AMD Radeon 840M vs Lisuan Tech LX MAX Comparison

AMD Radeon 840M and Lisuan Tech LX MAX occupy opposite ends of the graphics hardware spectrum, despite both being active products in the database. The Radeon 840M is an integrated graphics processor built for low-power mobile systems, while the LX MAX is a dual-slot discrete add-in board with dedicated memory and a much higher power envelope. The recorded specifications reveal distinct design goals, and the benchmark data, while sparse, allows for a structural comparison based on the physical and architectural parameters.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 840M is designed for scenarios where power consumption is the primary constraint. Its 15 W TDP places it firmly in the integrated graphics category, intended for thin-and-light laptops and portable devices. The IGP designation, along with system-shared memory and no power connectors, means it operates entirely within the host system's power budget. The 400 MHz base clock and 2900 MHz boost clock indicate a part that scales up when thermal headroom allows, but it will always be limited by the absence of dedicated video memory. The Radeon 840M wins in any situation where a discrete GPU cannot be physically installed or where battery life is prioritized over raw performance.

The Lisuan Tech LX MAX, conversely, is built for sustained, high-throughput workloads. Its 225 W TDP, dual-slot cooler, and single 16-pin power connector signal a desktop-oriented component that expects a robust power supply, with the database listing a 550 W suggested PSU. The 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus delivers 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth, a figure that dwarfs any system-shared memory arrangement. The LX MAX wins in compute-heavy tasks, high-resolution rendering, and any application that requires large datasets to reside locally on the GPU. Its 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs also make it suitable for multi-monitor configurations, whereas the Radeon 840M's display outputs are listed as portable device dependent.

The win split is clear: the Radeon 840M wins on integration, power efficiency, and portability; the LX MAX wins on memory bandwidth, raw throughput, and dedicated hardware resources. There is no overlap in their intended deployment environments.

Architecture Differences

The Radeon 840M uses the RDNA 3.5 architecture, built on a 4 nm TSMC process. It belongs to the Navi III IGP generation, specifically the Krackan Point chip. The LX MAX uses a completely different design, the TrueGPU architecture, fabricated on a 6 nm TSMC process, part of the 7G100 generation with the 7G106 chip. This fundamental architectural divergence explains the massive differences in resource counts.

The Radeon 840M contains 256 shading units, 16 texture mapping units, and 8 raster output pipelines. It has 4 ray tracing cores but no dedicated tensor cores. The LX MAX contains 6144 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, a 24x increase in shader count, a 12x increase in TMUs, and a 12x increase in ROPs. The LX MAX lists no ray tracing cores in the database.

Clock behavior also differs. The Radeon 840M has explicit base and boost clocks of 400 MHz and 2900 MHz. The LX MAX has no recorded base or boost clocks; instead, its memory clock is specified at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective data rate. This suggests the LX MAX's performance relies on its memory subsystem rather than a high core clock.

The FP32 compute figures illustrate the gap. The Radeon 840M delivers 1,484.8 GFLOPS, while the LX MAX delivers 24.58 TFLOPS, which is 16.5 times higher. The FP16 ratio also differs: the Radeon 840M runs FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, both at 1,484.8 GFLOPS, whereas the LX MAX runs FP16 at a 2:1 ratio, reaching 49.15 TFLOPS. This makes the LX MAX substantially more capable for mixed-precision workloads.

Memory architecture is the most decisive difference. The Radeon 840M uses system shared memory with a system dependent bandwidth, meaning its performance scales with the host system's RAM speed and bus configuration. The LX MAX has 12 GB of dedicated GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, yielding 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth, a fixed resource independent of the host. The bus interface also differs: the Radeon 840M uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the LX MAX uses PCIe 4.0 x16, doubling the available host interface bandwidth.

Pixel and texture rates follow the resource counts. The Radeon 840M achieves 23.20 GPixel/s and 46.40 GTexel/s. The LX MAX achieves 192.0 GPixel/s and 384.0 GTexel/s, an 8.3x and 8.3x increase respectively. The LX MAX's physical dimensions are recorded as 248 mm length, 118 mm height, and 48 mm width, a full dual-slot card. The Radeon 840M has no dimensions because it is an IGP soldered to a motherboard.

API support is similar but not identical. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and OpenGL 4.6. The Radeon 840M supports Vulkan 1.4, while the LX MAX supports Vulkan 1.3. The Radeon 840M was released on 2025-02-28, and the LX MAX on 2026-03-16, making the LX MAX the later product.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark entries between these two parts, and neither has recorded average benchmark scores. The percentileVsAllGpus field for both is 50, placing them at the median of all GPUs in the database, but this is a neutral placeholder rather than a measured result. The winsA and winsB fields are both zero, confirming no comparative tests have been logged.

Without measured scores, the comparison must rely on the recorded throughput parameters. The FP32 rate is the clearest differentiator: the LX MAX delivers 24.58 TFLOPS versus 1,484.8 GFLOPS for the Radeon 840M. That is a 16.5x advantage in single-precision compute. In FP16, the LX MAX delivers 49.15 TFLOPS versus 1,484.8 GFLOPS, a 33.1x advantage, driven both by the higher shader count and the 2:1 FP16 ratio.

