AMD Radeon Pro 575 vs NVIDIA RTX A1000 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clear overall victory for the NVIDIA RTX A1000, which wins both of the shared benchmark tests against the AMD Radeon Pro 575. The most decisive margin comes in the Geekbench OpenCL test, where the RTX A1000 scores 52,078 against the Radeon Pro 575’s 34,596. That is a 33.6% advantage for NVIDIA, a substantial gap that reflects a fundamental difference in compute throughput between the two workstation cards.

The Geekbench Vulkan test shows a narrower but still significant lead for the RTX A1000, with a score of 49,574 versus 37,878 for the AMD card. The 23.6% delta in this API-agnostic workload confirms that NVIDIA’s advantage is not limited to a single compute framework. It suggests the RTX A1000’s architecture handles both OpenCL and Vulkan workloads with consistent superiority, while the Radeon Pro 575’s GCN 4.0 design lags in both.

Looking at the broader database context, the RTX A1000’s average benchmark score of 34,207 places it in the 79th percentile of all GPUs, while the Radeon Pro 575 sits at the 82nd percentile with an average score of 39,555. This is an important nuance: despite losing the head-to-head tests, the AMD card actually has a higher average score across all benchmark entries in the database. The explanation lies in the fact that the RTX A1000’s average is dragged down by a single 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 969, which is a very different workload from the Geekbench compute tests. The Radeon Pro 575, by contrast, has three Geekbench scores (46,192 Metal, 34,596 OpenCL, 37,878 Vulkan) that all fall in a similar range, producing a higher arithmetic mean.

The RTX A1000’s nearest rivals in the database reinforce its standing. It sits within 0.2% of the NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB (average score 34,154) and 0.2% of the AMD Radeon RX 560 XT (34,133). It is also 0.4% behind the NVIDIA TITAN V (34,355) and 0.6% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 480 (33,997). These tight margins indicate that the RTX A1000’s average score is competitive with a wide range of cards, though its 79th percentile rank is slightly below the Radeon Pro 575’s 82nd percentile.

For the AMD side, the Radeon Pro 575’s nearest rivals include the NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile with an average score of 39,568 (a 0% delta), the AMD Radeon Pro 575X at 39,116 (1.1% behind), the AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 at 40,063 (1.3% ahead), and the AMD Radeon Pro 580 at 40,318 (1.9% ahead). This cluster shows that the Radeon Pro 575 sits squarely in the middle of its own performance tier, with no dramatic outliers among its closest comparisons.

The head-to-head data thus tells a straightforward story: the RTX A1000 is the faster card in the two tests they share, with a 33.6% win in OpenCL and a 23.6% win in Vulkan. But the Radeon Pro 575’s higher average score and percentile ranking warn against dismissing it entirely, as its performance profile across the full database is more consistent than the NVIDIA card’s.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different foundries and process nodes, which directly impacts their transistor density and power characteristics. The AMD Radeon Pro 575 uses the Ellesmere chip built on GlobalFoundries’ 14 nm process, packing 5,700 million transistors into a 232 mm² die for a density of 24.6 million transistors per square millimeter. The NVIDIA RTX A1000 uses the GA107 chip on Samsung’s 8 nm process, with 8,700 million transistors in a smaller 200 mm² die, yielding a density of 43.5 million transistors per square millimeter. That is nearly double the density of the AMD chip, a direct consequence of the newer, finer manufacturing process.

The architectural generations are also distinct. The Radeon Pro 575 belongs to the GCN 4.0 family, a design that dates back to AMD’s 2016-era Polaris architecture. The RTX A1000 is built on NVIDIA’s Ampere architecture, which introduces dedicated hardware features that GCN 4.0 simply does not have. Specifically, the RTX A1000 includes 18 ray tracing cores and 72 tensor cores, while the Radeon Pro 575 has none of either. This is a categorical difference: the NVIDIA card can accelerate ray-traced workloads and tensor-based operations in hardware, while the AMD card relies entirely on its general-purpose shading units for all computations.

Shader core counts favor NVIDIA as well. The RTX A1000 has 2,304 shading units, 72 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The Radeon Pro 575 has 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. While the AMD card has significantly more texture units (128 vs. 72), the NVIDIA card has more shaders and a higher peak clock speed, which explains its compute advantage in the benchmark data. The RTX A1000 boosts to 1462 MHz with a base clock of 727 MHz, while the Radeon Pro 575’s clock data is not recorded in the database beyond its memory clock of 1695 MHz (6.8 Gbps effective).

Memory configurations differ in capacity and type but not in a straightforward way. The Radeon Pro 575 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 217.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX A1000 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 192.0 GB/s. So the AMD card has higher bandwidth, but the NVIDIA card has double the capacity. For large datasets or multi-application workflows, the RTX A1000’s 8 GB capacity is likely the more important factor, while the Radeon Pro 575’s bandwidth advantage may help in memory-throughput-bound scenarios.

The RTX A1000 also supports a more modern API set. It lists DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Radeon Pro 575 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The difference in DirectX feature level and Vulkan version reflects the generational gap, with the NVIDIA card supporting newer hardware features like mesh shaders and variable rate shading that the AMD card cannot.

