NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A vs NVIDIA T1000 Comparison

NVIDIA’s GeForce MX570 A and T1000 represent two distinct approaches to mobile and compact workstation graphics, separated by architecture generation and design intent. The MX570 A, built on Ampere, is an integrated-class part (IGP) aimed at thin-and-light portables, while the T1000 is a single-slot, PCIe add-in card from the Quadro Turing lineup. Benchmark data shows the MX570 A winning both recorded head-to-head tests, yet the T1000 counters with double the memory, a wider memory bus, and professional display outputs. This analysis breaks down where each GPU excels, their architectural differences, and what the raw numbers mean in context.

Where Each One Wins

The MX570 A is the clear winner in raw compute performance as measured by Geekbench. In the OpenCL test, it scores 39,780 against the T1000’s 37,704, a 5.5% advantage. The Vulkan gap is larger: 37,601 versus 34,874, a 7.8% lead. These are not marginal differences; they represent a consistent edge across both API workloads. The MX570 A’s average benchmark score of 38,691 further solidifies its position, placing it in the 81st percentile of all GPUs, one point higher than the T1000’s 80th percentile.

However, the T1000 wins in memory capacity and bandwidth, which are critical for certain workloads. It ships with 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, yielding 160.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The MX570 A has only 2 GB on a 64-bit bus, delivering 96.00 GB/s. For tasks that exceed 2 GB of frame buffer—such as large texture sets, high-resolution displays, or compute datasets—the T1000 avoids spills to system memory, a scenario where the MX570 A would stall. The T1000 also offers four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, while the MX570 A’s display outputs are listed as “Portable Device Dependent,” meaning it relies on the host laptop’s panel and connections.

The data suggests a use-case split: the MX570 A wins on raw shader throughput and API-accelerated compute, making it suitable for general-purpose GPU tasks and lighter 3D workloads. The T1000 wins on memory-heavy professional applications, multi-monitor setups, and scenarios requiring a stable, dedicated desktop form factor.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architecture families and manufacturing nodes. The MX570 A uses the GA107SB chip on NVIDIA’s Ampere architecture, fabricated by Samsung on an 8 nm process. It packs 8,700 million transistors into a 200 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 43.5 million per square millimeter. The T1000, in contrast, uses the TU117 chip on the older Turing architecture, built by TSMC on a 12 nm process. It contains 4,700 million transistors on the same 200 mm² die, resulting in a density of 23.5 million per square millimeter—roughly half of the MX570 A’s density.

The compute resources differ dramatically. The MX570 A features 2,048 shading units, 64 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 32 raster operation units (ROPs). It also includes 16 ray tracing cores and 64 tensor cores, reflecting Ampere’s hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI capabilities. The T1000 has only 896 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, with no dedicated ray tracing or tensor cores. Despite having fewer shaders, the T1000’s higher clocks—1,065 MHz base and 1,395 MHz boost versus 832 MHz base and 1,155 MHz boost—partially compensate in pixel and texture throughput.

Memory architecture reinforces the split. The MX570 A uses 2 GB of GDDR6 at 12 Gbps effective on a 64-bit bus, while the T1000 uses 4 GB of GDDR6 at 10 Gbps effective on a 128-bit bus. This explains the bandwidth gap: 96.00 GB/s versus 160.0 GB/s. The MX570 A’s FP32 throughput is 4.731 TFLOPS, nearly double the T1000’s 2.500 TFLOPS. However, the T1000 achieves 5.000 TFLOPS in FP16, exceeding the MX570 A’s 4.731 TFLOPS, because Turing’s FP16 units operate at a 2:1 ratio while Ampere’s run at 1:1.

Power and interface also diverge. The MX570 A is rated at 25 W TDP, has no power connectors, and connects via PCIe 4.0 x8. The T1000 draws 50 W, requires a 250 W suggested PSU, and uses PCIe 3.0 x16. The MX570 A is an IGP (integrated graphics processor), meaning it is soldered onto a motherboard. The T1000 is a single-slot card measuring 156 mm by 69 mm. Both are end-of-life products, but the MX570 A launched later (December 2021) than the T1000 (May 2021).

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The MX570 A leads in both recorded benchmarks. Its OpenCL score is 39,780 versus 37,704 for the T1000 (5.5% higher), and its Vulkan score is 37,601 versus 34,874 (7.8% higher). The MX570 A also has higher FP32 throughput at 4.731 TFLOPS compared to 2.500 TFLOPS.

Q: Does the T1000 have any performance advantage?

A: Yes, in memory capacity and bandwidth. The T1000 has 4 GB of GDDR6 with 160.0 GB/s bandwidth, versus 2 GB with 96.00 GB/s for the MX570 A. It also has higher pixel rate (44.64 GPixel/s vs 36.96 GPixel/s) and texture rate (78.12 GTexel/s vs 73.92 GTexel/s).

Q: Which GPU is more power-efficient?

