GPU Comparison

NVIDIA RTX A1000 and AMD Radeon RX 560 XT land in essentially the same performance tier based on aggregate benchmark data, yet they achieve that parity through entirely different means. The RTX A1000 posts an average benchmark score of 34,207, while the RX 560 XT sits just 74 points behind at 34,133, a 0.2% gap that places them as direct rivals. Both cards occupy the 79th percentile among all GPUs. The data shows two very different designs converging on similar overall results, but the individual benchmark breakdown reveals where each architecture's strengths and weaknesses actually lie.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head comparison contains two benchmark entries, and the NVIDIA RTX A1000 wins both outright. In Geekbench OpenCL, the A1000 scores 52,078 against the RX 560 XT's 31,387, a 65.9% advantage that represents the single largest performance gap between these two cards in any measured test. This is a massive margin, one that suggests the A1000's compute-oriented design handles OpenCL workloads with significantly greater efficiency than the older GCN architecture. The compute difference is stark: the A1000 delivers 6.737 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput, while the RX 560 XT manages 4.394 TFLOPS, a 53% raw compute advantage that the benchmark results amplify further.

The second head-to-head test, Geekbench Vulkan, narrows the gap considerably but still favors the A1000. The NVIDIA card scores 49,574 versus 36,879 for the AMD card, a 34.4% delta. Vulkan is a lower-level API that can expose architectural inefficiencies, and the RX 560 XT's GCN 4.0 design does close some of the distance here compared to OpenCL, but it still trails by more than a third. The A1000's 18 RT cores and 72 tensor cores likely contribute to its Vulkan performance, as these specialized units can offload certain workloads that the RX 560 XT must handle through its general-purpose shaders alone, the AMD card has no RT cores and no tensor cores at all.

What the head-to-head data does not show is a single test where the RX 560 XT wins. The wins tally stands at 2 for the A1000 and 0 for the RX 560 XT. Yet the average benchmark scores remain nearly identical because the A1000's additional benchmark entry, a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 969, pulls its average down substantially. Without that DX12 datapoint, the A1000's average would be far higher, but the inclusion of this test demonstrates that the two cards trade blows across different API workloads. The RX 560 XT's absence from the 3DMark test means its average is computed from only two OpenCL and Vulkan results, both of which it loses by wide margins.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear but nuanced conclusion: the NVIDIA RTX A1000 is the stronger card in every benchmark where both were tested, but the overall average scores tell a more complicated story. If your workload relies on OpenCL or Vulkan compute, the A1000 is decisively better, 65.9% ahead in OpenCL and 34.4% ahead in Vulkan. Those are not marginal differences; they represent generational architectural improvements that the RX 560 XT simply cannot overcome.

However, the near-identical average scores (34,207 vs 34,133) suggest that in mixed workloads or DX12 gaming scenarios, where the RX 560 XT was not tested but its Polaris architecture is known to be competent, the playing field levels considerably. The A1000's 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 969 is notably low for a card with 6.737 TFLOPS of compute, indicating that the workstation-oriented drivers and hardware may not prioritize DX12 gaming performance. The RX 560 XT, with its 224.0 GB/s memory bandwidth on a 256-bit bus, has a wider memory interface that can help in bandwidth-sensitive scenarios.

For a professional or workstation user, the RTX A1000 is the obvious pick. It offers 8 GB of GDDR6 memory versus 4 GB of GDDR5, consumes 50 W versus 150 W, and provides RT and tensor cores that the RX 560 XT lacks entirely. The A1000 also runs on a single-slot cooler with no power connectors, while the RX 560 XT requires a dual-slot design with a 6-pin connector. For a gamer on a legacy platform, the RX 560 XT might still hold relevance given its 256-bit bus and higher texture rate of 137.3 GTexel/s versus the A1000's 105.3 GTexel/s, but the benchmark data does not support choosing it over the A1000 in any measured test.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A1000 scores 34,207 on average, while the AMD Radeon RX 560 XT scores 34,133. The A1000 leads by 74 points, a 0.2% margin.

Q: How much faster is the RTX A1000 in OpenCL compute?

A: The A1000 scores 52,078 in Geekbench OpenCL versus 31,387 for the RX 560 XT, giving the NVIDIA card a 65.9% performance advantage.

Q: Does the RX 560 XT win any benchmark in the head-to-head comparison?

A: No. The head-to-head data shows the A1000 winning both Geekbench OpenCL (65.9% delta) and Geekbench Vulkan (34.4% delta). The RX 560 XT has zero wins in the tested benchmarks.

Q: What are the memory specifications for each card?

