Intel Arc Pro A30M vs NVIDIA GeForce MX570 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only recorded benchmark comparison between the NVIDIA GeForce MX570 and the Intel Arc Pro A30M is the Geekbench OpenCL compute test. In this single metric, the NVIDIA GeForce MX570 scores 38,299 points, while the Intel Arc Pro A30M scores 31,894 points. The delta is 20.1% in favor of the NVIDIA part, a substantial margin for a single compute workload.

Context from the nearest rivals in the database helps frame this result. The MX570 sits just 0.1% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 Mobile (38,349) and 0.4% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile (38,135). It also trails its own sibling, the NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A, by 1% (38,691) and the AMD Radeon Pro 580X by 1.1% (38,706). This places the MX570 in a dense cluster of high-scoring mobile and professional parts, all within roughly a point or two of each other. The 20.1% lead over the Arc Pro A30M is therefore not just a small edge; it is a decisive gap in raw OpenCL throughput.

The Arc Pro A30M, conversely, finds itself in a different performance neighborhood. Its 31,894 score is 0.7% above the NVIDIA TITAN RTX (31,676), 0.9% below the AMD Radeon Pro 570X (32,176), 1.1% above the NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell (31,532), and 1.5% below the AMD FirePro S10000 (32,388). These rivals are older or lower-tier professional cards, and the Arc Pro A30M holds its own among them. But the comparison to the MX570 is unambiguous: the NVIDIA chip is the faster part in this specific test by a wide margin.

Interpreting the numbers further, the MX570's 20.1% advantage is larger than any delta between the Arc Pro A30M and its nearest rivals, which range from 0.7% to 1.5%. That means the performance gap between these two GPUs is roughly an order of magnitude larger than the typical spread among the Arc Pro A30M's closest competitors. The data does not suggest a close contest; it suggests two GPUs operating in different tiers of OpenCL performance.

It is also worth noting the percentile rankings. The MX570 sits at the 81st percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the Arc Pro A30M sits at the 76th. A five-point percentile difference is meaningful, implying the NVIDIA part outranks a larger share of the total GPU population. The average benchmark score for the MX570 is 38,299, identical to its single recorded score, and the Arc Pro A30M's average is 31,894, also matching its single result. With only one benchmark each, these averages carry no variance, but they do anchor the two parts at specific points in the distribution.

The Verdict

The data points clearly in one direction. The NVIDIA GeForce MX570 wins the only head-to-head benchmark by 20.1%, holds a higher percentile rank (81 vs 76), and matches or beats the Arc Pro A30M in several architectural specs. Any user choosing strictly on recorded performance should select the MX570.

That said, the Arc Pro A30M is not without its own advantages, which appear in the specifications rather than the benchmark. It has double the memory capacity: 4 GB versus 2 GB. It also has a higher pixel rate (64.00 GPixel/s vs 36.96 GPixel/s) and a higher texture rate (128.0 GTexel/s vs 73.92 GTexel/s). Its FP16 throughput is 8.192 TFLOPS, which is 2:1 versus its FP32 rate, compared to the MX570's 1:1 FP16 at 4.731 TFLOPS. These figures suggest the Intel part could be better suited to specific workloads like half-precision compute or fill-rate-heavy tasks, even though its overall OpenCL score lags.

The verdict from the database is therefore nuanced but not ambiguous. For general compute performance as measured by Geekbench OpenCL, the MX570 is the winner. For workloads that depend on memory capacity, FP16 throughput, or pixel and texture fill rates, the Arc Pro A30M has structural advantages that the benchmark does not capture. The user's application matters, but if the question is simply which GPU is faster in the recorded test, the answer is the NVIDIA GeForce MX570.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce MX570 wins in raw OpenCL compute. Its 38,299 score versus 31,894 is a 20.1% advantage, and it also leads in FP32 performance at 4.731 TFLOPS versus 4.096 TFLOPS. It has more shading units (2048 vs 1024), more RT cores (16 vs 8), and includes 64 tensor cores, a feature entirely absent from the Arc Pro A30M's specification sheet. The MX570 also has a higher transistor count (8,700 million vs 7,200 million) and a larger die (200 mm² vs 157 mm²), though it is built on an older 8 nm Samsung process versus Intel's 6 nm TSMC node.

The Intel Arc Pro A30M wins in several specification-driven categories. Its 4 GB memory is double the MX570's 2 GB. Its 128.0 GB/s memory bandwidth is 33% higher than the MX570's 96.00 GB/s. The memory clock is 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) versus 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective). Its base clock of 1500 MHz and boost clock of 2000 MHz are far higher than the MX570's 832 MHz base and 1155 MHz boost. Pixel rate is 64.00 GPixel/s versus 36.96 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 128.0 GTexel/s versus 73.92 GTexel/s. FP16 compute is 8.192 TFLOPS versus 4.731 TFLOPS, representing a 2:1 ratio versus the MX570's 1:1.

