AMD Radeon 740M vs Lisuan Tech LX PRO Comparison

The AMD Radeon 740M and the Lisuan Tech LX PRO occupy opposite ends of the hardware spectrum, yet both appear as active products in the database. The 740M is an integrated graphics processor built into a 4 nm Phoenix2 chip, while the LX PRO is a massive dual-slot discrete card with its own 24 GB of GDDR6 memory. Benchmark data exists only for the 740M, which records an average score of 12870 across its two submitted tests. The LX PRO has no recorded benchmarks, meaning its performance must be inferred entirely from its listed specifications. This asymmetry defines the analysis: one product has measured results, the other has only theoretical capabilities.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the AMD Radeon 740M serves a fundamentally different purpose than the Lisuan Tech LX PRO. The 740M, as an integrated processor, targets systems where a separate graphics card is unnecessary. Its average benchmark score of 12870 places it in the 53rd percentile of all GPUs tracked in the database, which puts it ahead of the AMD FirePro W5100 (12847, 0.2% slower), the AMD Radeon Pro 455 (12831, 0.3% slower), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 (12830, 0.3% slower), while trailing the AMD Radeon RX 580 (12928, 0.4% faster). These are narrow margins, all within half a percent, indicating that the 740M sits in a crowded performance tier.

The LX PRO, by contrast, shows no measured scores. Its specifications suggest a much higher raw capability, with 6144 shading units versus the 740M's 256, and a 24.58 TFLOPS FP32 figure compared to 2.867 TFLOPS. However, without benchmark results, the database cannot confirm how those specifications translate into real-world performance. The verdict for the LX PRO must remain provisional: it appears designed for workloads that require large memory capacity and high throughput, but the data does not yet support a definitive performance ranking.

For a user choosing between these two, the 740M is the only option with verified performance. It handles general graphics tasks at a level comparable to older discrete cards like the FirePro W5100 or GeForce GTX 590. The LX PRO, with its 225 W TDP and dual-slot footprint, targets a different class of use, one that demands dedicated VRAM and sustained compute output. The recorded data favors the 740M for any application where benchmark scores matter; the LX PRO remains an unproven quantity.

Architecture Differences

The two products diverge at every architectural level. The Radeon 740M uses the Phoenix2 chip manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC, containing 20,900 million transistors on a 137 mm² die. Its architecture is RDNA 3.0, part of the Navi III IGP generation. The LX PRO uses a chip designated 7G105, built on a 6 nm process also at TSMC, but its transistor count and die size are listed as unknown. Its architecture is called TrueGPU, within the 7G100 generation.

The 740M implements RDNA 3.0 with 256 shading units, 16 texture mapping units, and 8 raster output units. It includes 4 ray tracing cores. The LX PRO presents a very different configuration: 6144 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, with no ray tracing cores listed. This suggests a design focused on raw parallel compute rather than ray tracing acceleration.

Memory architecture differs completely. The 740M uses system shared memory, meaning it draws from the host system's RAM with a bus width and bandwidth that are system dependent. The LX PRO carries 24 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory on a 192 bit bus, with a listed bandwidth of 432.0 GB/s. Its memory clock is 2250 MHz, described as 18 Gbps effective. The 740M's memory clock is also listed as system shared, offering no fixed figure.

The FP16 compute ratio highlights a key architectural choice. The 740M delivers 2.867 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16, a 1:1 ratio. The LX PRO delivers 24.58 TFLOPS for FP32 and 49.15 TFLOPS for FP16, a 2:1 ratio. This means the LX PRO can double its throughput on half-precision workloads, a feature absent from the 740M.

Process node differences also matter. The 740M uses a 4 nm process with a transistor density of 152.6 million transistors per square millimeter. The LX PRO uses a 6 nm process, but its density is not recorded. The smaller node allows the 740M to pack more transistors into less space, though the LX PRO's larger die accommodates far more shading units overall.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between these two products. The headToHeadBenchmarks field is empty, and neither product records wins in a comparison. The 740M has two benchmark entries: a Geekbench OpenCL score of 10172 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 15568. These combine to an average of 12870. The LX PRO has zero benchmark entries, which explains its average score of 0 and its 50th percentile ranking, a figure that reflects no data rather than actual performance.

Without direct comparisons, the biggest wins must be inferred. The 740M wins on available measured performance, since any non-zero score exceeds a missing one. Its Vulkan score of 15568 is notably higher than its OpenCL score of 10172, indicating that the architecture responds better to Vulkan's lower-level API. The LX PRO cannot claim a single benchmark win because it has no recorded results.

The nearest rivals for the 740M provide context for its standing. The GeForce GTX 590, a dual-GPU card from a previous era, scores 12830, just 0.3% behind the 740M. The Radeon RX 580 scores 12928, 0.4% ahead. These differences are small enough to be considered measurement noise rather than meaningful performance gaps. The 740M effectively trades blows with these older discrete cards, which is notable for an integrated solution.

For the LX PRO, the absence of benchmarks means the data cannot confirm its position relative to any rival. Its specifications suggest it would outperform the 740M by a wide margin in raw throughput, but the database has no evidence to support that claim. Any assertion of a win for the LX PRO would be speculation, which the recorded data does not permit.

Specification Differences

The two products differ in nearly every specification field. The 740M has a base clock of 800 MHz and a boost clock of 2800 MHz. The LX PRO lists no base or boost clock, only a memory clock of 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective). The 740M's pixel rate is 22.40 GPixel/s, while the LX PRO's is 192.0 GPixel/s, a factor of roughly 8.6. Texture rates follow a similar pattern: 44.80 GTexel/s for the 740M versus 384.0 GTexel/s for the LX PRO.

