AMD Radeon 820M vs Lisuan Tech LX 7G100 Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the core specifications of the AMD Radeon 820M?

A: The AMD Radeon 820M is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) built on the RDNA 3.5 architecture using a 4 nm process at TSMC. It features 128 shading units, 8 texture mapping units, 4 render output units, and 2 ray tracing cores. Its base clock is 400 MHz with a boost clock of 2800 MHz, and it delivers 716.8 GFLOPS of FP32 performance.

Q: What are the core specifications of the Lisuan Tech LX 7G100?

A: The Lisuan Tech LX 7G100 is a discrete, dual-slot graphics card based on the TrueGPU architecture using a 6 nm process at TSMC. It has 6144 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, 96 render output units, and 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus with 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Its FP32 compute reaches 24.58 TFLOPS, and it uses a 225 W TDP with a 1x 8-pin power connector.

Q: How do the two compare in terms of memory configuration?

A: The AMD Radeon 820M uses system-shared memory with bandwidth that is system dependent. The Lisuan Tech LX 7G100 uses dedicated 12 GB GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit interface, providing a fixed 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth. This gives the LX 7G100 a decisive advantage in memory capacity and bandwidth.

Q: Which API versions do the two graphics solutions support?

A: Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and OpenGL 4.6. The AMD Radeon 820M supports Vulkan 1.4, while the Lisuan Tech LX 7G100 supports Vulkan 1.3.

Q: What are the physical dimensions of the Lisuan Tech LX 7G100?

A: The Lisuan Tech LX 7G100 measures 294 mm (11.6 inches) in length, 120 mm (4.7 inches) in height, and 49 mm (1.9 inches) in width. It occupies a dual-slot form factor and requires a 550 W suggested PSU.

Q: When were these products released, and what is their production status?

A: The AMD Radeon 820M was released on February 28, 2025, and is listed as Active in production. The Lisuan Tech LX 7G100 was released on June 17, 2026, and is also listed as Active.

The Verdict

The data shows a complete mismatch in intended use cases. The AMD Radeon 820M is an integrated processor with 128 shading units, 4 ROPs, and a 15 W TDP, designed for portable, low-power devices where the display output is dependent on the host system. Its FP32 throughput of 716.8 GFLOPS places it in the entry-level segment for light graphical tasks. The Lisuan Tech LX 7G100, by contrast, is a full-size, dual-slot discrete card with 6144 shading units, 96 ROPs, 12 GB of GDDR6 memory, and 24.58 TFLOPS of FP32 compute. That represents a 33.3x advantage in shading units and a 34.3x advantage in FP32 throughput, numbers that point to entirely different performance tiers.

For users needing a compact, fanless, integrated solution for basic productivity or media playback on a laptop or small-form-factor system, the Radeon 820M is the appropriate choice. It consumes only 15 W, requires no power connectors, and uses system memory, which keeps the platform simple. For anyone running demanding 3D workloads, high-resolution gaming, or content creation, the Lisuan Tech LX 7G100 is the only viable option based on the recorded specifications. Its 432.0 GB/s memory bandwidth and 192.0 GPixel/s pixel rate dwarf the 820M's system-dependent bandwidth and 11.20 GPixel/s pixel rate. The verdict is clear: the LX 7G100 wins on every raw performance metric, while the 820M wins on power efficiency and physical footprint.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains no direct benchmark scores for either product, but the specification-derived metrics provide a clear comparative picture. The Lisuan Tech LX 7G100 delivers 24.58 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, which is 34.3 times the 716.8 GFLOPS of the AMD Radeon 820M. In FP16, the LX 7G100 reaches 49.15 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while the 820M stays at 716.8 GFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, widening the gap to 68.5 times.

Pixel throughput shows a similar disparity. The LX 7G100 achieves 192.0 GPixel/s, while the 820M manages 11.20 GPixel/s, a 17.1x difference. Texture fill rates are 384.0 GTexel/s versus 22.40 GTexel/s, a 17.1x gap as well. The LX 7G100's 192 texture units and 96 ROPs directly enable these numbers, compared to the 820M's 8 TMUs and 4 ROPs.

Memory bandwidth is where the separation becomes most pronounced for real-world workloads. The LX 7G100 has a fixed 432.0 GB/s from 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus. The 820M relies on system-shared memory with bandwidth described as system dependent, meaning its performance scales with the host's memory configuration. In an integrated processor, this often results in significantly lower effective bandwidth, constrained by the platform's memory channels and speed.

The LX 7G100 also supports 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, whereas the 820M's display outputs are listed as portable device dependent, indicating it is not designed for multi-monitor desktop setups. Both products support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and OpenGL 4.6, but the LX 7G100 uses Vulkan 1.3 compared to the 820M's Vulkan 1.4, a minor software version difference that does not offset the massive hardware gap.

