Radeon Pro 570 vs R5 M330

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R5 M330 with Radeon Pro 570, including specs and performance data.

R5 M330
2015
4 GB DDR3, 18 Watt
1.54

Pro 570 outperforms R5 M330 by a whopping 968% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking979339
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency5.889.41
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameExoPolaris 20
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date5 May 2015 (9 years ago)5 June 2017 (7 years ago)

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 cores3201792
Compute units5no data
Core clock speed955 MHz1000 MHz
Boost clock speed1030 MHz1105 MHz
Number of transistors690 million5,700 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)18 Watt120 Watt
Texture fill rate20.60123.8
Floating-point processing power0.6592 TFLOPS3.96 TFLOPS
ROPs832
TMUs20112

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).

Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8PCIe 3.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1000 MHz1695 MHz
Memory bandwidth14.4 GB/s217.0 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

HD3D+-
PowerTune+-
DualGraphics+-
ZeroCore+-
Switchable graphics+-

API and SDK compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (12_0)
Shader Model5.06.4
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCLNot Listed2.0
Vulkan+1.2.131
Mantle+-

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

R5 M330 1.54
Pro 570 16.44
+968%

  • Passmark

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

R5 M330 595
Pro 570 6336
+965%

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 HD9
−956%
95−100
+956%

FPS performance in popular games

  • Full HD
    Low Preset
  • Full HD
    Medium Preset
  • Full HD
    High Preset
  • Full HD
    Ultra Preset
  • Full HD
    Epic Preset
  • 1440p
    High Preset
  • 1440p
    Ultra Preset
  • 1440p
    Epic Preset
  • 4K
    High Preset
  • 4K
    Ultra Preset
  • 4K
    Epic Preset
Atomic Heart 4−5
−900%
40−45
+900%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
−963%
85−90
+963%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−900%
30−33
+900%
Atomic Heart 4−5
−900%
40−45
+900%
Battlefield 5 2−3
−950%
21−24
+950%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
−963%
85−90
+963%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−900%
30−33
+900%
Fortnite 5−6
−900%
50−55
+900%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
−963%
85−90
+963%
Forza Horizon 5 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
−900%
100−105
+900%
Valorant 35−40
−900%
350−400
+900%
Atomic Heart 4−5
−900%
40−45
+900%
Battlefield 5 2−3
−950%
21−24
+950%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
−963%
85−90
+963%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 30−35
−838%
300−310
+838%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−900%
30−33
+900%
Dota 2 18−20
−956%
190−200
+956%
Fortnite 5−6
−900%
50−55
+900%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
−963%
85−90
+963%
Forza Horizon 5 0−1 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 2−3
−950%
21−24
+950%
Metro Exodus 2−3
−950%
21−24
+950%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
−900%
100−105
+900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
−900%
60−65
+900%
Valorant 35−40
−900%
350−400
+900%
Battlefield 5 2−3
−950%
21−24
+950%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
−963%
85−90
+963%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−900%
30−33
+900%
Dota 2 18−20
−956%
190−200
+956%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
−963%
85−90
+963%
Forza Horizon 5 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
−900%
100−105
+900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
−900%
60−65
+900%
Valorant 35−40
−900%
350−400
+900%
Fortnite 5−6
−900%
50−55
+900%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 9−10
−956%
95−100
+956%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
−900%
100−105
+900%
Valorant 8−9
−963%
85−90
+963%
Counter-Strike 2 2−3
−950%
21−24
+950%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−900%
10−11
+900%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−950%
21−24
+950%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−900%
30−33
+900%
Forza Horizon 5 0−1 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
−900%
30−33
+900%
Fortnite 2−3
−950%
21−24
+950%
Atomic Heart 1−2
−900%
10−11
+900%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−967%
160−170
+967%
Valorant 8−9
−963%
85−90
+963%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 2−3
−950%
21−24
+950%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−950%
21−24
+950%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
−900%
30−33
+900%
Fortnite 3−4
−900%
30−33
+900%

This is how R5 M330 and Pro 570 compete in popular games:

  • Pro 570 is 956% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.54 16.44
Recency 5 May 2015 5 June 2017
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 18 Watt 120 Watt

R5 M330 has 566.7% lower power consumption.

Pro 570, on the other hand, has a 967.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon Pro 570 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R5 M330 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R5 M330 is a notebook graphics card while Radeon Pro 570 is a mobile workstation one.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD Radeon R5 M330
Radeon R5 M330
AMD Radeon Pro 570
Radeon Pro 570

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


2.9
1065 votes

Rate Radeon R5 M330 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9
60 votes

Rate Radeon Pro 570 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R5 M330 or Radeon Pro 570, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.