NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A vs NVIDIA RTX A2000 Comparison

The NVIDIA RTX A2000 and the NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A are both Ampere-generation mobile and workstation graphics solutions, but they target very different segments of the market. The database places the RTX A2000 in the 85th percentile of all GPUs, while the MX570 A sits in the 81st percentile. That percentile gap, combined with the benchmark data, tells a clear story about their relative capabilities.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded head-to-head results show a decisive advantage for the RTX A2000 in every tested workload. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX A2000 scores 67,695 points against the MX570 A's 39,780 points. This translates to a 70.2% lead for the workstation card. The gap is even larger in Geekbench Vulkan, where the RTX A2000 posts 69,089 points versus 37,601 points for the MX570 A, a difference of 83.7%. These are not marginal wins; the RTX A2000 nearly doubles the MX570 A's performance in the Vulkan test.

The average benchmark scores reinforce this pattern. The RTX A2000 has an average benchmark score of 46,043, while the MX570 A averages 38,691. The RTX A2000's nearest rivals in the database include the NVIDIA RTX 5880 Ada Generation with an average score of 45,972 (a 0.2% delta), the Intel Arc A730M at 45,592 (1% delta), and the AMD Radeon RX 5600M at 46,601 (a -1.2% delta). This places the RTX A2000 in a competitive bracket with those mid-range discrete GPUs, despite its workstation positioning.

The MX570 A's nearest rivals, on the other hand, include the AMD Radeon Pro 580X at 38,706 (0% delta), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 Mobile at 38,349 (0.9% delta), and the NVIDIA GeForce MX570 at 38,299 (1% delta). The MX570 A is effectively at parity with those products, with the AMD Radeon Pro 575X at 39,116 being 1.1% ahead. This shows the MX570 A is a low-tier mobile part, while the RTX A2000 operates in a substantially higher performance class.

Looking at the specific compute metrics, the RTX A2000 delivers 7.987 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the MX570 A manages 4.731 TFLOPS. The RTX A2000 also has a higher pixel rate at 57.60 GPixel/s versus 36.96 GPixel/s, and a texture rate of 124.8 GTexel/s against 73.92 GTexel/s. Every measurable compute throughput figure favors the RTX A2000 by a significant margin.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in Geekbench Vulkan?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A2000 is faster, scoring 69,089 points versus 37,601 points for the MX570 A. That is an 83.7% advantage in the database's recorded Vulkan test.

Q: How much memory does each card have?

A: The RTX A2000 has 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, providing 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The MX570 A has 2 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, providing 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: What is the difference in average benchmark scores?

A: The RTX A2000 has an average benchmark score of 46,043, while the MX570 A averages 38,691. The RTX A2000 sits in the 85th percentile of all GPUs, and the MX570 A is in the 81st percentile.

Q: Do both cards support the same DirectX and Vulkan versions?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What is the power draw for each?

A: The RTX A2000 has a TDP of 70 W, while the MX570 A has a TDP of 25 W. The MX570 A is classified as an IGP (integrated graphics processor) form factor, while the RTX A2000 is a dual-slot card.

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The RTX A2000 has 3,328 shading units, compared to 2,048 shading units on the MX570 A. The RTX A2000 also has more TMUs (104 vs 64), ROPs (48 vs 32), RT cores (26 vs 16), and tensor cores (104 vs 64).

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The NVIDIA RTX A2000 wins all two recorded head-to-head benchmarks, with leads of 70.2% in OpenCL and 83.7% in Vulkan. The RTX A2000 should be the choice for anyone needing workstation-class compute performance, larger memory capacity, or higher memory bandwidth. Its 6 GB frame buffer and 288.0 GB/s bandwidth make it suitable for larger datasets and higher-resolution textures, while its 7.987 TFLOPS FP32 throughput handles demanding compute workloads.

The MX570 A is a fundamentally different product. With 2 GB of memory and 96.00 GB/s bandwidth, it is designed for light mobile use, not intensive graphics or compute tasks. Its 4.731 TFLOPS FP32 performance is roughly 59% of the RTX A2000's output. The MX570 A's 25 W TDP and IGP form factor indicate a low-power solution for thin-and-light laptops, where the RTX A2000's 70 W TDP and dual-slot design would not fit. The MX570 A's nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce MX570, is only 1% behind it, confirming that it is a modest incremental part.

