AMD Radeon Pro 570X vs NVIDIA T1000 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clear, consistent advantage for the NVIDIA T1000 in the shared compute workloads. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the T1000 scores 37,704 points against the AMD Radeon Pro 570X’s 27,604 points. That is a 36.6% lead, a substantial margin that places the two cards in different performance tiers despite their similar 4 GB memory capacities. The gap is not a narrow one; it indicates that the T1000 delivers roughly a third more raw compute throughput in this API.

The Vulkan results tell a similar story, though the margin is narrower. The T1000 posts 34,874 points, while the Radeon Pro 570X manages 28,859 points. This translates to a 20.8% advantage for the NVIDIA part. It is notably the T1000’s Vulkan score is only 7.5% below its own OpenCL result, whereas the Radeon Pro 570X’s Vulkan score is actually 4.5% higher than its OpenCL result. This suggests the AMD card scales relatively better under Vulkan, but it still cannot close the gap created by the T1000’s superior OpenCL showing.

The average benchmark score, which incorporates additional workloads beyond the head-to-head tests, reinforces the hierarchy. The T1000 holds an average score of 36,289, placing it in the 80th percentile of all GPUs. The Radeon Pro 570X averages 32,176, which lands in the 76th percentile. The 4,113-point difference in average scores is smaller than the OpenCL delta but larger than the Vulkan delta, which makes sense given that the averages include the AMD card’s Metal result, a workload the T1000 does not appear in the database for.

Looking at the rival comparisons, the T1000 sits in a tight cluster. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 5300M at 36,529 (0.7% behind the T1000), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN X at 36,530 (also 0.7% behind), the AMD Radeon Pro Duo at 35,860 (1.2% ahead of the T1000), and the NVIDIA Quadro GV100 at 35,520 (2.2% ahead of the T1000). This positioning shows the T1000 is competitive with much larger, older flagship cards, trading blows within a narrow 3% band.

The Radeon Pro 570X’s rival cluster is similarly tight but sits at a lower absolute level. Its nearest rivals are the AMD FirePro S10000 at 32,388 (0.7% behind the 570X), the AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE at 32,456 (0.9% behind), the Intel Arc Pro A30M at 31,894 (0.9% ahead of the 570X), and the AMD FirePro S9300 X2 at 32,540 (1.1% behind). The 570X is therefore bracketed by a mix of older workstation parts and a modern integrated GPU, which contextualizes its performance as mid-pack rather than class-leading.

Where Each One Wins

The win split is straightforward: the NVIDIA T1000 takes both head-to-head benchmarks that both cards participated in, giving it 2 wins to 0. There is no benchmark category in the database where the Radeon Pro 570X beats the T1000 directly. However, the 570X does have one exclusive test result: a Geekbench Metal score of 40,066. This is the highest single benchmark score recorded for either card, surpassing even the T1000’s best OpenCL result by 2,362 points. The T1000 has no Metal entry in the database, so this represents a workload category where the AMD card can claim superiority by default, though it cannot be directly compared.

For compute-heavy applications that rely on OpenCL or Vulkan, the T1000 is the clear choice based on the data. Its OpenCL advantage of 36.6% is decisive, and its Vulkan edge of 20.8% is still commanding. If a workload is built around Apple’s Metal API, the Radeon Pro 570X’s 40,066 score is the one bright spot, and given the 570X’s generation is explicitly tied to the Radeon Pro Mac lineup, Metal compatibility appears to be a deliberate design focus.

The percentile ranking adds another layer. The T1000’s 80th percentile placement versus the 570X’s 76th means the T1000 sits above roughly four-fifths of all GPUs in the database, while the 570X sits above roughly three-quarters. The practical interpretation is that the T1000 is the stronger all-round performer, while the 570X is a competent but not exceptional card whose best case depends on Metal-centric software.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from fundamentally different architectural lineages. The NVIDIA T1000 is built on the Turing architecture, specifically the TU117 chip, fabricated on a 12 nm process at TSMC. The AMD Radeon Pro 570X uses the GCN 4.0 architecture with the Ellesmere chip, produced on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The process node difference is modest, 12 nm versus 14 nm, but it is one of several factors that shape the performance gap.

Transistor counts and die sizes tell an interesting story. The AMD chip is physically larger and denser: 5,700 million transistors on a 232 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 24.6 million per mm². The NVIDIA chip packs 4,700 million transistors onto a 200 mm² die, for a density of 23.5 million per mm². Despite having fewer transistors and a smaller die, the T1000 achieves higher benchmark scores in the shared tests, which points to architectural efficiency differences rather than raw transistor count being the deciding factor.

The compute resource allocation is starkly different. The Radeon Pro 570X fields 1,792 shading units, exactly double the T1000’s 896. It also has double the texture mapping units, 112 versus 56. Both cards have 32 ROPs. Yet the T1000 still wins the compute benchmarks. This suggests that the Turing architecture’s per-shader efficiency is significantly higher than GCN 4.0’s, at least in the workloads captured by the database.