Specification Differences

The two products differ in nearly every measurable category. The AMD Radeon 820M uses the RDNA 3.5 architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process, while the Lisuan Tech LX 7G100 uses the TrueGPU architecture on a 6 nm TSMC process. The 820M has 128 shading units, 8 TMUs, and 4 ROPs; the LX 7G100 has 6144 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The 820M includes 2 ray tracing cores; the LX 7G100 lists no ray tracing cores in the data.

Clock speeds differ fundamentally. The 820M has a base clock of 400 MHz and a boost clock of 2800 MHz. The LX 7G100 has no base or boost clock listed, only a memory clock of 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective). Memory configurations are entirely different: the 820M uses system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth, while the LX 7G100 has 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus at 432.0 GB/s.

Power and physical requirements diverge sharply. The 820M has a 15 W TDP, an IGP slot width, and no power connectors. The LX 7G100 has a 225 W TDP, a dual-slot width, a 1x 8-pin power connector, and a suggested PSU of 550 W. The LX 7G100 measures 294 mm by 120 mm by 49 mm, while the 820M has no listed dimensions, consistent with an integrated solution. Bus interfaces also differ: PCIe 4.0 x8 for the 820M versus PCIe 4.0 x16 for the LX 7G100. Display outputs are portable-device dependent for the 820M versus 4x DisplayPort 1.4a for the LX 7G100.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split is fundamental. The AMD Radeon 820M belongs to the Navi III IGP generation, using the Krackan Point 2 chip with RDNA 3.5 architecture. It is an integrated graphics processor, meaning it shares the die with the CPU and uses system memory. Its 128 shading units and 4 ROPs reflect a design optimized for minimal power draw and physical footprint. The 2 ray tracing cores provide basic RT support, and the 1:1 FP16 to FP32 ratio indicates a unified shader design without dedicated tensor or AI acceleration hardware.

The Lisuan Tech LX 7G100 uses the TrueGPU architecture with the 7G106 chip, and it is a discrete, dual-slot card. Its 6144 shading units and 96 ROPs indicate a high-throughput design aimed at raw rasterization and compute. The 2:1 FP16 to FP32 ratio shows a different execution model, where half-precision operations are processed at twice the rate of single-precision. The LX 7G100 has no listed ray tracing cores or tensor cores, suggesting a focus on traditional graphics pipelines rather than hybrid rendering or AI workloads. Its 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus is dedicated, which removes the shared-memory bottleneck inherent to integrated graphics.

The process node difference is also notable: 4 nm for the 820M versus 6 nm for the LX 7G100. The 820M's smaller node allows higher transistor density and lower power per transistor, which is why it can operate at 15 W. The LX 7G100's larger node, combined with 225 W TDP, allows for a much larger die with more compute units, but at the cost of higher power draw and physical size. Both use TSMC as the foundry, but the architectural goals could not be more different: one for extreme efficiency in constrained devices, the other for maximum throughput in a desktop chassis.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 820M wins in scenarios defined by power and portability. Its 15 W TDP means it can be integrated into a laptop or compact device without active cooling or external power. The absence of power connectors and its IGP slot width confirm this design intent. For basic desktop productivity, web browsing, video playback, or light 2D acceleration, the 820M provides sufficient compute without the logistical overhead of a discrete card. Its smaller process node (4 nm) and lower clock range (400 MHz base, 2800 MHz boost) indicate a design that prioritizes thermals and battery life over peak performance. The system-dependent bandwidth means it can take advantage of fast system memory if present, but it will never reach the dedicated bandwidth of a discrete solution.

The Lisuan Tech LX 7G100 wins in every performance-oriented scenario. Its 24.58 TFLOPS of FP32 compute makes it suitable for high-end 3D rendering, heavy GPU compute, and demanding gaming at high resolutions. The 432.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth and 12 GB of GDDR6 capacity allow it to handle large textures and datasets without spilling to system memory. The 192.0 GPixel/s pixel rate and 384.0 GTexel/s texture rate support high-resolution, high-detail rendering. Its 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs enable multi-monitor setups, which is impossible with the 820M's portable-device-dependent outputs. The 225 W TDP and 550 W suggested PSU indicate a desktop-centric design where power delivery is not a constraint.

In summary, the 820M is the choice for ultra-mobile and low-power systems where the GPU must disappear into the platform. The LX 7G100 is the choice for desktop users who need maximum raw graphics and compute throughput and have the power budget and physical space to accommodate a 294 mm dual-slot card. The data does not support any middle ground: the performance gap is too wide, and the physical requirements are too different.