Power consumption differs starkly. The 740M has a TDP of 45 W and requires no power connectors, confirming its integrated nature. The LX PRO has a TDP of 225 W, uses a single 16-pin power connector, and suggests a 550 W power supply. Slot width reflects this too: the 740M is listed as IGP, meaning it occupies no expansion slot, while the LX PRO is dual-slot.

Physical dimensions separate them further. The LX PRO measures 248 mm in length, 118 mm in height, and 48 mm in width. The 740M has no listed dimensions because it is an integrated processor. Display outputs also differ: the 740M's outputs are motherboard dependent, while the LX PRO provides 4x DisplayPort 1.4a connectors.

Bus interfaces differ in lane count. The 740M uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the LX PRO uses PCIe 4.0 x16, giving the latter twice the bandwidth to the host system. API support is nearly identical: both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and OpenGL 4.6. The 740M supports Vulkan 1.4, while the LX PRO supports Vulkan 1.3, a minor version difference.

Release dates show a significant gap. The 740M was released on January 30, 2024. The LX PRO has a release date of March 16, 2026, over two years later. The 740M lists a predecessor as Navi II IGP and a successor as Navi III IGP. The LX PRO lists neither a predecessor nor a successor. The 740M's production status is Active, as is the LX PRO's.

Neither product has a launch MSRP recorded, so no price information can be included. The 740M's transistor count of 20,900 million is known, while the LX PRO's is unknown. The LX PRO's memory size of 24 GB dwarfs the 740M's system shared allocation, which has no fixed capacity.

FAQ

Q: Which product has a higher benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon 740M has an average benchmark score of 12870 across two tests, with a Geekbench OpenCL score of 10172 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 15568. The Lisuan Tech LX PRO has no recorded benchmark scores, so the 740M is the only product with measured performance.

Q: How much memory does each product have?

A: The Lisuan Tech LX PRO has 24 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192 bit bus with 432.0 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD Radeon 740M uses system shared memory, meaning its capacity, type, and bandwidth are system dependent and not fixed values.

Q: What are the power requirements for each product?

A: The AMD Radeon 740M has a TDP of 45 W and requires no power connectors, consistent with an integrated processor. The Lisuan Tech LX PRO has a TDP of 225 W, requires one 16-pin power connector, and lists a suggested power supply of 550 W.

Q: Do both products support ray tracing?

A: The AMD Radeon 740M includes 4 ray tracing cores. The Lisuan Tech LX PRO lists no ray tracing cores in its specifications. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), but the ray tracing hardware is present only in the 740M.

Q: What process nodes are used for each chip?

A: The AMD Radeon 740M uses a 4 nm process at TSMC, with a transistor count of 20,900 million on a 137 mm² die. The Lisuan Tech LX PRO uses a 6 nm process at TSMC, with transistor count and die size listed as unknown.

Q: Which product has a higher FP32 throughput?

A: The Lisuan Tech LX PRO has an FP32 throughput of 24.58 TFLOPS, compared to the AMD Radeon 740M's 2.867 TFLOPS. The LX PRO also delivers FP16 performance of 49.15 TFLOPS, while the 740M delivers 2.867 TFLOPS for FP16.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 740M wins in every category where measured data exists. Its average benchmark score of 12870 puts it in the 53rd percentile of all GPUs, and its nearest rivals are all within 0.4% of its score. This means it delivers reliable, verified performance for general graphics tasks. Its 45 W TDP and lack of power connectors make it suitable for systems without a discrete power supply. Its PCIe 4.0 x8 interface is sufficient for an integrated part, and its 4 nm process indicates a modern, efficient design.

The 740M also wins on API compatibility with Vulkan 1.4 support, one version newer than the LX PRO's Vulkan 1.3. Its ray tracing cores provide hardware acceleration for that workload, which the LX PRO lacks entirely. The 740M's release date of January 30, 2024 means it has been available for over two years, giving it a track record in the database.

The Lisuan Tech LX PRO wins on raw specification comparisons. Its 6144 shading units outnumber the 740M's 256 by a factor of 24. Its 192 TMUs and 96 ROPs far exceed the 740M's 16 and 8 respectively. Its FP32 throughput of 24.58 TFLOPS is approximately 8.6 times higher than the 740M's 2.867 TFLOPS. Its 24 GB of GDDR6 memory with 432.0 GB/s bandwidth provides dedicated, high-speed storage for large datasets, whereas the 740M must share system memory.

The LX PRO also wins on memory capacity and bandwidth, with fixed specifications that do not depend on the host system. Its 192 bit bus and 2250 MHz memory clock are concrete numbers, while the 740M's memory characteristics are system dependent. The LX PRO's dual-slot design and 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs give it a clear physical presence and direct display connectivity, unlike the 740M's motherboard dependent outputs.

For workloads that rely on half-precision math, the LX PRO's 2:1 FP16 ratio provides a distinct advantage, doubling its throughput to 49.15 TFLOPS. The 740M's 1:1 ratio offers no such acceleration. The LX PRO's larger pixel rate of 192.0 GPixel/s and texture rate of 384.0 GTexel/s suggest it can drive higher resolutions and more complex textures than the 740M's 22.40 GPixel/s and 44.80 GTexel/s.

The data ultimately shows two products designed for different contexts. The 740M delivers measured, competitive performance in an integrated form factor. The LX PRO offers specifications that point to far higher compute capability, but without benchmark results, those specifications remain unverified. The 740M wins on evidence; the LX PRO wins on paper. Neither product can claim superiority across all categories, as the missing benchmark data for the LX PRO prevents a complete comparison. The database records what it has, and what it has is a tested integrated GPU and an untested discrete card.