A: The RTX A1000 has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 192.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 560 XT has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus with 224.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card supports hardware ray tracing?

A: The RTX A1000 includes 18 RT cores and 72 tensor cores. The RX 560 XT has no RT cores and no tensor cores, so it lacks dedicated hardware for these workloads.

Q: How do the power requirements differ?

A: The RTX A1000 has a TDP of 50 W and requires no additional power connectors, with a suggested PSU of 250 W. The RX 560 XT has a TDP of 150 W, needs one 6-pin power connector, and a suggested 450 W PSU.

Specification Differences

The two cards diverge across nearly every major specification category. The RTX A1000 uses the GA107 chip on an 8 nm Samsung process, packing 8,700 million transistors into a 200 mm² die. The RX 560 XT uses the Ellesmere chip on a 14 nm GlobalFoundries process, with 5,700 million transistors on a larger 232 mm² die. The A1000's transistor density of 43.5M per mm² is nearly double the RX 560 XT's 24.6M per mm².

Clock speeds favor the AMD card on paper: the RX 560 XT runs at 1074 MHz base and 1226 MHz boost, while the A1000 sits at 727 MHz base and 1462 MHz boost. The A1000's higher boost clock partially compensates for the lower base, but the AMD card's higher base clock gives it a steadier performance floor. Memory clocks also differ, the A1000 runs at 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) while the RX 560 XT runs at 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective).

Shading units favor the A1000 at 2304 versus 1792, but the RX 560 XT has more TMUs at 112 versus 72. Both have 32 ROPs. The A1000's pixel rate of 46.78 GPixel/s exceeds the RX 560 XT's 39.23 GPixel/s, but the RX 560 XT's texture rate of 137.3 GTexel/s beats the A1000's 105.3 GTexel/s. The A1000 offers PCIe 4.0 x8, while the RX 560 XT uses PCIe 3.0 x16. Display outputs also differ: the A1000 has four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a connectors, while the RX 560 XT has one HDMI 2.0b and three DisplayPort 1.4a.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide here is generational. The RTX A1000 is built on NVIDIA's Ampere architecture, released in 2024 as part of the Workstation Ampere (Ax000) generation. It features 18 RT cores for dedicated ray tracing and 72 tensor cores for AI acceleration, capabilities entirely absent from the RX 560 XT. The A1000 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the RX 560 XT only reaches DirectX 12 (12_0). Vulkan support also differs, with the A1000 at version 1.4 and the RX 560 XT at 1.3; both support OpenGL 4.6.

The RX 560 XT is built on AMD's GCN 4.0 architecture, part of the Polaris (RX 500) generation from 2019. GCN 4.0 was designed for a different era, prioritizing raw shader throughput and memory bandwidth over specialized compute units. Its FP16 performance matches its FP32 at 4.394 TFLOPS, but it lacks the tensor and RT hardware that define modern NVIDIA workstation cards. The A1000 also delivers FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, but at the higher 6.737 TFLOPS figure.

The 8 nm Samsung process used by the A1000 is two generations ahead of the 14 nm GlobalFoundries node used by the RX 560 XT. This process advantage explains how the A1000 achieves 6.737 TFLOPS at just 50 W, while the RX 560 XT needs 150 W to produce 4.394 TFLOPS. The A1000's GA107 chip is physically smaller (200 mm² vs 232 mm²) despite packing 3 billion more transistors, a direct result of the denser manufacturing process.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX A1000 wins in compute-heavy workloads that leverage its architectural advantages. OpenCL performance is its strongest suit, with a 65.9% lead over the RX 560 XT. Vulkan workloads also favor the A1000 by 34.4%. The A1000's 8 GB of GDDR6 memory provides double the capacity of the RX 560 XT's 4 GB of GDDR5, making it the better choice for large datasets, AI inference, or ray tracing tasks that benefit from its 18 RT cores and 72 tensor cores. Its 50 W TDP and single-slot design make it suitable for compact workstations or systems where power and space are constrained.

The RX 560 XT retains advantages in specific areas. Its 256-bit memory bus delivers 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth, 32 GB/s more than the A1000, which can benefit certain texture-heavy and bandwidth-bound workloads. Its higher texture rate of 137.3 GTexel/s versus the A1000's 105.3 GTexel/s suggests better performance in tasks that heavily utilize texture mapping. The RX 560 XT's higher base clock of 1074 MHz provides more consistent low-load performance, and its 241 mm length is longer but familiar to builders with standard mid-tower cases. Production status also matters: the A1000 is currently active, while the RX 560 XT is end-of-life, meaning the A1000 is the only one of the two with ongoing driver support and availability for new systems.