A: The MX570 A is rated at a 25 W TDP, half the T1000’s 50 W. It also uses no external power connectors, while the T1000 suggests a 250 W PSU for the system.

Q: Can the T1000 support more displays?

A: Yes. The T1000 provides four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The MX570 A’s display outputs are listed as “Portable Device Dependent,” meaning its connectivity relies on the host laptop.

Q: Do both GPUs support modern APIs?

A: The MX570 A supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the T1000 supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The MX570 A also has ray tracing and tensor cores.

Q: How do they compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The MX570 A’s average score of 38,691 is within 0% of the AMD Radeon Pro 580X (38,706) and 0.9% ahead of the RTX 5080 Mobile (38,349). The T1000’s average of 36,289 is 0.7% behind the AMD Radeon RX 5300M (36,529) and 1.2% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro Duo (35,860).

Specification Differences

The most consequential differences lie in compute resources, memory, and form factor.

• Shading Units: MX570 A has 2,048; T1000 has 896.
• TMUs: MX570 A has 64; T1000 has 56.
• ROPs: Both have 32.
• RT Cores: MX570 A has 16; T1000 has none.
• Tensor Cores: MX570 A has 64; T1000 has none.
• FP32 Performance: MX570 A at 4.731 TFLOPS; T1000 at 2.500 TFLOPS.
• FP16 Performance: MX570 A at 4.731 TFLOPS (1:1); T1000 at 5.000 TFLOPS (2:1).
• Memory Size: MX570 A 2 GB; T1000 4 GB.
• Memory Bus: MX570 A 64-bit; T1000 128-bit.
• Memory Bandwidth: MX570 A 96.00 GB/s; T1000 160.0 GB/s.
• Base Clock: MX570 A 832 MHz; T1000 1,065 MHz.
• Boost Clock: MX570 A 1,155 MHz; T1000 1,395 MHz.
• Memory Clock: MX570 A 12 Gbps effective; T1000 10 Gbps effective.
• Process Node: MX570 A 8 nm (Samsung); T1000 12 nm (TSMC).
• Transistors: MX570 A 8,700 million; T1000 4,700 million.
• Transistor Density: MX570 A 43.5M / mm²; T1000 23.5M / mm².
• TDP: MX570 A 25 W; T1000 50 W.
• Slot Width: MX570 A IGP; T1000 Single-slot.
• Bus Interface: MX570 A PCIe 4.0 x8; T1000 PCIe 3.0 x16.
• Display Outputs: MX570 A Portable Device Dependent; T1000 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a.
• Dimensions: MX570 A not specified; T1000 156 mm x 69 mm.
• Suggested PSU: MX570 A none; T1000 250 W.
• Release Date: MX570 A December 2021; T1000 May 2021.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two recorded Geekbench tests show a consistent victory for the MX570 A. In the OpenCL workload, the MX570 A scores 39,780 against the T1000’s 37,704, a 5.5% delta. This test typically stresses raw compute throughput, where the MX570 A’s 2,048 shading units and 4.731 TFLOPS FP32 capability give it a substantial arithmetic advantage over the T1000’s 896 shaders and 2.500 TFLOPS.

The Vulkan test widens the gap. The MX570 A achieves 37,601, while the T1000 trails at 34,874, a 7.8% difference. Vulkan is a lower-overhead API that can expose architectural efficiencies. The MX570 A’s Ampere architecture, with its newer scheduler and higher transistor density (43.5M per mm² versus 23.5M), appears to translate more of its theoretical compute into real-world performance. The T1000’s higher boost clock (1,395 MHz vs 1,155 MHz) helps it close some ground, but it cannot overcome the 2.3x shader count deficit.

That said, the T1000’s wins are not captured by these two tests. Its pixel rate of 44.64 GPixel/s exceeds the MX570 A’s 36.96 GPixel/s, and its texture rate of 78.12 GTexel/s is higher than 73.92 GTexel/s. In fill-rate-bound scenarios—such as heavy post-processing, multi-sample anti-aliasing, or high-resolution compositing—the T1000 would likely perform better per clock. Its 160.0 GB/s bandwidth is 66.7% higher than the MX570 A’s 96.00 GB/s, which matters for streaming large textures or driving multiple 4K outputs.

Context from nearest rivals reinforces these positions. The MX570 A’s average score of 38,691 places it directly alongside the AMD Radeon Pro 580X (38,706) and slightly ahead of the RTX 5080 Mobile (38,349), indicating it punches above its 25 W power envelope. The T1000’s average of 36,289 sits near the AMD Radeon RX 5300M (36,529) and GTX TITAN X (36,530), showing that while it lags the MX570 A in compute, it remains competitive with older desktop-class parts. The MX570 A’s 81st percentile and T1000’s 80th percentile are close, but the former’s lead in both direct benchmarks makes it the faster GPU overall in the tested workloads.