NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A vs NVIDIA Quadro GV100 Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A and NVIDIA Quadro GV100 occupy opposite ends of the GPU spectrum, yet both sit near the 80th percentile among all graphics cards. The MX570 A is a low-power Ampere part aimed at thin-and-light portables, while the GV100 is a Volta-era workstation behemoth with 32 GB of HBM2. Benchmark data shows the GV100 dominating in raw compute, but the MX570 A holds its own in specific API workloads relative to its power envelope. This analysis relies solely on the provided specification and benchmark data.

FAQ

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

A: The MX570 A has an average benchmark score of 38691, while the GV100 averages 35520. Despite the GV100’s massive hardware advantage, its average score is dragged down by low DirectX 9 (207), DirectX 10 (140), DirectX 11 (168), and DirectX 12 (84) Passmark results. The MX570 A’s average is higher because it only has two benchmark entries, both in Geekbench.

Q: Which GPU wins in Geekbench OpenCL performance?

A: The Quadro GV100 wins decisively, scoring 150004 versus the MX570 A’s 39780. That is a delta of -73.5% for the MX570 A, meaning the GV100 is nearly four times faster in this compute test.

Q: What is the GV100’s memory advantage over the MX570 A?

A: The GV100 has 32 GB of HBM2 memory on a 4096-bit bus, delivering 868.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The MX570 A has 2 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, providing 96.00 GB/s. The GV100’s bandwidth is roughly nine times higher.

Q: Are both GPUs still in production?

A: No. Both are marked as end-of-life. The MX570 A was released on 2021-12-16, and the GV100 on 2018-03-26.

Q: How do their transistor counts differ?

A: The GV100 packs 21,100 million transistors on an 815 mm² die, while the MX570 A has 8,700 million on a 200 mm² die. The GV100 has over twice the transistor count and a die more than four times larger.

Q: Which GPU has higher pixel and texture rates?

A: The GV100 leads with 208.3 GPixel/s and 520.6 GTexel/s, versus the MX570 A’s 36.96 GPixel/s and 73.92 GTexel/s. The GV100’s pixel rate is over five times higher, and its texture rate is over seven times higher.

Architecture Differences

The MX570 A is built on NVIDIA’s Ampere architecture using a GA107SB chip, fabricated on an 8 nm process at Samsung. The GV100 uses the Volta architecture with a GV100 chip, fabricated on a 12 nm process at TSMC. This node difference is significant: the MX570 A achieves a transistor density of 43.5M / mm², while the GV100 manages only 25.9M / mm². The MX570 A therefore packs more transistors per square millimeter despite having far fewer total transistors.

Compute resources diverge sharply. The MX570 A has 2048 shading units, 64 TMUs, 32 ROPs, 16 RT cores, and 64 tensor cores. The GV100 has 5120 shading units, 320 TMUs, 128 ROPs, no RT cores, and 640 tensor cores. The GV100 has 2.5 times the shading units, 5 times the TMUs, and 4 times the ROPs. Its tensor core count is exactly 10 times higher.

Memory architecture is another fundamental split. The MX570 A uses 2 GB of GDDR6 with a 64-bit bus, while the GV100 uses 32 GB of HBM2 with a 4096-bit bus. The GV100’s memory clock is lower (848 MHz versus 1500 MHz), but its enormous bus width yields 868.4 GB/s bandwidth versus 96.00 GB/s.

The MX570 A supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the GV100 only supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The MX570 A has RT cores for ray tracing; the GV100 has none. The GV100’s FP16 throughput is 33.32 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), double its FP32 of 16.66 TFLOPS. The MX570 A has equal FP16 and FP32 at 4.731 TFLOPS (1:1).

Where Each One Wins

The GV100 wins decisively in Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan, the only two benchmarks shared between the two GPUs. Its OpenCL score of 150004 is 3.77 times the MX570 A’s 39780. Its Vulkan score of 139526 is 3.71 times the MX570 A’s 37601. For any compute-heavy or graphics-API workload measured by Geekbench, the GV100 is the clear choice.

The MX570 A wins in efficiency-oriented scenarios. With a TDP of 25 W versus the GV100’s 250 W, the MX570 A delivers 4.731 TFLOPS of FP32 performance at one-tenth the power draw. It also fits an IGP form factor with no power connectors, making it suitable for portable devices. The GV100 requires a dual-slot cooler, a single 8-pin power connector, and a suggested 600 W PSU.