Clock speeds favor the NVIDIA card as well. The T1000 runs at a 1,065 MHz base and 1,395 MHz boost, while the 570X runs at 1,000 MHz base and 1,105 MHz boost. The T1000’s boost clock is 290 MHz higher, a 26.2% advantage. When combined with the architectural differences, this explains why the T1000 can achieve higher floating-point throughput despite fewer cores. The T1000’s FP32 rating is 2.500 TFLOPS, while the 570X is rated at 3.960 TFLOPS. The AMD card actually has a higher theoretical FP32 peak, yet it loses in real-world OpenCL and Vulkan tests. This is a notable inversion: the card with the higher peak throughput and twice the shading units ends up behind in actual benchmark results.

The FP16 story also differs. The T1000 offers 5.000 TFLOPS FP16 with a 2:1 ratio, meaning it doubles its FP32 rate when using FP16. The 570X offers 3.960 TFLOPS FP16 at a 1:1 ratio, meaning it does not accelerate FP16 over FP32. For workloads that can leverage FP16, the T1000 has a clear theoretical advantage that exceeds even its FP32 lead in some contexts.

Specification Differences

Memory configurations show a split between the two cards. Both have 4 GB of memory, but the T1000 uses GDDR6 while the 570X uses GDDR5. The T1000’s memory clock is 1,250 MHz, translating to 10 Gbps effective, on a 128-bit bus, yielding 160.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The 570X runs its memory at 1,695 MHz, or 6.8 Gbps effective, on a 256-bit bus, yielding 217.0 GB/s. The AMD card has 35.6% more memory bandwidth, which could benefit certain memory-bound workloads, though the benchmark data does not show this translating into compute wins.

Power and physical specifications diverge sharply. The T1000 has a 50 W TDP and is a single-slot card measuring 156 mm in length and 69 mm in height, with no power connectors required and a suggested PSU of 250 W. The 570X has a 150 W TDP, is classified as an IGP (integrated graphics processor), has no listed dimensions, and no suggested PSU rating. The T1000’s power draw is one-third that of the 570X, which is a substantial efficiency advantage given its superior benchmark results.

Display outputs differ as well. The T1000 offers 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a connectors, while the 570X’s outputs are listed as “Portable Device Dependent,” reflecting its intended use in Apple Mac systems rather than as a standalone add-in card. The T1000 uses PCIe 3.0 x16, as does the 570X, so bus interface is not a differentiator.

API support shows minor differences. Both support DirectX 12, but the T1000 supports version 12_1 while the 570X supports 12_0. Both support OpenGL 4.6. The T1000 supports Vulkan 1.4, while the 570X supports Vulkan 1.3. Release dates also differ: the T1000 launched on May 5, 2021, while the 570X launched on March 17, 2019, making the AMD card roughly two years older. Both are marked as end-of-life in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA T1000, with an average score of 36,289 compared to the AMD Radeon Pro 570X’s 32,176, a difference of 4,113 points.

Q: How big is the T1000’s lead in OpenCL?

A: The T1000 scores 37,704 versus 27,604, a 36.6% advantage.

Q: Does the Radeon Pro 570X win any benchmark against the T1000?

A: No. The two shared head-to-head benchmarks are both won by the T1000. The 570X does have a Metal score of 40,066, but the T1000 has no Metal result in the database.

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 570X has 1,792 shading units, double the T1000’s 896, yet it still loses the shared compute benchmarks.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The 570X offers 217.0 GB/s on a 256-bit bus with GDDR5, while the T1000 offers 160.0 GB/s on a 128-bit bus with GDDR6.

Q: Which card is more power-efficient?

A: The T1000 has a 50 W TDP versus the 570X’s 150 W TDP, and it delivers higher benchmark scores at that lower power draw.

The Verdict

The data points to the NVIDIA T1000 as the superior card for compute workloads. It wins both shared benchmarks by double-digit margins, holds a higher average score, sits in a higher performance percentile, and does so at one-third the power draw. For anyone selecting between these two for OpenCL or Vulkan tasks, the T1000 is the obvious pick.

The AMD Radeon Pro 570X is not without merit. Its Metal score of 40,066 is the highest single benchmark result for either card, and its 217.0 GB/s memory bandwidth is meaningfully higher than the T1000’s 160.0 GB/s. The 570X also has double the shading units and higher theoretical FP32 throughput at 3.960 TFLOPS. These specifications suggest the 570X could be preferable in environments where Metal is the primary API and where memory bandwidth matters more than raw compute wins.

However, the benchmark results are unambiguous: the T1000 outperforms the 570X in every directly comparable test. The 570X’s higher FP32 peak and larger core count do not translate into real-world wins, which points to the Turing architecture’s efficiency advantage over GCN 4.0. The T1000 is the card the database recommends for general compute, while the 570X remains a viable option specifically for Metal-centric Mac workloads.