RTX A1000 vs Radeon RX 560X Mobile
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon RX 560X Mobile with RTX A1000, including specs and performance data.
RTX A1000 outperforms 560X Mobile by a whopping 160% 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 | 489 | 251 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 11.74 | 39.70 |
| Architecture | GCN 4.0 (2016−2020) | Ampere (2020−2025) |
| GPU code name | Polaris 21 | GA107 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Workstation |
| Release date | 11 April 2018 (7 years ago) | 16 April 2024 (1 year 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 cores | 1024 | 2304 |
| Core clock speed | 1275 MHz | 727 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1202 MHz | 1462 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 3,000 million | 8,700 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 8 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 50 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 81.60 | 105.3 |
| Floating-point processing power | 2.611 TFLOPS | 6.737 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 32 |
| TMUs | 64 | 72 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 72 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 18 |
| L1 Cache | 256 KB | 2.3 MB |
| L2 Cache | 1024 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 |
| Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 4.0 x8 |
| Length | no data | 163 mm |
| Width | no data | 1-slot |
| 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 | 4 GB | 8 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1450 MHz | 1500 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 92.8 GB/s | 192.0 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 | No outputs | 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| FreeSync | + | - |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 6.7 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 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 | 34
−150%
| 85−90
+150%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 50−55
−159%
|
140−150
+159%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 23
−139%
|
55−60
+139%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 31
−158%
|
80−85
+158%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 52
−150%
|
130−140
+150%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 50−55
−159%
|
140−150
+159%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 17
−135%
|
40−45
+135%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 39
−156%
|
100−105
+156%
|
| Fortnite | 66
−158%
|
170−180
+158%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 52
−150%
|
130−140
+150%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 34
−150%
|
85−90
+150%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 50
−160%
|
130−140
+160%
|
| Valorant | 95−100
−153%
|
240−250
+153%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 44
−150%
|
110−120
+150%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 50−55
−159%
|
140−150
+159%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 122
−146%
|
300−310
+146%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 15
−133%
|
35−40
+133%
|
| Dota 2 | 71
−154%
|
180−190
+154%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 36
−150%
|
90−95
+150%
|
| Fortnite | 44
−150%
|
110−120
+150%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 49
−145%
|
120−130
+145%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 31
−158%
|
80−85
+158%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 36
−150%
|
90−95
+150%
|
| Metro Exodus | 20
−150%
|
50−55
+150%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 42
−138%
|
100−105
+138%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 36
−150%
|
90−95
+150%
|
| Valorant | 95−100
−153%
|
240−250
+153%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 39
−156%
|
100−105
+156%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 13
−131%
|
30−33
+131%
|
| Dota 2 | 66
−158%
|
170−180
+158%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 33
−158%
|
85−90
+158%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 38
−150%
|
95−100
+150%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30
−150%
|
75−80
+150%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 22
−150%
|
55−60
+150%
|
| Valorant | 95−100
−153%
|
240−250
+153%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 33
−158%
|
85−90
+158%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 18−20
−137%
|
45−50
+137%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 75−80
−150%
|
190−200
+150%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−150%
|
35−40
+150%
|
| Metro Exodus | 10−12
−145%
|
27−30
+145%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 50−55
−155%
|
130−140
+155%
|
| Valorant | 110−120
−155%
|
280−290
+155%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 24−27
−160%
|
65−70
+160%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9
−125%
|
18−20
+125%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 21−24
−138%
|
50−55
+138%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 24−27
−150%
|
60−65
+150%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
−150%
|
35−40
+150%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 21−24
−138%
|
50−55
+138%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 5−6
−140%
|
12−14
+140%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 21−24
−138%
|
50−55
+138%
|
| Metro Exodus | 6−7
−133%
|
14−16
+133%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 12−14
−150%
|
30−33
+150%
|
| Valorant | 50−55
−145%
|
130−140
+145%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 12−14
−131%
|
30−33
+131%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 5−6
−140%
|
12−14
+140%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−133%
|
7−8
+133%
|
| Dota 2 | 35−40
−157%
|
95−100
+157%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−11
−140%
|
24−27
+140%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 16−18
−135%
|
40−45
+135%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−11
−140%
|
24−27
+140%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 10−11
−140%
|
24−27
+140%
|
This is how RX 560X Mobile and RTX A1000 compete in popular games:
- RTX A1000 is 150% faster in 1080p
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 9.91 | 25.78 |
| Recency | 11 April 2018 | 16 April 2024 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 8 GB |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 8 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 50 Watt |
RTX A1000 has a 160.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 75% more advanced lithography process, and 30% lower power consumption.
The RTX A1000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon RX 560X Mobile in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon RX 560X Mobile is a notebook graphics card while RTX A1000 is a workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
