AMD Radeon 760M vs Lisuan Tech LX PRO Comparison

The Verdict

The AMD Radeon 760M and the Lisuan Tech LX PRO occupy completely separate segments of the GPU market, and the data reflects that divide clearly. The Radeon 760M is an integrated graphics processor built for low-power systems, drawing only 15 W and sharing system memory. The Lisuan Tech LX PRO is a dual-slot discrete add-in board with 24 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory, a 225 W TDP, and a 550 W suggested power supply. These are not direct competitors in any realistic sense.

The Radeon 760M has recorded benchmark results across multiple suites. Its average benchmark score stands at 6019, placing it in the 35th percentile of all GPUs in the database. The Lisuan Tech LX PRO, however, has no recorded benchmark scores in the database. Its average benchmark score is listed as 0, and it has no nearest rivals listed. The percentile field for the LX PRO is 50, but with zero measured benchmarks, that percentile cannot be derived from direct testing.

For users choosing between these two parts, the decision rests entirely on system context. The Radeon 760M belongs in a compact, low-power machine where the CPU already incorporates graphics. The LX PRO belongs in a desktop with a PCIe 4.0 x16 slot, a 16-pin power connector, a power supply rated at 550 W or higher, and enough chassis space for a 248 mm long, dual-slot card. The data shows no overlapping use case where both parts could serve the same build.

Benchmark results indicate the Radeon 760M delivers a workable level of integrated graphics performance. Its best recorded scores include a Geekbench Vulkan result of 30336, a Geekbench OpenCL result of 20255, and a Passmark G3D score of 5310. The LX PRO has no comparable measurements in the database, so any performance comparison must remain qualitative. The LX PRO lists 6144 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, and 96 render output units, which vastly outnumber the 760M's 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The FP32 throughput figures likewise diverge: 24.58 TFLOPS for the LX PRO against 5.323 TFLOPS for the 760M.

The verdict from the recorded data is straightforward. The Radeon 760M is the only one of the two with measured performance data, making it the only part that can be evaluated against the database's benchmark baselines. The Lisuan Tech LX PRO is a higher-specification discrete GPU on paper, but without benchmark scores, its real-world standing cannot be confirmed from the database.

Where Each One Wins

The Radeon 760M wins in every category where the database has actual measurements, simply because the LX PRO has no recorded scores. The 760M's recorded wins include a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 400, a Geekbench OpenCL score of 20255, a Geekbench Vulkan score of 30336, and Passmark scores across DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12 of 65, 19, 52, and 25 respectively. Its Passmark G2D score is 890, its Passmark G3D score is 5310, and its Passmark GPU Compute score is 2840.

The LX PRO wins on specification-based advantages that the database records. It carries 24 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, delivering 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The 760M uses system shared memory with bandwidth listed as system dependent, meaning its memory performance relies entirely on the host platform's DRAM. The LX PRO's memory clock is listed at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective data rate, a figure the 760M cannot match with shared system memory.

The LX PRO also wins on raw throughput specifications. Its pixel rate of 192.0 GPixel/s is substantially higher than the 760M's 41.58 GPixel/s. Its texture rate of 384.0 GTexel/s compares to the 760M's 83.17 GTexel/s. The FP16 figure for the LX PRO is 49.15 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, while the 760M lists 5.323 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio.

Where each one wins depends on what metric matters. The 760M wins in the only place that matters for verified performance: actual benchmark results. The LX PRO wins in theoretical specifications, memory capacity, and memory bandwidth. For a workload that requires more than 16 GB of VRAM, the LX PRO's 24 GB pool gives it a category advantage the 760M cannot address. For a workload that must run within a 15 W power envelope, the 760M is the only viable option.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural lineages entirely. The AMD Radeon 760M uses the RDNA 3.0 architecture on TSMC's 4 nm process node. Its chip is named Phoenix, and it belongs to the Navi III IGP generation. The die measures 178 mm² and contains 25,390 million transistors, giving a transistor density of 142.6 million per square millimeter. The Lisuan Tech LX PRO uses an architecture labeled TrueGPU, built on a 6 nm process node from the same foundry, TSMC. Its chip is named 7G105 and belongs to the 7G100 generation. The LX PRO's transistor count and die size are listed as unknown in the database.

The compute resources differ by an order of magnitude. The 760M has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, plus 8 ray tracing cores. The LX PRO has 6144 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, with no ray tracing core count listed. The LX PRO's shading unit count is 12 times that of the 760M. Its TMU count is 6 times higher, and its ROP count is 6 times higher.

Clock behavior also differs. The 760M has a base clock of 800 MHz and a boost clock of 2599 MHz. The LX PRO lists no base or boost clock in the database. Instead, its memory clock is specified at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective. The 760M's memory configuration is entirely system shared, with no dedicated VRAM, no fixed bus width, and no independent bandwidth figure.

The memory subsystem represents the largest architectural gap. The LX PRO has 24 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit interface, with 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The 760M has no dedicated memory at all. Its bus width is listed as system shared, and its bandwidth is system dependent. In practical terms, the LX PRO can sustain memory throughput independent of the host system, while the 760M's memory performance rises and falls with the platform's DRAM configuration.

Power and physical design diverge sharply. The 760M is an IGP with a 15 W TDP, no power connectors, and a slot width listed as IGP. The LX PRO is a dual-slot card measuring 248 mm in length, 118 mm in height, and 48 mm in width. It requires a single 16-pin power connector, draws a 225 W TDP, and lists a suggested power supply of 550 W. The 760M uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 bus interface, while the LX PRO uses PCIe 4.0 x16.

