AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 vs Lisuan Tech LX PRO Comparison

The Verdict

The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 and Lisuan Tech LX PRO serve entirely different segments of the GPU market, and the data reflects that split clearly. The R9700 is a high-end workstation accelerator built on RDNA 4.0 with a 4 nm TSMC process, 32 GB of GDDR6 memory, and a 300 W power envelope. The LX PRO is a more power-efficient design on a 6 nm node with 24 GB of GDDR6, a 225 W TDP, and a 192-bit memory bus. Benchmark results place the R9700 in the 69th percentile of all GPUs, while the LX PRO sits at the 50th percentile with no recorded benchmark scores in the database. For users needing maximum compute throughput and larger memory capacity, the R9700 is the clear choice from the recorded specifications. For deployments where power draw and physical footprint matter more, the LX PRO offers a lower-profile alternative with four DisplayPort outputs.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 wins on raw compute performance. Its FP32 throughput of 47.84 TFLOPS nearly doubles the LX PRO's 24.58 TFLOPS. Texture rate follows the same pattern: 747.5 GTexel/s versus 384.0 GTexel/s. Pixel rate also favors AMD, with 373.8 GPixel/s compared to 192.0 GPixel/s. Memory bandwidth is another decisive advantage, as the R9700 delivers 644.6 GB/s over a 256-bit bus, while the LX PRO manages 432.0 GB/s on a 192-bit interface. The R9700 also carries more VRAM at 32 GB versus 24 GB, which matters for large dataset workloads.

The Lisuan Tech LX PRO wins on power efficiency and physical dimensions. Its 225 W TDP is 75 W lower than the R9700's 300 W, and its suggested power supply drops from 700 W to 550 W. The LX PRO is also shorter at 248 mm versus 267 mm, although it is taller and thicker. The LX PRO's FP16 ratio of 2:1 yields 49.15 TFLOPS, which exceeds its own FP32 rate and edges past the R9700's FP16 figure of 47.84 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio. The LX PRO also supports four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs versus the R9700's combination of one HDMI 2.1b and three DisplayPort 2.1a, which may suit multi-display configurations.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 uses the Navi 48 chip with RDNA 4.0 architecture, fabricated on TSMC's 4 nm process. The die measures 357 mm² and contains 53,900 million transistors, yielding a density of 151.0M transistors per mm². The R9700 integrates 4,096 shading units, 256 texture mapping units, 128 ROPs, and 64 ray tracing cores. Clock speeds reach 1,660 MHz base, 2,350 MHz game, and 2,920 MHz boost. Memory operates at 2,518 MHz with 20.1 Gbps effective transfer.

The Lisuan Tech LX PRO employs the 7G105 chip with TrueGPU architecture, built on TSMC's 6 nm process. Transistor count and die size are not recorded in the database. The LX PRO uses 6,144 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, with no ray tracing cores listed. Its memory clock is 2,250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective transfer. The LX PRO's higher shading unit count does not translate into higher FP32 performance because its per-clock throughput is lower. The architectural split is stark: RDNA 4.0 emphasizes high clock speeds and ray tracing hardware, while TrueGPU relies on wider execution resources at lower frequencies.

Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and OpenGL 4.6. The R9700 supports Vulkan 1.4, while the LX PRO lists Vulkan 1.3. The R9700 uses PCIe 5.0 x16, and the LX PRO uses PCIe 4.0 x16. Both are dual-slot cards with a single 16-pin power connector. The R9700 requires a 700 W power supply, and the LX PRO needs 550 W. The R9700 was released on July 22, 2025, with a launch MSRP of 1,299 USD. The LX PRO arrived on March 16, 2026, with no launch MSRP recorded. The R9700 lists the Radeon Pro Vega as its predecessor, while the LX PRO has no predecessor in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 delivers 47.84 TFLOPS FP32, compared to 24.58 TFLOPS for the Lisuan Tech LX PRO. The R9700's FP32 throughput is approximately double.