Power and physical design diverge sharply. The RTX A1000 has a 50 W TDP and is a single-slot, low-profile card measuring 163 mm in length and 69 mm in height, with no power connectors and a suggested PSU of 250 W. The Radeon Pro 575 has a 150 W TDP and uses an MXM module form factor, meaning it is designed for laptop or modular systems rather than standard desktop expansion slots. Its display outputs are listed as “Portable Device Dependent,” while the RTX A1000 offers 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a. The bus interface also differs: the RTX A1000 uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the Radeon Pro 575 uses PCIe 3.0 x16.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in the shared benchmark tests?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A1000 wins both head-to-head tests. It scores 52,078 to the Radeon Pro 575’s 34,596 in Geekbench OpenCL (a 33.6% lead) and 49,574 to 37,878 in Geekbench Vulkan (a 23.6% lead).

Q: Does the Radeon Pro 575 have any advantage in the benchmark database?

A: Yes. The Radeon Pro 575 has an average benchmark score of 39,555 across all recorded tests, placing it in the 82nd percentile of all GPUs. The RTX A1000’s average is 34,207, which puts it in the 79th percentile. The AMD card’s higher average is due to its three Geekbench scores all falling in a similar range, while the RTX A1000’s average is lowered by a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 969.

Q: What are the key architectural differences between the two cards?

A: The Radeon Pro 575 uses AMD’s GCN 4.0 architecture on a 14 nm process, while the RTX A1000 uses NVIDIA’s Ampere architecture on an 8 nm process. The RTX A1000 has 18 ray tracing cores and 72 tensor cores, neither of which the Radeon Pro 575 has. The NVIDIA card also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4, while the AMD card supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3.

Q: How do their memory configurations compare?

A: The Radeon Pro 575 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 217.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX A1000 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 192.0 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD card offers higher bandwidth, but the NVIDIA card has twice the capacity.

Q: What are the power and form factor differences?

A: The Radeon Pro 575 has a 150 W TDP and uses an MXM module form factor with no power connectors. The RTX A1000 has a 50 W TDP, is a single-slot card with no power connectors, and has a suggested PSU of 250 W. The RTX A1000 measures 163 mm in length and 69 mm in height.

Q: Which card has better API support?

A: The RTX A1000 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Radeon Pro 575 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. Both cards support OpenGL 4.6, but the NVIDIA card has a newer DirectX feature level and a newer Vulkan version.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon Pro 575 | NVIDIA RTX A1000 |

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

| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | Ampere |

| Process node | 14 nm | 8 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | Samsung |

| Transistors | 5,700 million | 8,700 million |

| Die size | 232 mm² | 200 mm² |

| Transistor density | 24.6M / mm² | 43.5M / mm² |

| Base clock | Not recorded | 727 MHz |

| Boost clock | Not recorded | 1462 MHz |

| Memory size | 4 GB | 8 GB |

| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |

| Memory bus | 256 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory bandwidth | 217.0 GB/s | 192.0 GB/s |

| Shading units | 2048 | 2304 |

| Texture mapping units | 128 | 72 |

| ROPs | 32 | 32 |

| Ray tracing cores | None | 18 |

| Tensor cores | None | 72 |

| Pixel rate | 35.07 GPixel/s | 46.78 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 140.3 GTexel/s | 105.3 GTexel/s |

| FP32 performance | 4.489 TFLOPS | 6.737 TFLOPS |

| FP16 performance | 4.489 TFLOPS (1:1) | 6.737 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 150 W | 50 W |

| Slot width | MXM Module | Single-slot |

| Suggested PSU | Not recorded | 250 W |

| Bus interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

| Display outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a |

| DirectX support | 12 (12_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| Vulkan support | 1.3 | 1.4 |

| Production status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release date | 2017-06-04 | 2024-04-15 |

The Verdict

The data points to the NVIDIA RTX A1000 as the better choice for raw compute performance in the tested workloads. It wins both Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan tests by substantial margins, has more shading units, higher clock speeds, double the memory capacity, and a significantly lower power draw. Its 50 W TDP versus the Radeon Pro 575’s 150 W TDP is a dramatic efficiency advantage, and its active production status means it remains a current product while the AMD card is end-of-life.

The Radeon Pro 575’s only statistical advantages are its higher average benchmark score (39,555 vs. 34,207) and its higher percentile ranking (82nd vs. 79th). However, these figures are influenced by the RTX A1000’s low 3DMark Steel Nomad score, which is not a direct comparison point with the AMD card’s Geekbench results. In the tests where both cards were measured head-to-head, the NVIDIA card is clearly superior.

For users who need maximum compute throughput, modern API support, ray tracing capabilities, or tensor core acceleration, the RTX A1000 is the obvious selection. For users constrained by the MXM module form factor or those who specifically need the Radeon Pro 575’s higher memory bandwidth, the AMD card remains a viable option, but it is an older, less capable product overall.

Where Each One Wins

NVIDIA RTX A1000 wins on: OpenCL compute performance, where it leads by 33.6%; Vulkan compute performance, where it leads by 23.6%; raw FP32 throughput at 6.737 TFLOPS versus 4.489 TFLOPS; pixel fill rate at 46.78 GPixel/s versus 35.07 GPixel/s; memory capacity at 8 GB versus 4 GB; power efficiency at 50 W versus 150 W; ray tracing and tensor core hardware; modern API support including DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4; PCIe 4.0 connectivity; and production status as an active, current product.

AMD Radeon Pro 575 wins on: Texture fill rate at 140.3 GTexel/s versus 105.3 GTexel/s; memory bandwidth at 217.0 GB/s versus 192.0 GB/s; average benchmark score across the database at 39,555 versus 34,207; percentile ranking at 82nd versus 79th; and the MXM module form factor for specialized portable or modular systems. The AMD card also has a larger memory bus at 256-bit versus 128-bit, though this does not translate into a benchmark win in the shared tests.