For a builder choosing between these two, the decision rests on the workload. If the task involves 3D rendering, GPU compute, or professional applications, the RTX A2000 is the only sensible option based on the recorded data. If the priority is extreme power efficiency in a portable chassis, the MX570 A offers a lower-power alternative, but with less than half the Vulkan performance and a much smaller memory footprint.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every core specification. The RTX A2000 uses the GA106 chip, while the MX570 A uses the GA107SB chip. The RTX A2000 has a base clock of 562 MHz and a boost clock of 1200 MHz. The MX570 A has a higher base clock at 832 MHz but a lower boost clock at 1155 MHz. Both have a memory clock of 1500 MHz with 12 Gbps effective speed.

Memory configuration is a major differentiator. The RTX A2000 offers 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, yielding 288.0 GB/s bandwidth. The MX570 A has 2 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, yielding 96.00 GB/s bandwidth. That is a 3x difference in memory size and a 3x difference in bandwidth.

The RTX A2000 has 3,328 shading units, 104 texture mapping units, and 48 raster output units. The MX570 A has 2,048 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The RTX A2000 also carries 26 RT cores and 104 tensor cores, while the MX570 A has 16 RT cores and 64 tensor cores.

The physical and power specifications differ as well. The RTX A2000 is a dual-slot card with a 70 W TDP and a suggested PSU of 250 W. It uses a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface and has four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The MX570 A is an IGP (integrated form factor) with a 25 W TDP, no suggested PSU, a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, and display outputs described as portable device dependent. The RTX A2000 measures 167 mm in length and 69 mm in height, while the MX570 A has no recorded dimensions.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs are built on the Ampere architecture using an 8 nm process at Samsung, and both have the same transistor density of 43.5M per mm². The RTX A2000's GA106 chip contains 12,000 million transistors on a 276 mm² die, while the MX570 A's GA107SB chip contains 8,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die. The larger die and higher transistor count give the RTX A2000 more room for compute resources.

The RTX A2000 belongs to the Workstation Ampere (Ax000) generation, while the MX570 A belongs to the GeForce MX (5xx) generation. The RTX A2000 was released on 2021-08-09, and the MX570 A was released on 2021-12-16. Both are marked as end-of-life production status.

The FP16 performance mirrors FP32 on both cards, with the RTX A2000 delivering 7.987 TFLOPS and the MX570 A delivering 4.731 TFLOPS. Both support the same API set, including DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The RTX A2000 has a predecessor listed as Quadro Turing and a successor as Workstation Ada, while the MX570 A has no recorded predecessor or successor.

The RTX A2000's launch MSRP was 449 USD. The MX570 A has no recorded launch MSRP.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX A2000 wins in every recorded benchmark category. It leads in Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan, and its average benchmark score is 18.9% higher than the MX570 A's. The RTX A2000's strengths are in compute-heavy tasks, where its higher shading unit count, more RT cores, and larger memory bandwidth provide a clear advantage. The 6 GB frame buffer allows for larger working sets than the 2 GB MX570 A, which is critical for modern rendering workloads and machine learning inference.

The MX570 A wins in power efficiency. Its 25 W TDP is less than half of the RTX A2000's 70 W TDP, and its IGP form factor means it can be integrated into compact laptops without a dedicated cooling solution. It has a higher base clock than the RTX A2000, which can help in short, lightly threaded tasks, but its lower boost clock and reduced compute resources limit sustained performance.

For a workstation user, the RTX A2000 is the clear pick. The data shows it is 70.2% ahead in OpenCL and 83.7% ahead in Vulkan, with a 288.0 GB/s memory pipeline that the MX570 A cannot approach. For a mobile user who needs only basic GPU acceleration and prioritizes battery life, the MX570 A offers a lower-power path, but the benchmark results make clear that any serious graphics or compute work will favor the RTX A2000 by a wide margin.