AMD Instinct MI325X vs Lisuan Tech LX MAX Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database does not contain any head-to-head benchmark entries for the AMD Instinct MI325X versus the Lisuan Tech LX MAX. Both products show a wins tally of zero in direct comparisons, and the head-to-head benchmark list is empty. As a result, there are no measured performance deltas, no percentage leads, and no per-test victory counts to walk through. The absence of direct measurements is itself a notable data point: the two accelerators have never been subjected to the same benchmark suite in the database, so any numerical comparison between them must be derived from their respective specification sheets rather than from recorded test results.

Both products sit at the 50th percentile against all GPUs, and both carry an average benchmark score of zero. These two figures are identical, yet they should not be read as equivalence in capability. The percentile rank of 50 for both parts simply reflects that neither has accumulated benchmark data in the database. A zero average score does not indicate performance; it indicates that no performance samples exist. Consequently, the only reliable numerical contrasts available are the architectural and memory parameters listed for each accelerator.

The FP32 compute figures offer the clearest mathematical separation. The MI325X is rated at 81.72 TFLOPS, while the LX MAX is rated at 24.58 TFLOPS. The AMD part therefore delivers 3.32 times the single-precision throughput of the Lisuan part. In FP16, the MI325X holds 81.72 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, meaning it does not gain any additional throughput by switching to half precision. The LX MAX, by contrast, reaches 49.15 TFLOPS in FP16 through a 2:1 ratio, doubling its FP32 rate. That gives the AMD accelerator a 1.66 times lead in FP16, a much narrower margin than in FP32.

Memory bandwidth is another decisive gap. The MI325X provides 6.14 TB/s of bandwidth, while the LX MAX provides 432.0 GB/s. The AMD part is 14.2 times faster in raw memory throughput. Texture rate follows a similar pattern: the MI325X reaches 2,553.6 GTexel/s versus 384.0 GTexel/s for the LX MAX, a 6.65 times advantage. Pixel rate is the one metric where the Lisuan part posts a non-zero value, 192.0 GPixel/s, while the MI325X is recorded at 0 MPixel/s. This difference reflects the MI325X having zero ROPs, a design choice consistent with its compute-focused architecture.

Architecture Differences

The two accelerators come from different design philosophies. The AMD Instinct MI325X uses the Aqua Vanjaram chip built on CDNA 3.0 architecture, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The chip contains 153,000 million transistors on a 1017 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 150.4M per mm². The Lisuan Tech LX MAX uses the 7G106 chip on the TrueGPU architecture, fabricated on a 6 nm process, also at TSMC. Its transistor count and die size are not recorded in the database.

The MI325X is a pure compute accelerator. It has no display outputs, no ROPs, and no API support for DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan, all of which are listed as N/A. The LX MAX, in contrast, is a full graphics-capable card. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3, and it provides four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The MI325X cannot drive a display; the LX MAX can drive up to four.

Memory architecture separates the two sharply. The MI325X uses 256 GB of HBM3e on an 8192 bit bus, with memory clocked at 1500 MHz and 6 Gbps effective. The LX MAX uses 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192 bit bus, with memory clocked at 2250 MHz and 18 Gbps effective. The HBM3e implementation gives the AMD part a 21.3 times larger memory pool and a bus width 42.7 times wider. GDDR6 on the Lisuan part runs at a higher effective clock, but the narrow bus limits total bandwidth to a small fraction of the HBM3e figure.

Compute unit organization also differs. The MI325X carries 19,456 shading units, 1,216 TMUs, and zero ROPs. The LX MAX carries 6,144 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The AMD part has 3.17 times more shading units and 6.33 times more TMUs, while the Lisuan part is the only one with raster operation units. Neither part lists RT cores or tensor cores in the database.

The physical and power profiles are equally distinct. The MI325X is an OAM module with no power connectors and a 1000 W TDP, requiring a suggested 1400 W power supply. It uses a PCIe 5.0 x16 interface. The LX MAX is a dual-slot card measuring 248 mm in length, 118 mm in height, and 48 mm in width, with a single 16-pin power connector. Its TDP is 225 W, its suggested PSU is 550 W, and it uses PCIe 4.0 x16. The MI325X releases on 2024-10-09, while the LX MAX is dated 2026-03-16 and is listed as Active in production status. The AMD part lists Radeon Instinct as its predecessor; the Lisuan part has no predecessor recorded.