The architecture differences reinforce this split. The MX570 is built on NVIDIA's Ampere architecture with the GA107S chip, while the Arc Pro A30M uses Intel's Xe-HPG architecture with the DG2-128 chip. The MX570 belongs to the GeForce MX (5xx) generation, and the Arc Pro A30M belongs to the Alchemist (Pro-Series Mobile) generation. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Both use PCIe 4.0 x8. Both have 64 TMUs and 32 ROPs. Both are end-of-life products with portable-device-dependent display outputs and no power connectors.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce MX570 scores 38,299 versus the Intel Arc Pro A30M's 31,894, a 20.1% difference in favor of the MX570.

Q: Does the Intel Arc Pro A30M have any advantage in memory?

A: Yes. It has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory versus 2 GB on the MX570, and its bandwidth is 128.0 GB/s versus 96.00 GB/s.

Q: How does the MX570 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: It is 0.1% behind the RTX 5080 Mobile, 0.4% ahead of the RTX 4080 Mobile, 1% behind the MX570 A, and 1.1% behind the AMD Radeon Pro 580X.

Q: How does the Arc Pro A30M compare to its nearest rivals?

A: It is 0.7% ahead of the NVIDIA TITAN RTX, 0.9% behind the AMD Radeon Pro 570X, 1.1% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell, and 1.5% behind the AMD FirePro S10000.

Q: What are the FP16 compute capabilities of each GPU?

A: The Arc Pro A30M delivers 8.192 TFLOPS FP16 at a 2:1 ratio, while the MX570 delivers 4.731 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units and RT cores?

A: The MX570 has 2048 shading units and 16 RT cores, versus the Arc Pro A30M's 1024 shading units and 8 RT cores. The MX570 also has 64 tensor cores; the Arc Pro A30M lists none.

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA GeForce MX570 uses the GA107S chip built on the Ampere architecture, manufactured by Samsung on an 8 nm process. The die measures 200 mm² with 8,700 million transistors, yielding a density of 43.5 million transistors per mm². The Intel Arc Pro A30M uses the DG2-128 chip built on the Xe-HPG architecture, manufactured by TSMC on a 6 nm process. Its die is 157 mm² with 7,200 million transistors, for a density of 45.9 million per mm². Despite the MX570's larger absolute transistor count, the Arc Pro A30M has a higher transistor density.

The MX570's compute configuration includes 2048 shading units, 64 TMUs, 32 ROPs, 16 RT cores, and 64 tensor cores. The Arc Pro A30M has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, 32 ROPs, and 8 RT cores, with no tensor cores listed. The MX570's FP32 throughput is 4.731 TFLOPS, and its FP16 is identical at 4.731 TFLOPS, indicating a 1:1 ratio. The Arc Pro A30M's FP32 is 4.096 TFLOPS, but its FP16 is 8.192 TFLOPS, a 2:1 ratio. This makes the Intel part significantly stronger in half-precision work, while the NVIDIA part leads in single-precision.

Both GPUs support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Both use a PCIe 4.0 x8 bus interface. Both have display outputs described as portable-device dependent. Both are end-of-life with no power connectors required. The MX570 has a slot width of IGP, while the Arc Pro A30M's slot width is not specified. The MX570's TDP is 15 W, and the Arc Pro A30M's TDP is 50 W, a notable difference in power envelope.

The generation names also differ. The MX570 is part of the GeForce MX (5xx) generation, released in December 2021. The Arc Pro A30M is part of the Alchemist (Pro-Series Mobile) generation, released in August 2022. Neither has a listed predecessor or successor in the database. Neither has a launch MSRP recorded.

Specification Differences

The key specification differences are as follows. The MX570 has 2048 shading units, while the Arc Pro A30M has 1024. The MX570 has 16 RT cores and 64 tensor cores; the Arc Pro A30M has 8 RT cores and no tensor cores. The MX570's FP32 is 4.731 TFLOPS versus 4.096 TFLOPS. Its FP16 is 4.731 TFLOPS versus 8.192 TFLOPS. The MX570's pixel rate is 36.96 GPixel/s versus 64.00 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 73.92 GTexel/s versus 128.0 GTexel/s.

Memory differs substantially. The MX570 has 2 GB GDDR6 with a 64-bit bus and 96.00 GB/s bandwidth. The Arc Pro A30M has 4 GB GDDR6 with a 64-bit bus and 128.0 GB/s bandwidth. The memory clocks are 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) for the MX570 and 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) for the Arc Pro A30M.

Clocks differ as well. The MX570 has a base clock of 832 MHz and a boost clock of 1155 MHz. The Arc Pro A30M has a base clock of 1500 MHz and a boost clock of 2000 MHz. Power consumption is 15 W for the MX570 and 50 W for the Arc Pro A30M. The MX570's slot width is listed as IGP, while the Arc Pro A30M's slot width is not specified. The MX570 is built on an 8 nm Samsung process, and the Arc Pro A30M is built on a 6 nm TSMC process. The MX570's chip is GA107S, and the Arc Pro A30M's chip is DG2-128.

The release dates are December 2021 for the MX570 and August 2022 for the Arc Pro A30M. The MX570's transistor count is 8,700 million on a 200 mm² die, while the Arc Pro A30M has 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die. Transistor densities are 43.5M per mm² and 45.9M per mm², respectively. Both have 64 TMUs and 32 ROPs, and both use PCIe 4.0 x8. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Neither has a launch MSRP in the database.