AMD Radeon AI PRO 9600D vs Lisuan Tech LX ULTRA Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the core architectural differences between the AMD Radeon AI PRO 9600D and the Lisuan Tech LX ULTRA?

A: The AMD card uses the Navi 48 chip on the RDNA 4.0 architecture, built on a 4 nm TSMC process with 53,900 million transistors on a 357 mm² die. The Lisuan Tech LX ULTRA uses the 7G105 chip on the TrueGPU architecture, built on a 6 nm TSMC process. The AMD card is from the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi IV Series) generation, while the Lisuan is from the 7G100 generation.

Q: How do their memory subsystems compare?

A: The AMD Radeon AI PRO 9600D has 32 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 576.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Lisuan Tech LX ULTRA has 24 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, delivering 432.0 GB/s. Both run memory at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective speed.

Q: Which card has higher raw compute throughput?

A: They are very close in FP32 performance. The AMD card delivers 24.82 TFLOPS, while the Lisuan delivers 24.58 TFLOPS. In FP16, the Lisuan pulls ahead with 49.15 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), whereas the AMD card matches its FP32 at 24.82 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio).

Q: What are the physical size and power differences?

A: The AMD card is a single-slot design, 241 mm long, 111 mm tall, and 19 mm wide, with a 150 W TDP and a suggested 450 W PSU. The Lisuan is a dual-slot card, 268 mm long, 112 mm tall, and 40 mm wide, with a 225 W TDP and a suggested 550 W PSU. Both use a single 16-pin power connector.

Q: How do their display outputs and bus interfaces differ?

A: The AMD card has one DisplayPort 2.1a output and uses PCIe 5.0 x16. The Lisuan has four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs and uses PCIe 4.0 x16.

Q: What is the difference in shading unit count and API support?

A: The Lisuan has 6144 shading units, double the AMD card's 3072. Both have 192 TMUs and 96 ROPs. The AMD card supports Vulkan 1.4, while the Lisuan supports Vulkan 1.3. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and OpenGL 4.6.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon AI PRO 9600D is built on the RDNA 4.0 architecture using the Navi 48 chip, fabricated on TSMC's 4 nm process. The die measures 357 mm² and contains 53,900 million transistors, resulting in a transistor density of 151.0M per mm². This is a Radeon Pro Navi (Navi IV Series) generation product.

The Lisuan Tech LX ULTRA uses the 7G105 chip under the TrueGPU architecture, fabricated on TSMC's 6 nm process. Its transistor count and die size are not recorded in the database. It belongs to the 7G100 generation.

The AMD card includes 48 dedicated ray tracing cores, while the Lisuan lists no ray tracing core count. The AMD card has 3072 shading units, whereas the Lisuan has 6144 shading units, exactly double. Both cards share 192 texture mapping units and 96 render output units.

Clock behavior differs substantially. The AMD card has a base clock of 1080 MHz, a boost clock of 2020 MHz, and a game clock of 1080 MHz. The Lisuan has no recorded base, boost, or game clock values in the database.

The AMD card is a single-slot design measuring 241 mm by 111 mm by 19 mm. The Lisuan is a dual-slot design measuring 268 mm by 112 mm by 40 mm. The AMD card uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the Lisuan uses PCIe 4.0 x16.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database shows no head-to-head benchmark entries for these two cards. Both have an average benchmark score of 0 and occupy the 50th percentile among all GPUs. With zero recorded wins for either card, the comparison must rely on the specification differences recorded in the database.

The closest comparison point is FP32 compute. The AMD card delivers 24.82 TFLOPS, which is 0.24 TFLOPS higher than the Lisuan's 24.58 TFLOPS. This is a marginal advantage of roughly 1% for AMD in single-precision workloads.

In FP16 compute, the Lisuan delivers 49.15 TFLOPS, which is 24.33 TFLOPS higher than the AMD card's 24.82 TFLOPS. This represents a 98% advantage for the Lisuan in half-precision workloads, driven by its 2:1 FP16 ratio versus the AMD card's 1:1 ratio.

Memory bandwidth favors the AMD card. The 576.0 GB/s figure is 144.0 GB/s higher than the Lisuan's 432.0 GB/s, a 33% advantage. The AMD card also has 8 GB more memory (32 GB versus 24 GB) and a wider 256-bit bus versus 192-bit.

Pixel rate is nearly identical: 193.9 GPixel/s for AMD versus 192.0 GPixel/s for the Lisuan. Texture rate is similarly close: 387.8 GTexel/s versus 384.0 GTexel/s. The AMD card holds a very small lead in both.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ on several recorded specification fields. The AMD card uses a 4 nm node, the Lisuan uses 6 nm. The AMD chip is Navi 48, the Lisuan chip is 7G105. The AMD architecture is RDNA 4.0, the Lisuan is TrueGPU.

