NVIDIA GeForce MX570 vs NVIDIA T1000 8 GB Comparison

# NVIDIA GeForce MX570 vs NVIDIA T1000 8 GB

The GeForce MX570 and T1000 8 GB are both end-of-life NVIDIA workstation-oriented GPUs, but they target fundamentally different use cases. The MX570 is a low-power Ampere part built for thin-and-light portables, while the T1000 is a Turing-based desktop card with a single-slot cooler and four mini-DisplayPort outputs. The benchmark data shows a narrow edge for the MX570 in raw compute performance, but the T1000 counters with eight times the memory capacity and a wider memory bus. The MX570 scores 38,299 in Geekbench OpenCL, placing it in the 81st percentile of all GPUs, while the T1000 scores 34,561 in Geekbench Vulkan, placing it in the 79th percentile. The MX570's nearest rival is the RTX 5080 Mobile with an average score of 38,349 (a delta of -0.1%), while the T1000's nearest rival is the AMD Radeon HD 7970 at 34,541 (a delta of 0.1%). These are close margins, but the architectural and configuration differences tell a more nuanced story.

Where Each One Wins

The MX570 wins on raw compute throughput. Its FP32 performance of 4.731 TFLOPS nearly doubles the T1000's 2.500 TFLOPS, and its shading unit count of 2,048 is more than double the T1000's 896. This translates to a decisive advantage in compute-heavy workloads that scale with shader count and FP32 throughput. The MX570 also brings hardware ray tracing cores (16) and tensor cores (64), features entirely absent from the T1000, which means any workload leveraging those accelerators will only run on the MX570. In Geekbench OpenCL, the MX570's 38,299 score beats the T1000's 34,561 in Vulkan by roughly 10.8%, though these are different benchmark APIs and not directly comparable.

The T1000 wins decisively on memory capacity and bandwidth. With 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, it delivers 160.0 GB/s of bandwidth versus the MX570's 2 GB on a 64-bit bus at 96.00 GB/s. That is four times the memory and 66.7% more bandwidth. For workloads that require large datasets, textures, or framebuffers—such as professional visualization, multi-monitor output, or GPU-accelerated rendering with big scenes—the T1000's memory headroom is a hard requirement that the MX570 simply cannot meet. The T1000 also has a higher pixel rate (44.64 GPixel/s vs 36.96 GPixel/s) and texture rate (78.12 GTexel/s vs 73.92 GTexel/s), indicating it can sustain higher fill rates despite its lower compute throughput. The T1000's four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs also give it a clear advantage in multi-display workstation setups, while the MX570's display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent."

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The MX570, with 4.731 TFLOPS FP32 and 2,048 shading units, compared to the T1000's 2.500 TFLOPS and 896 shading units. The MX570's OpenCL score of 38,299 is also higher than the T1000's Vulkan score of 34,561.

Q: Can the T1000 handle larger workloads than the MX570?

A: Yes, decisively. The T1000 has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 160.0 GB/s bandwidth, versus the MX570's 2 GB on a 64-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s. For memory-bound tasks, the T1000 has four times the capacity.

Q: Does the MX570 support ray tracing?

A: Yes. The MX570 has 16 dedicated RT cores and 64 tensor cores, and its DirectX support is rated at 12 Ultimate (12_2). The T1000 has no RT cores or tensor cores and only supports DirectX 12 (12_1).

Q: Which card is more suitable for multi-monitor professional use?

A: The T1000, which provides four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The MX570's display outputs are described only as "Portable Device Dependent," meaning they vary by laptop implementation.

Q: How do their power requirements compare?

A: The MX570 has a 15 W TDP and is an integrated graphics processor (IGP), requiring no power connectors. The T1000 has a 50 W TDP, is single-slot, and also requires no power connectors, though NVIDIA suggests a 250 W power supply for the system.

Q: What are the relative performance percentiles?

A: The MX570 sits at the 81st percentile of all GPUs, while the T1000 sits at the 79th percentile. The MX570's closest rival is the RTX 5080 Mobile (38,349, -0.1% delta), and the T1000's closest rival is the AMD Radeon HD 7970 (34,541, 0.1% delta).

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark data shows zero wins for either card, meaning there is no direct comparison test with both GPUs under identical conditions. However, the available single-benchmark scores provide a reference point. The MX570's Geekbench OpenCL score of 38,299 places it just 0.1% below the RTX 5080 Mobile (38,349) and 0.4% above the RTX 4080 Mobile (38,135). It is also 1% below the MX570 A variant (38,691) and 1.1% below the AMD Radeon Pro 580X (38,706). These are extremely tight margins—the MX570 is performing at the level of high-end mobile RTX parts in OpenCL compute, which is remarkable for a 15 W part.