The GV100 wins in memory-heavy tasks. Its 32 GB capacity and 868.4 GB/s bandwidth dwarf the MX570 A’s 2 GB and 96.00 GB/s. For datasets that exceed 2 GB, the MX570 A is physically unable to proceed. The GV100’s 4096-bit bus also provides a massive bandwidth advantage for large matrix operations.

The MX570 A wins in modern API support. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the GV100 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1). The MX570 A also has 16 RT cores, enabling hardware ray tracing, which the GV100 lacks entirely. For games or applications that use ray tracing or DirectX 12 Ultimate features, the MX570 A is the only option of the two.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A | NVIDIA Quadro GV100 |

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

| Architecture | Ampere | Volta |

| Process Node | 8 nm | 12 nm |

| Foundry | Samsung | TSMC |

| Transistors | 8,700 million | 21,100 million |

| Die Size | 200 mm² | 815 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 43.5M / mm² | 25.9M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 832 MHz | 1132 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1155 MHz | 1627 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) | 848 MHz (1696 Mbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | 32 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | HBM2 |

| Memory Bus Width | 64 bit | 4096 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 96.00 GB/s | 868.4 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2048 | 5120 |

| TMUs | 64 | 320 |

| ROPs | 32 | 128 |

| RT Cores | 16 | None |

| Tensor Cores | 64 | 640 |

| Pixel Rate | 36.96 GPixel/s | 208.3 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 73.92 GTexel/s | 520.6 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 4.731 TFLOPS | 16.66 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 4.731 TFLOPS (1:1) | 33.32 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 25 W | 250 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | None listed | 600 W |

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

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 4x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| DirectX Support | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (12_1) |

| Release Date | 2021-12-16 | 2018-03-26 |

| Predecessor | None listed | Quadro Pascal |

| Successor | None listed | Quadro Turing |

| Launch MSRP | None listed | 8,999 USD |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data includes only two shared benchmarks, and the GV100 wins both. The first is Geekbench OpenCL, where the GV100 scores 150004 against the MX570 A’s 39780. The deltaPct is -73.5% from the MX570 A’s perspective, meaning the MX570 A trails by nearly three-quarters. This is a massive margin, reflecting the GV100’s 5120 shading units, 640 tensor cores, and 868.4 GB/s bandwidth.

The second benchmark is Geekbench Vulkan, with the GV100 at 139526 and the MX570 A at 37601. The deltaPct is -73.1%, almost identical to the OpenCL gap. The GV100’s advantage in Vulkan is slightly smaller than in OpenCL, but still overwhelming. The MX570 A’s nearest rival, the AMD Radeon Pro 580X, averages 38706, which is within 0% of the MX570 A’s average of 38691. The GV100’s nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti Mobile, averages 35435, a delta of 0.2% from the GV100’s 35520 average.

The wins tally is 0 for the MX570 A and 2 for the GV100. However, the GV100’s average benchmark score of 35520 is actually lower than the MX570 A’s 38691. This is because the GV100 has nine benchmark entries, including several low Passmark scores (DirectX 9 at 207, DirectX 10 at 140, DirectX 11 at 168, DirectX 12 at 84, G2D at 836, G3D at 19650, and GPU compute at 9069). These legacy API tests penalize the GV100 heavily. The MX570 A’s two Geekbench scores are both high, keeping its average elevated.

In raw compute terms, the GV100’s FP32 is 16.66 TFLOPS versus 4.731 TFLOPS for the MX570 A — a 3.52 times advantage. Its FP16 is 33.32 TFLOPS versus 4.731 TFLOPS — a 7.04 times advantage. Its pixel rate is 208.3 GPixel/s versus 36.96 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 520.6 GTexel/s versus 73.92 GTexel/s. These theoretical numbers align with the Geekbench results, confirming the GV100’s dominance in compute-heavy workloads.

The MX570 A counters with a 10 times lower TDP (25 W versus 250 W) and a much smaller die (200 mm² versus 815 mm²). Its transistor density is 43.5M / mm² versus 25.9M / mm², showing a more modern process. It also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate and includes 16 RT cores, features absent from the GV100. For portable devices where power and space are constrained, the MX570 A offers a functional if limited alternative. For workstation compute, the GV100 is in a different class entirely.