The AMD card has 32 GB memory, the Lisuan has 24 GB. The AMD bus is 256-bit, the Lisuan is 192-bit. Bandwidth is 576.0 GB/s versus 432.0 GB/s. Both use GDDR6 memory at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective speed.

Shading units: 3072 for AMD, 6144 for the Lisuan. Ray tracing cores: 48 for AMD, none recorded for the Lisuan. FP16 throughput: 24.82 TFLOPS for AMD versus 49.15 TFLOPS for the Lisuan. FP32 throughput: 24.82 TFLOPS versus 24.58 TFLOPS.

The AMD TDP is 150 W, the Lisuan is 225 W. Suggested PSU is 450 W versus 550 W. Slot width is single-slot versus dual-slot. The AMD card is 241 mm long, 111 mm tall, and 19 mm wide. The Lisuan is 268 mm long, 112 mm tall, and 40 mm wide.

Bus interface: PCIe 5.0 x16 for AMD, PCIe 4.0 x16 for the Lisuan. Display outputs: one DisplayPort 2.1a for AMD, four DisplayPort 1.4a for the Lisuan. Vulkan support: 1.4 for AMD, 1.3 for the Lisuan. Release dates: the AMD card is dated 2025-12-10, the Lisuan is dated 2026-03-16.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon AI PRO 9600D wins in memory capacity and bandwidth. Its 32 GB frame buffer and 576.0 GB/s bandwidth suit workloads that need large datasets resident in VRAM. The 256-bit bus provides a 33% bandwidth advantage over the Lisuan. Its 1:1 FP16 ratio means half-precision and single-precision performance are equal, which simplifies mixed-precision work.

The AMD card also wins on power efficiency. Its 150 W TDP is 75 W lower than the Lisuan's 225 W, and its suggested PSU is 100 W lower at 450 W versus 550 W. The single-slot design and smaller dimensions (241 mm versus 268 mm length, 19 mm versus 40 mm width) make it easier to fit in constrained chassis.

The AMD card supports PCIe 5.0 x16, doubling the bus bandwidth of the Lisuan's PCIe 4.0 x16. It also has a newer DisplayPort version (2.1a versus 1.4a) and newer Vulkan support (1.4 versus 1.3). Its 48 ray tracing cores provide hardware acceleration for ray-traced workloads, which the Lisuan lacks entirely.

The Lisuan Tech LX ULTRA wins on FP16 compute. Its 49.15 TFLOPS is nearly double the AMD card's 24.82 TFLOPS. This makes it the stronger choice for workloads that operate primarily in half precision, such as certain machine learning inference paths or graphics pipelines that use FP16 throughout.

The Lisuan also wins on shading unit count with 6144 versus 3072. Even at unknown clock speeds, the doubled shading unit count suggests a different compute scaling pattern. The Lisuan provides four DisplayPort outputs versus one on the AMD card, which supports multi-monitor setups directly without additional hardware.

The Lisuan has a higher TDP at 225 W, which indicates a larger power envelope. Its dual-slot design and 40 mm width require more case clearance but also allow for a physically larger cooling solution.

The Verdict

The data indicates a clear split by workload type. The AMD Radeon AI PRO 9600D is the choice for memory-heavy tasks. Its 32 GB frame buffer, 576.0 GB/s bandwidth, and 256-bit bus provide a substantial capacity and throughput advantage. The 150 W TDP and single-slot form factor make it the more practical card for dense servers or workstations where space and power are constrained. The PCIe 5.0 interface, DisplayPort 2.1a, Vulkan 1.4 support, and 48 ray tracing cores round out a modern feature set.

The Lisuan Tech LX ULTRA is the choice for FP16-intensive workloads. Its 49.15 TFLOPS half-precision throughput is the standout specification, nearly double the AMD card's figure. The 6144 shading units provide a different compute architecture, one that scales differently in shader-bound scenarios. The four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs support multi-display configurations directly from the card.

For FP32 performance, the two cards are effectively tied. The AMD card leads by 0.24 TFLOPS, a difference too small to matter in real workloads. Pixel rate and texture rate are also within 1% of each other.

The Lisuan's higher TDP of 225 W and dual-slot footprint indicate it needs more robust cooling and a larger case. Its 6 nm process node is older than AMD's 4 nm node, and its transistor count is not recorded, so density comparisons are impossible.

No benchmark scores exist in the database for either card. The percentile ranking for both is 50, and the average benchmark score is 0 for both. Without measured performance data, the specification comparison is the only available evidence. The AMD card offers better memory, efficiency, and connectivity. The Lisuan offers double the shading units and double the FP16 throughput. Buyers should weigh whether memory bandwidth and ray tracing matter more, or whether half-precision compute and display output count matter more.