AMD Radeon RX 570X vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M and the AMD Radeon RX 570X represent two very different approaches to mobile graphics, separated by three years of GPU architecture evolution. The data shows a clear performance gap, but the story is more nuanced than a simple win/loss record. The GTX 965M, an end-of-life Maxwell part from early 2015, and the RX 570X, a late-2018 Polaris refresh, target different segments and eras, yet both occupy a similar percentile rank among all GPUs. This analysis breaks down where each card stands based strictly on the benchmark and specification data.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only shared benchmark between the two cards is Geekbench OpenCL, and the result is decisive. The AMD Radeon RX 570X scores 38,939, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M scores 14,509. That is a delta of -62.7% for the NVIDIA part, meaning the RX 570X is roughly 2.7 times faster in this compute-oriented test. This is not a marginal victory; it is a generational leap in raw throughput. The RX 570X’s FP32 compute of 5.095 TFLOPS versus the GTX 965M’s 1.946 TFLOPS explains the gulf, as OpenCL heavily rewards raw shader output.

Looking at average benchmark scores, the picture shifts slightly. The GTX 965M averages 14,404 across its two recorded Geekbench runs (OpenCL and Vulkan), landing at the 56th percentile of all GPUs. The RX 570X averages 13,871 across three tests (Geekbench OpenCL, Passmark G2D, and Passmark G3D), placing it at the 55th percentile. Despite the massive OpenCL win for AMD, the average scores are nearly identical, with the GTX 965M actually sitting 3.8% higher (14,404 vs 13,871). This is because the RX 570X’s Passmark G3D score of 1,923 drags its average down, while the GTX 965M’s Vulkan score of 14,299 keeps its average competitive.

The rivalry data reinforces this split-personality result. The GTX 965M’s nearest rival is the AMD Radeon RX Vega 11, with an average score of 14,385 — a delta of just 0.1%. The RX 570X, meanwhile, sits next to the NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile at 13,821 (0.4% delta) and the AMD Radeon 660M at 13,812 (0.4% delta). Notably, the RX 570X is also within 0.9% of the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT’s average score of 13,745, which demonstrates how misleading average scores can be when tests vary widely in workload type. In the single head-to-head test, AMD wins outright; in aggregate, the two cards are statistical peers.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 570X wins decisively in raw compute and memory bandwidth. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 38,939 is more than double the GTX 965M’s 14,509, making it the clear choice for GPU-accelerated compute tasks, rendering, or any workload that scales with shader count and memory throughput. The RX 570X’s 224.0 GB/s memory bandwidth versus the GTX 965M’s 80.19 GB/s is a 2.8x advantage, which directly benefits texture-heavy workloads and large data sets. With 2,048 shading units and 128 TMUs, it has double the execution resources of the GTX 965M’s 1,024 shaders and 64 TMUs.

The GTX 965M, however, holds its ground in the average benchmark standings, suggesting better consistency across different API workloads. Its Vulkan score of 14,299 on a 2015 mobile chip is respectable, and it supports Vulkan 1.4, a newer API version than the RX 570X’s Vulkan 1.3. The GTX 965M’s percentile rank of 56 is also fractionally higher than the RX 570X’s 55, indicating that when averaged across its tested workloads, it performs slightly better relative to the entire GPU landscape. For a user running older DirectX 12 titles or Vulkan-based games, the GTX 965M’s API support (DirectX 12_1 versus 12_0) might offer better feature compatibility.

The RX 570X also wins on memory capacity with 8 GB versus 2 GB, which is critical for modern textures and high-resolution assets. The GTX 965M’s 2 GB frame buffer is a hard ceiling for contemporary gaming, while the RX 570X’s 8 GB provides headroom for future titles. In practical terms, the RX 570X is the card for compute-heavy or bandwidth-bound scenarios, while the GTX 965M shows surprising resilience in mixed API benchmarks given its age.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap is fundamental. The GTX 965M uses the GM204 chip on NVIDIA’s Maxwell 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It packs 5,200 million transistors into a 398 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 13.1 million per mm². The RX 570X, by contrast, uses the Polaris 20 chip on AMD’s GCN 4.0 architecture, built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It houses 5,700 million transistors in a much smaller 232 mm² die, achieving a density of 24.6 million per mm² — nearly double the density of the Maxwell part.

These process and density differences explain the clock speed disparity. The GTX 965M runs at a base of 924 MHz and boosts to 950 MHz, while the RX 570X runs at 1,168 MHz base and 1,244 MHz boost. The smaller 14 nm node allows AMD to push higher clocks while consuming more power (150 W TDP versus no TDP listed for the NVIDIA part, though the GTX 965M is an MXM module with no power connectors, implying a much lower draw). The RX 570X’s dual-slot design with a 6-pin power connector and 450 W suggested PSU stands in contrast to the GTX 965M’s slot-width MXM form factor, which is portable-device dependent.

