category:

• Process node: 8 nm (Samsung) for NVIDIA, 14 nm (GlobalFoundries) for AMD
• Transistors: 8,700 million versus 5,700 million
• Die size: 200 mm² versus 232 mm²
• Transistor density: 43.5M / mm² versus 24.6M / mm²
• Base clock: 832 MHz versus 1074 MHz
• Boost clock: 1537 MHz versus 1226 MHz
• Memory clock: 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) versus 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective)
• Memory type: GDDR6 versus GDDR5
• Memory bus width: 64 bit versus 256 bit
• Memory bandwidth: 96.00 GB/s versus 224.0 GB/s
• Shading units: 2048 versus 1792
• TMUs: 64 versus 112
• ROPs: 32 versus 32 (no difference)
• RT cores: 16 versus null
• Tensor cores: 64 versus null
• Pixel rate: 49.18 GPixel/s versus 39.23 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 98.37 GTexel/s versus 137.3 GTexel/s
• FP32: 6.296 TFLOPS versus 4.394 TFLOPS
• FP16: 6.296 TFLOPS (1:1) versus 4.394 TFLOPS (1:1)
• TDP: 30 W versus 150 W
• Slot width: IGP versus Dual-slot
• Power connectors: None versus 1x 6-pin
• Suggested PSU: null versus 450 W
• Bus interface: PCIe 4.0 x8 versus PCIe 3.0 x16
• Display outputs: Portable Device Dependent versus 1x HDMI 2.0b, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
• DirectX support: 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus 12 (12_0)
• Vulkan support: 1.4 versus 1.3
• Release date: 2022-03-21 versus 2019-03-12
• Length: null versus 241 mm (9.5 inches)

The ROP count is the only specification that matches exactly at 32. Every other measurable field shows a difference between the two designs.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two head-to-head comparisons, both won by the NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile. The first test, Geekbench OpenCL, shows the largest divergence. The NVIDIA card scores 41263 against 31387 for the AMD RX 560 XT, producing a 31.5 percent delta. This is a decisive victory that aligns with the FP32 compute difference: 6.296 TFLOPS versus 4.394 TFLOPS, a 43 percent gap in theoretical throughput. The actual benchmark delta is smaller than the theoretical gap, suggesting some overhead or inefficiency in the NVIDIA implementation, but the direction is consistent.

The second test, Geekbench Vulkan, is far closer. The RTX A500 Mobile scores 37873, while the RX 560 XT scores 36879, for a delta of just 2.7 percent. This result is remarkable given the architectural differences. The AMD card's wider memory bus (256 bit versus 64 bit) and higher memory bandwidth (224.0 GB/s versus 96.00 GB/s) appear to compensate for its lower shader count and absent ray tracing cores. The texture rate also favors the AMD card: 137.3 GTexel/s versus 98.37 GTexel/s. In a graphics API like Vulkan, these factors can matter more than raw compute throughput.

The overall win count stands at 2 for the NVIDIA card and 0 for the AMD card. However, the narrow Vulkan margin suggests that the RX 560 XT is not outclassed in all scenarios. If a workload heavily favors memory bandwidth and texture throughput, the AMD card could potentially outperform its average score suggests. The data does not include tests that isolate these factors, so this remains an inference from the recorded specifications rather than a measured result.

The Verdict

The benchmark data indicates that the NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile is the stronger performer in the recorded tests, winning both head-to-head comparisons. Its 31.5 percent OpenCL advantage is substantial and reflects its newer architecture, higher shader count, and dedicated tensor cores. The 2.7 percent Vulkan win is narrower but still a win. Anyone prioritizing raw compute performance, ray tracing capability, or AI acceleration should choose the RTX A500 Mobile based on this data.

The AMD Radeon RX 560 XT, however, is not without merit. Its Vulkan score comes within 2.7 percent of the NVIDIA card, and its memory bandwidth is more than double. The 224.0 GB/s bandwidth and 112 TMUs give it strengths in texture-heavy workloads. The card also has a wider 256-bit bus, which historically benefits higher-resolution rendering. The data suggests this GPU remains competitive for traditional graphics tasks, even if it lacks the feature set of the Ampere generation.

Power consumption is another distinguishing factor. The RTX A500 Mobile draws only 30 W and requires no external power connectors, making it suitable for compact, integrated designs. The RX 560 XT draws 150 W and needs a 6-pin connector plus a 450 W power supply. For constrained form factors or low-power systems, the NVIDIA card is the practical choice. For desktop systems with adequate power delivery, the AMD card's higher power budget enables its bandwidth advantages.

The production status of both GPUs is end-of-life, so neither is a forward-looking purchase. The RTX A500 Mobile has a later release date (2022-03-21 versus 2019-03-12), reflecting its newer design. The database shows the NVIDIA card at the 82nd percentile versus the 79th percentile for the AMD card, confirming its higher standing in the overall performance distribution. Buyers seeking the best recorded performance should choose the RTX A500 Mobile; those with workloads specifically sensitive to memory bandwidth may find the RX 560 XT adequate, particularly given its competitive Vulkan showing.