AMD Radeon PRO V710 vs Lisuan Tech LX 7G100 Comparison

FAQ

Q: What is the process node difference between the AMD Radeon PRO V710 and the Lisuan Tech LX 7G100?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO V710 uses a 5 nm process node, while the Lisuan Tech LX 7G100 uses a 6 nm process node. Both are manufactured by TSMC.

Q: How do the two cards differ in memory capacity and bandwidth?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO V710 has 28 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 224-bit bus, delivering 504.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Lisuan Tech LX 7G100 has 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, delivering 432.0 GB/s bandwidth. Both run memory at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective.

Q: Which card has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO V710 delivers 27.65 TFLOPS FP32, while the Lisuan Tech LX 7G100 delivers 24.58 TFLOPS FP32. The V710 leads by roughly 3.07 TFLOPS in single-precision throughput.

Q: What are the shading unit counts for each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO V710 has 3456 shading units, while the Lisuan Tech LX 7G100 has 6144 shading units. The LX 7G100 has nearly double the shader count despite lower overall FP32 output.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two cards?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO V710 has a TDP of 158 W, while the Lisuan Tech LX 7G100 has a TDP of 225 W. The V710 requires a suggested PSU of 450 W, and the LX 7G100 requires 550 W.

Q: Which card has display outputs?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO V710 has no display outputs, making it a compute-only accelerator. The Lisuan Tech LX 7G100 has 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon PRO V710 wins in raw compute density and memory capacity. Its 28 GB frame buffer at 504.0 GB/s bandwidth positions it for large data sets, such as high-resolution inference workloads or geometry-heavy rendering buffers. The V710 also leads in FP32 at 27.65 TFLOPS versus 24.58 TFLOPS, a 12.5% advantage in single-precision throughput. Its texture rate of 432.0 GTexel/s outpaces the LX 7G100's 384.0 GTexel/s, and both share the same pixel rate of 192.0 GPixel/s.

The V710 also wins on efficiency and physical footprint. At 158 W TDP versus 225 W, it delivers higher compute with 30% less power draw. It is a single-slot card, whereas the LX 7G100 occupies dual slots. The V710's 5 nm process node contributes to this density advantage.

The Lisuan Tech LX 7G100 wins in shading unit count and FP16 throughput. It has 6144 shading units versus 3456, and it delivers 49.15 TFLOPS FP16 at a 2:1 ratio, versus the V710's 27.65 TFLOPS FP16 at 1:1. For workloads that utilize FP16 arithmetic, such as certain AI inference paths, the LX 7G100 nearly doubles the FP16 rate.

The LX 7G100 also wins on display connectivity. Four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs allow direct monitor attachment, while the V710 has no outputs at all. The LX 7G100 supports PCIe 4.0 x16 like the V710, but its 12 GB memory on a 192-bit bus is smaller and slower.

In the recorded benchmark data, the V710 posts an average benchmark score of 58657 and sits in the 88th percentile of all GPUs. The LX 7G100 has no recorded benchmarks and holds the 50th percentile. The V710's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA P102-100 at 58528 (0.2% behind), the AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT at 58392 (0.5% behind), the Intel Arc A570M at 58239 (0.7% behind), and the AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM at 58085 (1% behind).

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon PRO V710 uses the Navi 32 chip based on RDNA 3.0 architecture, with the codename Wheat Nas. It belongs to the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) generation. The chip is fabricated on TSMC's 5 nm process and contains 28,100 million transistors on a 346 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 81.2M per mm². It includes 54 ray tracing cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The Lisuan Tech LX 7G100 uses the 7G106 chip based on the TrueGPU architecture, with no codename listed. It belongs to the 7G100 generation and is fabricated on TSMC's 6 nm process. Transistor count and die size are unknown. It has no ray tracing cores listed. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3.

The architecture difference is fundamental. RDNA 3.0 is a graphics-first design with dedicated ray tracing hardware, while TrueGPU appears oriented toward general-purpose compute with a much larger shading unit count. The V710's FP16 runs at 1:1 ratio with FP32, indicating no dedicated FP16 acceleration path. The LX 7G100's FP16 runs at 2:1 ratio, meaning its FP16 throughput is double its FP32 rate. This suggests the LX 7G100 has been tuned for half-precision workloads.