The texture rate shows an 8.3x advantage for the LX MAX: 384.0 GTexel/s versus 46.40 GTexel/s. The pixel rate similarly shows an 8.3x advantage: 192.0 GPixel/s versus 23.20 GPixel/s. These ratios are consistent with the TMU and ROP counts, confirming that the LX MAX scales proportionally across all fixed-function units.

Memory bandwidth is the most lopsided metric. The LX MAX provides 432.0 GB/s, while the Radeon 840M's bandwidth is listed as system dependent, meaning it cannot be quantified independently. In practice, system-shared memory on a typical laptop may deliver a fraction of the LX MAX's dedicated bandwidth, but the database does not specify a value. The LX MAX's 12 GB capacity also exceeds any shared allocation the Radeon 840M might access, though again the exact shared amount is not recorded.

The power disparity is equally stark. The LX MAX draws 225 W, fifteen times the Radeon 840M's 15 W TDP. This explains the performance gap: the LX MAX has the thermal and electrical headroom to sustain high clocks across 6144 shaders, while the Radeon 840M is constrained to 256 shaders at a fraction of the power. The LX MAX requires a 550 W suggested PSU and a 16-pin connector, while the Radeon 840M needs no external power.

The process node difference is minor: 4 nm for the Radeon 840M versus 6 nm for the LX MAX. The Radeon 840M's smaller process partially offsets its lower power budget, but the resource count difference is too large to overcome. The Radeon 840M's 4 nm process allows higher clock speeds relative to its power draw, but it cannot compensate for a 24x shader deficit.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The Lisuan Tech LX MAX has 6144 shading units, while the AMD Radeon 840M has 256. This is a 24x difference in shader count.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does each GPU provide?

A: The LX MAX provides 432.0 GB/s from 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus. The Radeon 840M uses system shared memory, and its bandwidth is listed as system dependent in the database.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The Radeon 840M has a 15 W TDP, while the LX MAX has a 225 W TDP. The LX MAX also lists a 550 W suggested PSU and uses a single 16-pin power connector, whereas the Radeon 840M has no power connectors.

Q: Do both GPUs support DirectX 12 Ultimate?

A: Yes, both the Radeon 840M and the LX MAX support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). Both also support OpenGL 4.6, but the Radeon 840M supports Vulkan 1.4 while the LX MAX supports Vulkan 1.3.

Q: Which GPU has a higher FP32 compute rate?

A: The LX MAX has a significantly higher FP32 rate at 24.58 TFLOPS, compared to the Radeon 840M's 1,484.8 GFLOPS. The LX MAX is 16.5 times faster in single-precision compute.

Q: What are the physical size differences?

A: The LX MAX is a dual-slot card measuring 248 mm in length, 118 mm in height, and 48 mm in width. The Radeon 840M is an integrated GPU with no recorded dimensions, as it is built into the host device.

The Verdict

The recorded data presents a binary choice with no ambiguity. The AMD Radeon 840M is an integrated processor for mobile systems where 15 W is the total budget, memory is shared with the CPU, and no external power is available. Its 256 shaders, 8 ROPs, and 23.20 GPixel/s pixel rate are appropriate for basic display output and light graphics workloads. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4, indicating modern API compatibility despite its modest resources. This part belongs in a portable device, and its performance will scale with the host system's memory configuration.

The Lisuan Tech LX MAX is a discrete desktop GPU with a 225 W TDP, a dual-slot cooler, and a 16-pin power connector. Its 6144 shaders, 192 TMUs, 96 ROPs, and 12 GB of GDDR6 memory with 432.0 GB/s bandwidth position it for demanding applications. The 24.58 TFLOPS FP32 rate and 49.15 TFLOPS FP16 rate confirm its compute capability. It requires a 550 W suggested PSU and measures 248 mm in length. This is a part for a dedicated desktop build with adequate cooling and power delivery.

The database shows no measured benchmark scores for either GPU, and no head-to-head results exist. The comparison therefore rests on the physical specifications. The LX MAX outperforms the Radeon 840M by an order of magnitude in every quantifiable metric: shader count, texture rate, pixel rate, memory capacity, memory bandwidth, and FP32/FP16 throughput. The Radeon 840M counters with a 4 nm process, a 15 W TDP, and no power connector requirement, making it suitable for devices where the LX MAX cannot physically or electrically exist.

The choice is determined by the system context. A laptop or mini PC with no PCIe slot for a dual-slot card cannot use the LX MAX. A desktop with a 550 W PSU and a PCIe 4.0 x16 slot would be severely underutilized with the Radeon 840M, which uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface. The LX MAX's 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs support multiple high-resolution monitors, while the Radeon 840M's display outputs depend on the portable device. The LX MAX's release date of 2026-03-16 makes it the newer product, but its 6 nm process is older than the Radeon 840M's 4 nm node.

For users constrained by power, size, or integration requirements, the Radeon 840M is the only viable option. For users building a desktop with dedicated graphics needs, the LX MAX delivers 16.5x the FP32 compute and a fixed 432.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The data does not support any middle ground between these two parts. Each wins in its own deployment class, and neither can substitute for the other in the opposite scenario.