Q: How much memory bandwidth do these cards provide?

A: The R9700 provides 644.6 GB/s over a 256-bit bus with 32 GB of GDDR6. The LX PRO provides 432.0 GB/s over a 192-bit bus with 24 GB of GDDR6.

Q: Which card supports more display outputs?

A: The Lisuan Tech LX PRO supports four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 supports one HDMI 2.1b and three DisplayPort 2.1a outputs.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The R9700 has a 300 W TDP and recommends a 700 W power supply. The LX PRO has a 225 W TDP and recommends a 550 W power supply.

Q: Does either card support ray tracing?

A: The AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 includes 64 ray tracing cores. The Lisuan Tech LX PRO has no ray tracing cores listed in the database.

Q: What is the memory clock difference?

A: The R9700 runs memory at 2,518 MHz with 20.1 Gbps effective transfer. The LX PRO runs memory at 2,250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective transfer.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons between the AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 and the Lisuan Tech LX PRO. The LX PRO has no recorded benchmark scores at all, and its average benchmark score is 0. The R9700's average benchmark score is 23,315, placing it in the 69th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Radeon R9 M290X with an average score of 23,276 (0.2% behind), the AMD Radeon RX 6600M at 23,273 (0.2% behind), the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 at 23,250 (0.3% behind), and the NVIDIA P106-100 at 23,249 (0.3% behind). These margins are extremely tight, indicating the R9700's average score sits just ahead of those older or lower-tier parts.

The R9700's individual benchmark results show a wide spread across test types. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, it scores 7,006. Geekbench OpenCL returns 118,202, and Geekbench Vulkan returns 63,550. Passmark results vary by API: DirectX 10 scores 155, DirectX 11 scores 272, DirectX 12 scores 83, and DirectX 9 scores 363. The Passmark G2D score is 1,236, while G3D reaches 26,979. GPU compute on Passmark records 15,300. These numbers indicate strong compute-oriented performance, particularly in OpenCL, while legacy DirectX tests show lower absolute scores due to the test methodology.

Because the LX PRO lacks benchmark entries, the comparison relies entirely on specification-derived metrics. The FP32 gap of 47.84 TFLOPS versus 24.58 TFLOPS represents the single largest performance differentiator. The R9700's pixel rate of 373.8 GPixel/s versus 192.0 GPixel/s indicates a 1.95x advantage in fill-rate-bound scenarios. Texture rate shows a similar ratio at 747.5 GTexel/s versus 384.0 GTexel/s. Memory bandwidth favors the R9700 by a factor of 1.49x.

The LX PRO's FP16 output of 49.15 TFLOPS exceeds the R9700's 47.84 TFLOPS, but this is a narrow 2.7% difference and only applies to FP16 workloads. The R9700's FP16 figure matches its FP32 figure due to the 1:1 ratio, whereas the LX PRO's 2:1 ratio means half-rate FP16. In mixed-precision workloads, the LX PRO may hold an advantage in FP16-specific tasks, but the R9700's overall compute ceiling is higher.

The R9700's 4 nm process and 53,900 million transistors on a 357 mm² die represent a denser implementation than the LX PRO's 6 nm process, though the LX PRO's transistor count and die size are unknown. The R9700's 64 ray tracing cores give it hardware-accelerated ray tracing capability that the LX PRO lacks entirely. For Vulkan workloads, the R9700's 1.4 support is newer than the LX PRO's 1.3.

The R9700's nearest rivals in the database are all older or lower-tier cards, which suggests its 23,315 average score is modest relative to its specification sheet. The LX PRO's 50th percentile placement with no scores means it sits at the median of the database by default, not by measured performance. Users comparing these two cards should treat the LX PRO's specifications as the only available data, while the R9700 has verified benchmark results across multiple test suites. The R9700's closest measured competitor, the Radeon R9 M290X, scores only 0.2% lower on average, indicating that the R9700's real-world performance may not fully reflect its architectural advantages in every workload.