AMD Radeon Pro 555 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 570
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon Pro 555 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 570 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: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon Pro 555
- Videocard is newer: launch date 6 year(s) 5 month(s) later
- Around 60% higher pipelines: 768 vs 480
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 40 nm
- 2.9x lower typical power consumption: 75 Watt vs 219 Watt
- Around 60% higher maximum memory size: 2 GB vs 1280 MB
- 2.7x more memory clock speed: 5100 MHz vs 1900 MHz (3800 data rate)
- Around 39% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 659 vs 475
- Around 32% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 162.706 vs 122.953
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3349 vs 3325
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3349 vs 3325
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 5 June 2017 vs 7 December 2010 |
| Pipelines | 768 vs 480 |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 40 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt vs 219 Watt |
| Maximum memory size | 2 GB vs 1280 MB |
| Memory clock speed | 5100 MHz vs 1900 MHz (3800 data rate) |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 659 vs 475 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 162.706 vs 122.953 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3349 vs 3325 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3349 vs 3325 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 570
- Around 72% higher core clock speed: 1464 MHz vs 850 MHz
- Around 8% higher texture fill rate: 43.9 billion / sec vs 40.8 GTexel / s
- Around 8% better floating-point performance: 1,405.4 gflops vs 1,306 gflops
- Around 25% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 3931 vs 3141
- Around 17% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 13443 vs 11524
- Around 18% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 36.849 vs 31.301
- Around 29% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 736.185 vs 572.795
- Around 54% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 4.369 vs 2.83
- Around 52% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 40.08 vs 26.388
- Around 20% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 4862 vs 4042
- Around 65% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3668 vs 2221
- Around 20% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 4862 vs 4042
- Around 65% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3668 vs 2221
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Core clock speed | 1464 MHz vs 850 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 43.9 billion / sec vs 40.8 GTexel / s |
| Floating-point performance | 1,405.4 gflops vs 1,306 gflops |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3931 vs 3141 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 13443 vs 11524 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 36.849 vs 31.301 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 736.185 vs 572.795 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 4.369 vs 2.83 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 40.08 vs 26.388 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4862 vs 4042 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3668 vs 2221 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4862 vs 4042 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3668 vs 2221 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon Pro 555
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 570
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | AMD Radeon Pro 555 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 570 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3141 | 3931 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 659 | 475 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 11524 | 13443 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 31.301 | 36.849 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 572.795 | 736.185 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.83 | 4.369 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 26.388 | 40.08 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 162.706 | 122.953 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4042 | 4862 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2221 | 3668 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3349 | 3325 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4042 | 4862 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2221 | 3668 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3349 | 3325 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| AMD Radeon Pro 555 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 570 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | Fermi 2.0 |
| Code name | Polaris 21 | GF110 |
| Launch date | 5 June 2017 | 7 December 2010 |
| Place in performance rating | 705 | 708 |
| Type | Mobile workstation | Desktop |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $349 | |
| Price now | $99.99 | |
| Value for money (0-100) | 48.11 | |
Technical info |
||
| Core clock speed | 850 MHz | 1464 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 1,306 gflops | 1,405.4 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 40 nm |
| Pipelines | 768 | 480 |
| Texture fill rate | 40.8 GTexel / s | 43.9 billion / sec |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt | 219 Watt |
| Transistor count | 3,000 million | 3,000 million |
| CUDA cores | 480 | |
| Maximum GPU temperature | 97 °C | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI, Mini HDMITwo Dual Link DVI |
| Audio input for HDMI | Internal | |
| HDMI | ||
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | |
| Multi monitor support | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Laptop size | large | |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | Two 6-pin |
| Bus support | PCI-E 2.0 x 16 | |
| Height | 4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm) | |
| Length | 10.5" (267 mm) (26.7 cm) | |
| SLI options | 3-way | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_0) | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.2 |
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 1280 MB |
| Memory bandwidth | 81.6 GB / s | 152.0 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 320 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 5100 MHz | 1900 MHz (3800 data rate) |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| DisplayPort 1.3 HBR / 1.4 HDR Ready | ||
| FreeSync | ||
| HDMI 2.0 | ||
| 3D Vision | ||
| CUDA | ||
| DSR | ||
| SLI | ||
| Surround | ||