The T1000's Geekbench Vulkan score of 34,561 is 0.1% above the AMD Radeon HD 7970 (34,541), 0.4% below the NVIDIA A2 (34,690), 0.6% above the TITAN V (34,355), and 1% above the RTX A1000 (34,207). The T1000 is therefore clustered with a mix of ancient desktop cards (HD 7970), data-center accelerators (A2), and workstation parts (RTX A1000), all within a 1% band. Its 79th percentile ranking indicates it is a solid mid-tier performer, but it is clearly not in the same compute class as the MX570, which sits at the 81st percentile with a score roughly 10.8% higher.

In terms of raw throughput, the MX570's FP32 of 4.731 TFLOPS is 89.2% higher than the T1000's 2.500 TFLOPS. The MX570 also has a 1:1 FP16 ratio, meaning it can process FP16 at the same 4.731 TFLOPS, whereas the T1000's FP16 is 5.000 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, which is actually higher than its FP32. This suggests the T1000 may be more efficient in FP16-heavy workloads, but the MX570 still has absolute compute superiority in FP32. The T1000 counters with higher pixel and texture rates—44.64 GPixel/s and 78.12 GTexel/s versus 36.96 GPixel/s and 73.92 GTexel/s for the MX570—indicating better fill-rate performance for pixel-heavy rendering tasks.

Specification Differences

The memory configuration is the most striking difference. The MX570 has 2 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth, while the T1000 has 8 GB on a 128-bit bus with 160.0 GB/s. Clock speeds also favor the T1000 in absolute terms: its base clock is 1065 MHz and boost is 1395 MHz, versus 832 MHz base and 1155 MHz boost for the MX570. The T1000's memory clock is 1250 MHz (10 Gbps effective), while the MX570's is 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective)—the MX570 has faster memory chips, but the narrower bus limits overall bandwidth.

The MX570 has 2,048 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, while the T1000 has 896 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The MX570 also includes 16 RT cores and 64 tensor cores; the T1000 has none. Power draw is dramatically different: the MX570's TDP is 15 W and it is listed as an IGP, while the T1000 is 50 W and single-slot. The MX570 uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, while the T1000 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. The T1000 has physical dimensions of 156 mm (6.1 inches) in length and 69 mm (2.7 inches) in height; the MX570 has no listed dimensions. The T1000's display outputs are four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a, while the MX570's are portable-device dependent. The MX570 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the T1000 supports DirectX 12 (12_1); both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Architecture Differences

The MX570 is built on the GA107S chip using NVIDIA's Ampere architecture, fabricated on an 8 nm process at Samsung. It contains 8,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 43.5 million per mm². Ampere brings second-generation RT cores and third-generation tensor cores, which explains the MX570's 16 RT cores and 64 tensor cores. The architecture is designed for efficient compute with a 1:1 FP16 ratio, meaning it can achieve 4.731 TFLOPS in both FP32 and FP16.

The T1000 uses the TU117 chip from the Turing architecture, fabricated on a 12 nm process at TSMC. It contains 4,700 million transistors on the same 200 mm² die size, yielding a transistor density of 23.5 million per mm²—roughly half the density of the MX570. Turing lacks dedicated RT cores and tensor cores in this implementation, and its FP16 throughput is 5.000 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, meaning it uses paired FP32 units to achieve FP16. The T1000's predecessor is Quadro Volta, and its successor is Workstation Ampere, placing it in the professional Quadro line. The MX570's generation is listed as GeForce MX (5xx), with no predecessor or successor named. The MX570 was released on December 16, 2021, while the T1000 was released earlier on May 5, 2021.

The Verdict

The data points to a split decision based on workload type. For compute-heavy tasks—AI inference, scientific simulation, or any shader-bound workload—the MX570 is the stronger part. Its 4.731 TFLOPS FP32, 2,048 shading units, and tensor/RT core support give it a clear performance advantage, reflected in its higher percentile rank (81st vs 79th) and higher benchmark score. If your application is limited by raw compute throughput and can fit within 2 GB of memory, the MX570 will deliver nearly twice the FP32 performance of the T1000.

For professional visualization, large dataset processing, or multi-display output, the T1000 is the obvious choice. Its 8 GB of GDDR6 memory is four times the MX570's capacity, and its 160.0 GB/s bandwidth is 66.7% higher. The four mini-DisplayPort outputs, single-slot form factor, and 50 W TDP make it a practical workstation card for driving multiple monitors or handling large textures and framebuffers. The T1000 also has higher pixel and texture rates, meaning it can fill a screen faster even if it computes slower.

The MX570 is a mobile IGP with no discrete form factor, while the T1000 is a desktop card with defined dimensions. That alone dictates the choice for many users: if you need a socketed GPU for a desktop workstation, the T1000 is the only one of the two that exists in that form. If you are selecting a laptop component, the MX570 is the relevant option. The MX570's 15 W TDP makes it suitable for ultraportable designs, while the T1000's 50 W TDP and 250 W suggested power supply requirement fits a more conventional desktop setup. Neither card has a launch MSRP listed, so price cannot factor into the comparison. Ultimately, the MX570 wins on compute and features, the T1000 wins on memory and connectivity, and the correct choice depends entirely on which of those constraints matter more for your specific workload.