NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A vs NVIDIA RTX A6000 Comparison

The NVIDIA RTX A6000 and the NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A are both Ampere-generation parts, but they occupy opposite ends of NVIDIA’s professional and mobile lineup. The data is unambiguous: the RTX A6000 wins every benchmark in the head-to-head comparison, often by margins exceeding 300%. However, the MX570 A is not without purpose—its 25 W power envelope and IGP form factor target a completely different use case. This analysis breaks down the raw scores, architectural gaps, and the specific workloads where each card makes sense, based solely on the provided facts.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A6000 holds a decisive lead with an average benchmark score of 44,075, compared to the MX570 A’s 38,691. This places the A6000 in the 84th percentile of all GPUs, while the MX570 A sits in the 81st percentile.

Q: How large is the performance gap in the head-to-head tests?

A: In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX A6000 scores 193,937 versus 39,780 for the MX570 A, yielding a 387.5% advantage. In Geekbench Vulkan, the A6000 scores 164,462 versus 37,601, a 337.4% lead. The A6000 wins both of the two head-to-head benchmarks.

Q: Do both cards support the same modern graphics APIs?

A: Yes. Both the RTX A6000 and the MX570 A list DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. This means software compatibility is not a differentiator, though raw performance capability differs enormously.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The RTX A6000 features 48 GB of GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus with 768.0 GB/s bandwidth. The MX570 A has 2 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth. The A6000 offers 24 times the memory capacity and 8 times the bandwidth.

Q: Which card is more suitable for a compact or low-power system?

A: The MX570 A is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with a 25 W TDP and no power connectors, making it suitable for portable devices. The RTX A6000 is a dual-slot card with a 300 W TDP, an 8-pin EPS connector, and a suggested PSU of 700 W.

Q: What are the nearest rivals for each card according to the data?

A: The RTX A6000’s closest competitors are the GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile (0.9% above), RTX 4070 Ti (1.6% below), Quadro M6000 (1.8% above), and RTX 5050 Mobile (1.9% above). The MX570 A’s nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon Pro 580X (0% delta), RTX 5080 Mobile (0.9% above), and GeForce MX570 (1% above).

Where Each One Wins

The RTX A6000 wins in every scenario where raw compute throughput and memory capacity are paramount. Its 38.71 TFLOPS FP32 performance, combined with 48 GB of VRAM, makes it the clear choice for large-scale rendering, scientific simulation, or AI inference workloads that require massive datasets resident in GPU memory. The benchmark data supports this: it scores 193,937 in OpenCL and 164,462 in Vulkan, placing it in the top 16% of all GPUs. Its 84th percentile ranking against all GPUs confirms it is a high-end workstation part.

The MX570 A wins in power-constrained, mobile environments. With a 25 W TDP and IGP form factor, it is designed for thin-and-light laptops where battery life and thermals take precedence over peak performance. Its 81st percentile ranking is surprisingly high, given its modest specs, but this reflects its efficiency relative to other low-power parts. It wins no head-to-head benchmarks against the A6000, but its 4.731 TFLOPS FP32 is adequate for basic creative tasks, office productivity, and light media consumption. The data shows it trades blows with the AMD Radeon Pro 580X (0% delta), indicating it holds its own in its class.

The use-case split is stark: the A6000 is for professionals who need maximum throughput and memory; the MX570 A is for users who need a discrete GPU in a portable device without the thermal or power budget of a full-size card.

Architecture Differences

Both cards use the Ampere architecture, but they are built on different chips with vastly different scales. The RTX A6000 uses the GA102 chip, which contains 28,300 million transistors on a 628 mm² die, manufactured on Samsung’s 8 nm process. The MX570 A uses the GA107SB chip, with 8,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die, also on Samsung’s 8 nm process. The transistor density is nearly identical (45.1M / mm² for the A6000 vs 43.5M / mm² for the MX570 A), but the A6000 has over three times the transistors.

The compute resources reflect this disparity. The A6000 has 10,752 shading units, 336 TMUs, 112 ROPs, 84 RT cores, and 336 tensor cores. The MX570 A has 2,048 shading units, 64 TMUs, 32 ROPs, 16 RT cores, and 64 tensor cores. This means the A6000 offers roughly 5.25 times the shading units, 5.25 times the TMUs, 3.5 times the ROPs, 5.25 times the RT cores, and 5.25 times the tensor cores.

Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so the feature set is identical. The key architectural difference is scale, not capability. The A6000’s FP32 and FP16 performance is listed at 38.71 TFLOPS (1:1), while the MX570 A is at 4.731 TFLOPS (1:1). The A6000’s pixel rate is 201.6 GPixel/s versus 36.96 GPixel/s for the MX570 A, and its texture rate is 604.8 GTexel/s versus 73.92 GTexel/s.

Specification Differences

The table below highlights only the fields where the two cards differ, per the FACT PACK:

| Specification | NVIDIA RTX A6000 | NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A |

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

| Chip | GA102 | GA107SB |

| Generation | Workstation Ampere (Ax000) | GeForce MX (5xx) |

| Transistors | 28,300 million | 8,700 million |

| Die Size | 628 mm² | 200 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 45.1M / mm² | 43.5M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1410 MHz | 832 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1800 MHz | 1155 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) | 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 48 GB | 2 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 384 bit | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 768.0 GB/s | 96.00 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 10,752 | 2,048 |

| TMUs | 336 | 64 |

| ROPs | 112 | 32 |

| RT Cores | 84 | 16 |

| Tensor Cores | 336 | 64 |

| Pixel Rate | 201.6 GPixel/s | 36.96 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 604.8 GTexel/s | 73.92 GTexel/s |

| FP32 / FP16 | 38.71 TFLOPS (1:1) | 4.731 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 300 W | 25 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | IGP |

| Power Connectors | 8-pin EPS | None |

| Suggested PSU | 700 W | Not applicable |

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

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

| Dimensions | 267 mm (10.5 inches) x 112 mm (4.4 inches) | Not specified |

| Release Date | 2020-10-04 | 2021-12-16 |

| Predecessor | Quadro Turing | None |

| Successor | Workstation Ada | None |

| Launch MSRP | 4,649 USD | Not specified |

The A6000 is larger, faster, and more power-hungry in every measurable way. The MX570 A is smaller, slower, and designed for integration directly onto a motherboard or in a laptop.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are lopsided. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX A6000 scores 193,937 against the MX570 A’s 39,780. This is a 387.5% delta, meaning the A6000 is nearly five times faster in this compute test. The A6000’s OpenCL score is its strongest benchmark, reflecting its massive shading unit count and memory bandwidth.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the A6000 scores 164,462 versus 37,601 for the MX570 A, a 337.4% delta. While the margin shrinks slightly compared to OpenCL, the A6000 still delivers over four times the Vulkan performance. This test is more representative of gaming or real-time graphics workloads, where the A6000’s 84 RT cores and 336 tensor cores provide substantial advantages.

It is notably the MX570 A only has two benchmark scores listed (OpenCL and Vulkan), while the A6000 has nine, including Passmark tests. In Passmark G3D, the A6000 scores 22,577, and in Passmark GPU Compute it scores 14,110. These additional data points reinforce the A6000’s workstation credentials, but the head-to-head comparison is limited to the two Geekbench tests, where the A6000 wins both decisively.

The Verdict

The data makes the choice clear for anyone who needs raw performance: the NVIDIA RTX A6000 is the superior card by every benchmark metric. It wins both head-to-head tests with deltas of 387.5% and 337.4%, has an average score 13.9% higher than the MX570 A (44,075 vs 38,691), and offers 48 GB of memory versus 2 GB. Its 84th percentile ranking versus 81st confirms it sits higher in the overall GPU hierarchy.

However, the verdict is not universal. The MX570 A is not designed to compete with the A6000; it is designed to exist in systems where a 300 W, dual-slot card with a 700 W PSU requirement is physically impossible. For a portable device, the MX570 A’s 25 W TDP and IGP form factor are the only viable option. Its 81st percentile ranking is respectable, and its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon Pro 580X, is matched exactly (0% delta), showing it is competitive within its class.

The practical guidance is straightforward. If you are building a workstation or a desktop system with room for a full-size card, the RTX A6000 is the only choice—it is faster, has more memory, and supports the same APIs. If you are designing a laptop or an embedded system, the MX570 A is the appropriate part, provided you accept its 2 GB memory limit and its 4.731 TFLOPS FP32 ceiling. The A6000 is end-of-life, as is the MX570 A, but the A6000’s legacy is one of high-end compute, while the MX570 A’s legacy is efficiency in a constrained form factor. Choose based on your physical and power constraints, not on raw scores, because the performance gap is so wide that it only matters if the A6000 cannot physically fit in your system.