AMD ROG Ally Extreme vs AMD Radeon Pro 570X
Comparative analysis of AMD ROG Ally Extreme and AMD Radeon Pro 570X videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score, Geekbench - OpenCL.
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD ROG Ally Extreme
- Videocard is newer: launch date 4 year(s) 2 month(s) later
- Around 50% higher core clock speed: 1500 MHz vs 1000 MHz
- 2.4x more boost clock speed: 2700 MHz vs 1105 MHz
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 4 nm vs 14 nm
- 4x lower typical power consumption: 30 Watt vs 120 Watt
- 4x more maximum memory size: 16 GB vs 4 GB
Launch date | 13 Jun 2023 vs 18 March 2019 |
Core clock speed | 1500 MHz vs 1000 MHz |
Boost clock speed | 2700 MHz vs 1105 MHz |
Manufacturing process technology | 4 nm vs 14 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 30 Watt vs 120 Watt |
Maximum memory size | 16 GB vs 4 GB |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon Pro 570X
- 2.3x more pipelines: 1792 vs 768
- Around 6% higher memory clock speed: 1700 MHz (6800 MHz effective) vs 1600 MHz, 6.4 Gbps effective
Pipelines | 1792 vs 768 |
Memory clock speed | 1700 MHz (6800 MHz effective) vs 1600 MHz, 6.4 Gbps effective |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD ROG Ally Extreme
GPU 2: AMD Radeon Pro 570X
Name | AMD ROG Ally Extreme | AMD Radeon Pro 570X |
---|---|---|
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2811 | |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 27194 |
Compare specifications (specs)
AMD ROG Ally Extreme | AMD Radeon Pro 570X | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | RDNA 3.0 | GCN 4.0 |
Code name | Phoenix | Polaris 20 |
Launch date | 13 Jun 2023 | 18 March 2019 |
Place in performance rating | 874 | 876 |
Type | Laptop | |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 2700 MHz | 1105 MHz |
Compute units | 12 | 28 |
Core clock speed | 1500 MHz | 1000 MHz |
Manufacturing process technology | 4 nm | 14 nm |
Pipelines | 768 | 1792 |
Pixel fill rate | 86.40 GPixel/s | 35.36 GPixel/s |
Texture fill rate | 129.6 GTexel/s | |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 30 Watt | 120 Watt |
Transistor count | 25390 million | 5700 million |
Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 247.5 GFLOPS | |
Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 3.960 TFLOPS | |
Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 3.960 TFLOPS | |
Stream Processors | 123.8 GTexel/s | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | 1x USB Type-C | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Height | 21 mm, 0.8 inches | |
Length | 280 mm, 11 inches | |
Supplementary power connectors | None | |
Width | 111 mm, 4.4 inches | |
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 |
OpenCL | 2.1 | 2.0 |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
Shader Model | 6.7 | 6.3 |
Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 16 GB | 4 GB |
Memory bandwidth | 51.20 GB/s | 217.6 GB/s |
Memory bus width | 64 bit | 256 bit |
Memory clock speed | 1600 MHz, 6.4 Gbps effective | 1700 MHz (6800 MHz effective) |
Memory type | LPDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Technologies |
||
Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | ||
Video Code Engine (VCE) |