The memory subsystems are also architecturally distinct. The GTX 965M uses a 128-bit bus with GDDR5 at 1,253 MHz (5 Gbps effective), delivering 80.19 GB/s. The RX 570X uses a 256-bit bus with GDDR5 at 1,750 MHz (7 Gbps effective), delivering 224.0 GB/s. The RX 570X’s memory clock is nearly 40% higher, and its bus width is double, resulting in that 2.8x bandwidth advantage. The RX 570X also supports FP16 at a 1:1 ratio (5.095 TFLOPS), while the GTX 965M has no listed FP16 capability, which matters for mixed-precision workloads.

API support differs as well. The GTX 965M supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the RX 570X supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3. Both support OpenGL 4.6. The GTX 965M’s higher DirectX feature level (12_1 vs 12_0) and newer Vulkan version are notable for a 2015 part, potentially offering better compatibility with certain modern rendering features.

Specification Differences

The key specification differences between the two cards are stark. The RX 570X has double the shading units (2,048 vs 1,024), double the TMUs (128 vs 64), and the same 32 ROPs. Its pixel rate is 39.81 GPixel/s versus 30.40 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 159.2 GTexel/s versus 60.80 GTexel/s — a 2.6x advantage in texture fill. FP32 performance is 5.095 TFLOPS versus 1.946 TFLOPS, a 2.6x gap.

Memory is the biggest differentiator: the RX 570X has 8 GB versus 2 GB, a 256-bit bus versus 128-bit, and 224.0 GB/s versus 80.19 GB/s. The RX 570X’s base clock is 1,168 MHz versus 924 MHz, and its boost clock is 1,244 MHz versus 950 MHz. The process node is 14 nm versus 28 nm, and the die size is 232 mm² versus 398 mm². The RX 570X has a TDP of 150 W, requires a 6-pin power connector, and a 450 W suggested PSU; the GTX 965M has no TDP listed, no power connectors, and uses an MXM-B (3.0) interface versus PCIe 3.0 x16.

The RX 570X is physically a dual-slot card at 241 mm (9.5 inches) long with fixed display outputs (1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a). The GTX 965M is an MXM module with display outputs that are portable-device dependent. The RX 570X’s transistor count is slightly higher (5,700 million vs 5,200 million), but its density is much higher due to the smaller die. Release dates differ by over three years: the GTX 965M launched on January 8, 2015, while the RX 570X launched on April 10, 2018.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher raw compute performance?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 570X dominates, with 5.095 TFLOPS FP32 versus the GTX 965M’s 1.946 TFLOPS, and its Geekbench OpenCL score of 38,939 is 62.7% higher than the NVIDIA card’s 14,509.

Q: Are these cards comparable in overall benchmark standings?

A: Yes, they are very close. The GTX 965M sits at the 56th percentile of all GPUs with an average score of 14,404, while the RX 570X is at the 55th percentile with an average score of 13,871. The GTX 965M’s average is 3.8% higher, despite losing the only head-to-head test.

Q: What is the memory capacity and bandwidth difference?

A: The RX 570X has 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, yielding 224.0 GB/s. The GTX 965M has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, yielding 80.19 GB/s. The RX 570X offers 2.8x the bandwidth.

Q: Which card supports newer graphics APIs?

A: The GTX 965M supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the RX 570X supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Q: What are the physical form factor differences?

A: The GTX 965M is an MXM Module with no power connectors and portable-device-dependent outputs. The RX 570X is a dual-slot card, 241 mm (9.5 inches) long, requiring a 6-pin power connector and a 450 W suggested PSU, with fixed DVI, HDMI, and DisplayPort outputs.

Q: Which card has a higher clock speed?

A: The RX 570X runs at 1,168 MHz base and 1,244 MHz boost, while the GTX 965M runs at 924 MHz base and 950 MHz boost. The RX 570X’s boost clock is 294 MHz higher.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split. If you prioritize raw compute, memory bandwidth, or texture-heavy workloads, the AMD Radeon RX 570X is the superior part — its 2.6x advantage in FP32, texture rate, and memory bandwidth, combined with 4x the VRAM, make it the obvious choice for any GPU-accelerated task beyond basic gaming. The 62.7% lead in Geekbench OpenCL is decisive evidence of this.

However, the GTX 965M is not without merit. Its higher percentile rank (56 vs 55), slightly better average benchmark score (14,404 vs 13,871), and newer API support (Vulkan 1.4, DirectX 12_1) suggest it may offer better compatibility and consistency in mixed workloads. Its MXM form factor and lack of power connectors make it suitable for portable devices where the RX 570X’s 150 W TDP and dual-slot size would be impractical.

The verdict depends on your use case. For desktop-replacement gaming or compute tasks at 1080p with high textures, the RX 570X’s 8 GB and 224 GB/s bandwidth are the deciding factors. For a thin-and-light laptop running older titles or Vulkan-based applications, the GTX 965M’s lower power footprint and newer API versions make it a viable, if dated, option. The RX 570X wins on sheer performance; the GTX 965M wins on compactness and API modernity. Choose accordingly.