GeForce MX570 A vs GTX 1060 Mobile
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GTX 1060 Mobile and GeForce MX570 A, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
1060 Mobile outperforms MX570 A by a significant 21% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 333 | 381 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 9.73 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 17.13 | 45.35 |
| Architecture | Pascal (2016−2021) | Ampere (2020−2025) |
| GPU code name | GP106 | GA107 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 15 August 2016 (9 years ago) | May 2022 (3 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $237.11 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 1280 | 2048 |
| Core clock speed | 1506 MHz | 832 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1708 MHz | 1155 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 4,400 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 16 nm | 8 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 80 Watt | 25 Watt |
| Maximum GPU temperature | 94 °C | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 133.6 | 73.92 |
| Floating-point processing power | 4.275 TFLOPS | 4.731 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 48 | 40 |
| TMUs | 80 | 64 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 64 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 16 |
| L1 Cache | 480 KB | 2 MB |
| L2 Cache | 1536 KB | 2 MB |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).
| Laptop size | large | no data |
| Bus support | PCIe 3.0 | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
VRAM capacity and type
Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 6 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory bus width | 192 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 2002 MHz | 1500 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 192 GB/s | 96 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
| Resizable BAR | - | + |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | DP 1.43, HDMI 2.0b, Dual Link-DVI | No outputs |
| Multi monitor support | + | no data |
| HDCP | 2.2 | - |
| G-SYNC support | + | - |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| GameStream | + | - |
| GPU Boost | 3.0 | no data |
| VR Ready | + | no data |
| Ansel | + | no data |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 6.6 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | 1.3 |
| CUDA | + | 8.6 |
| DLSS | - | + |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Average FPS across all PC games
Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:
| Full HD | 68
+23.6%
| 55−60
−23.6%
|
| 1440p | 45
+28.6%
| 35−40
−28.6%
|
| 4K | 30
+25%
| 24−27
−25%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | 3.49 | no data |
| 1440p | 5.27 | no data |
| 4K | 7.90 | no data |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 137
+24.5%
|
110−120
−24.5%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 37
+23.3%
|
30−33
−23.3%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 48
+37.1%
|
35−40
−37.1%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 96
+28%
|
75−80
−28%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 110
+22.2%
|
90−95
−22.2%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 30
+25%
|
24−27
−25%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 75
+25%
|
60−65
−25%
|
| Fortnite | 177
+26.4%
|
140−150
−26.4%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 102
+27.5%
|
80−85
−27.5%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 69
+25.5%
|
55−60
−25.5%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 35
+29.6%
|
27−30
−29.6%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 78
+30%
|
60−65
−30%
|
| Valorant | 136
+23.6%
|
110−120
−23.6%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 81
+24.6%
|
65−70
−24.6%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 73
+21.7%
|
60−65
−21.7%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 222
+23.3%
|
180−190
−23.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 25
+38.9%
|
18−20
−38.9%
|
| Dota 2 | 100−110
+24.7%
|
85−90
−24.7%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 68
+23.6%
|
55−60
−23.6%
|
| Fortnite | 105
+23.5%
|
85−90
−23.5%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 91
+21.3%
|
75−80
−21.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 61
+22%
|
50−55
−22%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 74
+23.3%
|
60−65
−23.3%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 27
+28.6%
|
21−24
−28.6%
|
| Metro Exodus | 40
+33.3%
|
30−33
−33.3%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 67
+21.8%
|
55−60
−21.8%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 69
+25.5%
|
55−60
−25.5%
|
| Valorant | 134
+21.8%
|
110−120
−21.8%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 71
+29.1%
|
55−60
−29.1%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 23
+27.8%
|
18−20
−27.8%
|
| Dota 2 | 118
+24.2%
|
95−100
−24.2%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 64
+28%
|
50−55
−28%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 71
+29.1%
|
55−60
−29.1%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 21
+31.3%
|
16−18
−31.3%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 52
+30%
|
40−45
−30%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 39
+30%
|
30−33
−30%
|
| Valorant | 72
+30.9%
|
55−60
−30.9%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 81
+24.6%
|
65−70
−24.6%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 35−40
+23.3%
|
30−33
−23.3%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 130−140
+20.9%
|
110−120
−20.9%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 30−35
+29.2%
|
24−27
−29.2%
|
| Metro Exodus | 23
+27.8%
|
18−20
−27.8%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 160−170
+29.2%
|
130−140
−29.2%
|
| Valorant | 133
+20.9%
|
110−120
−20.9%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 53
+32.5%
|
40−45
−32.5%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 16−18
+21.4%
|
14−16
−21.4%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 43
+22.9%
|
35−40
−22.9%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 57
+26.7%
|
45−50
−26.7%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 20−22
+25%
|
16−18
−25%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 27−30
+33.3%
|
21−24
−33.3%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 50
+25%
|
40−45
−25%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 16−18
+33.3%
|
12−14
−33.3%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 30−35
+22.2%
|
27−30
−22.2%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 10−12
+22.2%
|
9−10
−22.2%
|
| Metro Exodus | 14
+40%
|
10−11
−40%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 26
+23.8%
|
21−24
−23.8%
|
| Valorant | 117
+23.2%
|
95−100
−23.2%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 28
+33.3%
|
21−24
−33.3%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 16−18
+33.3%
|
12−14
−33.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 7−8
+40%
|
5−6
−40%
|
| Dota 2 | 60−65
+28%
|
50−55
−28%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 21
+31.3%
|
16−18
−31.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 35
+29.6%
|
27−30
−29.6%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 10−12
+22.2%
|
9−10
−22.2%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 17
+21.4%
|
14−16
−21.4%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 23
+27.8%
|
18−20
−27.8%
|
This is how GTX 1060 Mobile and MX570 A compete in popular games:
- GTX 1060 Mobile is 24% faster in 1080p
- GTX 1060 Mobile is 29% faster in 1440p
- GTX 1060 Mobile is 25% faster in 4K
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 17.02 | 14.08 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 6 GB | 2 GB |
| Chip lithography | 16 nm | 8 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 80 Watt | 25 Watt |
GTX 1060 Mobile has a 20.9% higher aggregate performance score, and a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount.
MX570 A, on the other hand, has a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 220% lower power consumption.
The GeForce GTX 1060 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce MX570 A in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