Display outputs and API support show smaller differences. The 760M's display outputs are motherboard dependent, since it is an integrated part. The LX PRO provides 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and OpenGL 4.6. The 760M supports Vulkan 1.4, while the LX PRO lists Vulkan 1.3.

The FP32 and FP16 throughput figures reflect the architectural split. The 760M delivers 5.323 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16 at a 1:1 ratio. The LX PRO delivers 24.58 TFLOPS for FP32 and 49.15 TFLOPS for FP16 at a 2:1 ratio. The LX PRO's FP16 rate is roughly 9.2 times the 760M's FP16 rate, while its FP32 rate is roughly 4.6 times higher.

Release timing also separates the two. The 760M was released on January 30, 2024. The LX PRO carries a release date of March 16, 2026. The 760M lists a predecessor called Navi II IGP, while the LX PRO has no predecessor listed. Both parts are marked as active in production status.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has recorded benchmark scores in the database?

A: Only the AMD Radeon 760M has recorded benchmark scores. It has results across 3DMark, Geekbench OpenCL, Geekbench Vulkan, and multiple Passmark tests. The Lisuan Tech LX PRO has no recorded benchmarks, with an average benchmark score of 0.

Q: How much memory does each GPU have?

A: The Lisuan Tech LX PRO has 24 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus with 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The AMD Radeon 760M uses system shared memory, with size, type, and bus width all listed as system shared and bandwidth listed as system dependent.

Q: What are the power requirements for each part?

A: The AMD Radeon 760M has a 15 W TDP and uses no power connectors. The Lisuan Tech LX PRO has a 225 W TDP, requires a single 16-pin power connector, and lists a suggested power supply of 550 W.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The Lisuan Tech LX PRO has 6144 shading units, compared to 512 for the AMD Radeon 760M. The LX PRO also has 192 TMUs and 96 ROPs, versus 32 TMUs and 16 ROPs for the 760M.

Q: What process nodes do the two GPUs use?

A: The AMD Radeon 760M uses TSMC's 4 nm process node. The Lisuan Tech LX PRO uses TSMC's 6 nm process node. Both are manufactured by TSMC.

Q: What is the FP32 throughput difference between the two?

A: The Lisuan Tech LX PRO delivers 24.58 TFLOPS of FP32 performance. The AMD Radeon 760M delivers 5.323 TFLOPS. The LX PRO's FP32 figure is approximately 4.6 times higher than the 760M's.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

No head-to-head benchmark entries exist in the database for these two GPUs. The head-to-head benchmark list is empty, and the win counts for both parts are zero. This absence of direct comparison data means the only available evidence comes from the 760M's standalone benchmark results and the LX PRO's listed specifications.

The AMD Radeon 760M's strongest recorded result is its Geekbench Vulkan score of 30336. Its Geekbench OpenCL score follows at 20255. These two results show that the 760M performs substantially better under Vulkan than under OpenCL in the Geekbench suite, a difference of roughly 50 percent between the two API tests. The Passmark G3D score of 5310 and Passmark GPU Compute score of 2840 provide additional reference points, though they come from a different benchmark suite and cannot be directly compared to the Geekbench numbers.

The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 result of 400 is the lowest standalone score recorded for the 760M. This low score relative to its other results reflects the demanding nature of the Steel Nomad workload, which stresses modern DX12 rendering paths. The 760M's Passmark DirectX results follow a similar pattern: DirectX 9 scores 65, DirectX 11 scores 52, DirectX 12 scores 25, and DirectX 10 scores 19. The progression shows the 760M handling older DirectX workloads better than newer ones, with the DirectX 9 score more than triple the DirectX 12 score.

The 760M's Passmark G2D score of 890 shows its 2D performance is a small fraction of its 3D performance, as expected for a GPU that emphasizes 3D rendering over desktop compositing work.

For the Lisuan Tech LX PRO, the only comparable figures come from its specification sheet. Its FP32 throughput of 24.58 TFLOPS is roughly 4.6 times the 760M's 5.323 TFLOPS. Its pixel rate of 192.0 GPixel/s is roughly 4.6 times the 760M's 41.58 GPixel/s. Its texture rate of 384.0 GTexel/s is roughly 4.6 times the 760M's 83.17 GTexel/s. The consistency of these ratios reflects the underlying compute unit scaling between the two architectures.

The nearest rival data for the 760M places it in a tight cluster. The AMD Radeon RX 6400 has an average score of 6001, just 0.3 percent lower than the 760M's 6019. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M also scores 6000, again 0.3 percent behind. The NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server scores 5996, 0.4 percent behind. The NVIDIA Quadro P2000 scores 6049, which is 0.5 percent ahead of the 760M. These four rivals bracket the 760M within a 53-point range, indicating that its average benchmark score sits in a crowded performance band.

The LX PRO has no nearest rivals listed in the database. Its 50th percentile figure, combined with zero recorded benchmarks, means it cannot be positioned relative to other GPUs through measured data. The database treats it as an unmeasured part, and the only meaningful comparisons come from its architectural specifications.

The 760M's percentile rank of 35 places it below the median of all GPUs in the database. That rank, combined with an average score of 6019, shows an integrated part performing in the lower-middle range of the overall GPU distribution. The LX PRO's listed percentile of 50 would place it exactly at the median, but without benchmark data that figure carries no empirical weight.

In the absence of direct head-to-head results, the recorded data supports a simple conclusion: the 760M has verified performance numbers and a clear position among its nearest rivals, while the LX PRO remains an unverified specification sheet. Any buyer comparing these two parts must weigh the 760M's measured results against the LX PRO's theoretical specifications, with no benchmark data to confirm the latter's real-world behavior.