Where Each One Wins

Without direct benchmark data, the win conditions must be inferred from the specification sheet. The MI325X wins in every compute-heavy category where the database records a number. Its FP32 throughput of 81.72 TFLOPS is 3.32 times the LX MAX figure. Its FP16 throughput of 81.72 TFLOPS is 1.66 times the LX MAX figure. Its memory bandwidth of 6.14 TB/s is 14.2 times higher. Its texture rate of 2,553.6 GTexel/s is 6.65 times higher. Its memory capacity of 256 GB is 21.3 times larger. Any workload that scales with raw FP32, FP16, texture throughput, or memory bandwidth will favor the AMD part.

The LX MAX wins in categories that the MI325X does not address at all. It has a functioning pixel pipeline with 96 ROPs and a pixel rate of 192.0 GPixel/s, whereas the MI325X records 0 MPixel/s. It supports the DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3 APIs, while the MI325X lists N/A for all three. It has four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, while the MI325X has none. It fits in a dual-slot form factor at 248 mm length with a 225 W TDP, while the MI325X is an OAM module with a 1000 W TDP. The LX MAX also has a higher effective memory clock at 18 Gbps versus 6 Gbps, although this does not compensate for the narrow 192 bit bus.

The production status field further separates the two. The LX MAX is marked Active, meaning it is currently in production. The MI325X has no production status recorded in the database. The LX MAX also has a later release date, 2026-03-16, compared to 2024-10-09 for the MI325X.

FAQ

Q: Which accelerator has higher FP32 compute?

A: The AMD Instinct MI325X is rated at 81.72 TFLOPS FP32, which is 3.32 times the 24.58 TFLOPS of the Lisuan Tech LX MAX.

Q: How do the memory systems compare?

A: The MI325X uses 256 GB of HBM3e on an 8192 bit bus with 6.14 TB/s bandwidth. The LX MAX uses 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192 bit bus with 432.0 GB/s bandwidth. The MI325X has 21.3 times more capacity and 14.2 times more bandwidth.

Q: Can either card output video?

A: Only the Lisuan Tech LX MAX can. It provides 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The AMD Instinct MI325X lists no display outputs and does not support DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The MI325X has a 1000 W TDP and a suggested 1400 W power supply. The LX MAX has a 225 W TDP and a suggested 550 W power supply. The MI325X uses no power connectors as an OAM module, while the LX MAX uses a single 16-pin connector.

Q: Which part has more shading units?

A: The MI325X has 19,456 shading units, compared to 6,144 for the LX MAX. The AMD part also has 1,216 TMUs versus 192, but the Lisuan part has 96 ROPs while the AMD part has zero.

Q: What is the process node for each chip?

A: The MI325X uses a 5 nm process at TSMC, while the LX MAX uses a 6 nm process at TSMC. The MI325X die is 1017 mm² with 153,000 million transistors; the LX MAX die size and transistor count are not recorded.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to two accelerators built for different purposes. The AMD Instinct MI325X is a compute module with no graphics output, no raster pipeline, and no consumer API support. It leads in FP32 by 3.32 times, in FP16 by 1.66 times, in texture rate by 6.65 times, and in memory bandwidth by 14.2 times. It also provides 256 GB of HBM3e, a memory pool 21.3 times larger than the LX MAX. Any workload that needs large model residency, high bandwidth, or sustained FP32 and FP16 throughput will favor the MI325X based on these specifications.

The Lisuan Tech LX MAX is a graphics-capable dual-slot card. It is the only one of the two with ROPs, pixel output, display connectors, and DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3 support. It is also the only one marked as Active in production, and its 225 W TDP makes it far less demanding on power delivery. Its 192.0 GPixel/s pixel rate is a real capability, while the MI325X records zero. For rendering, display output, or any rasterization workload, the LX MAX is the only viable option in this comparison.

The absence of head-to-head benchmark results means the database cannot confirm how these parts behave under identical test conditions. The specification sheet, however, draws a clear line: the MI325X dominates raw compute and memory metrics, while the LX MAX dominates graphics features and practical installability. The choice follows the workload. A compute deployment with no display requirement aligns with the MI325X. A graphics or rasterization task aligns with the LX MAX.