The V710 has 216 texture mapping units versus 192 on the LX 7G100. Both have 96 ROPs. The V710's texture rate is 432.0 GTexel/s versus 384.0 GTexel/s for the LX 7G100, reflecting the higher TMU count and higher FP32 throughput.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every major specification category.

Process node: 5 nm for the V710, 6 nm for the LX 7G100.

Chip: Navi 32 versus 7G106.

Architecture: RDNA 3.0 versus TrueGPU.

Generation: Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) versus 7G100.

Transistors: 28,100 million for the V710, unknown for the LX 7G100.

Die size: 346 mm² for the V710, unknown for the LX 7G100.

Base clock: 1900 MHz for the V710, none listed for the LX 7G100.

Boost clock: 2000 MHz for the V710, none listed for the LX 7G100.

Memory size: 28 GB versus 12 GB.

Memory bus width: 224 bit versus 192 bit.

Memory bandwidth: 504.0 GB/s versus 432.0 GB/s.

Shading units: 3456 versus 6144.

TMUs: 216 versus 192.

ROPs: 96 for both.

Ray tracing cores: 54 for the V710, none for the LX 7G100.

FP32: 27.65 TFLOPS versus 24.58 TFLOPS.

FP16: 27.65 TFLOPS (1:1) versus 49.15 TFLOPS (2:1).

Pixel rate: 192.0 GPixel/s for both.

Texture rate: 432.0 GTexel/s versus 384.0 GTexel/s.

TDP: 158 W versus 225 W.

Slot width: Single-slot versus dual-slot.

Power connectors: 1x 8-pin for both.

Suggested PSU: 450 W versus 550 W.

Display outputs: none versus 4x DisplayPort 1.4a.

Vulkan support: 1.4 versus 1.3.

Dimensions: the LX 7G100 measures 294 mm in length, 120 mm in height, and 49 mm in width; the V710 has no listed dimensions.

Release date: the V710 released on 2024-10-02, while the LX 7G100 is dated 2026-06-17.

Production status: the LX 7G100 is listed as Active; the V710 has no status listed.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains two benchmark entries for the AMD Radeon PRO V710. In 3dmark_3dmark_steel_nomad_dx12, the V710 scores 853. In geekbench_opencl, it scores 116460. The Lisuan Tech LX 7G100 has no recorded benchmark entries, and the head-to-head benchmark array is empty. Therefore, direct comparisons must rely on specification-derived metrics and the V710's percentile position.

The V710's average benchmark score of 58657 places it in the 88th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA P102-100, averages 58528, a delta of 0.2%. The AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT sits 0.5% behind at 58392. The Intel Arc A570M trails by 0.7% at 58239, and the AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM is 1% behind at 58085. These margins are tight, indicating the V710 operates in a densely packed performance band.

In FP32 compute, the V710's 27.65 TFLOPS exceeds the LX 7G100's 24.58 TFLOPS by 12.5%. In memory bandwidth, the V710's 504.0 GB/s beats the LX 7G100's 432.0 GB/s by 16.7%. In texture rate, the V710's 432.0 GTexel/s leads the LX 7G100's 384.0 GTexel/s by 12.5%. These are the V710's clear wins.

The LX 7G100 counters in FP16. Its 49.15 TFLOPS is 77.8% higher than the V710's 27.65 TFLOPS. Its shading unit count of 6144 is 77.8% higher than the V710's 3456. These advantages suggest the LX 7G100 is built for half-precision compute throughput, potentially in neural network inference or training where FP16 dominates.

The V710 also wins on efficiency. Its 158 W TDP produces 27.65 TFLOPS FP32, yielding roughly 0.175 TFLOPS per watt. The LX 7G100's 225 W TDP produces 24.58 TFLOPS FP32, yielding roughly 0.109 TFLOPS per watt. The V710 is about 60% more efficient in FP32 per watt. In FP16, the LX 7G100 produces 49.15 TFLOPS at 225 W, or roughly 0.218 TFLOPS per watt, while the V710 produces 27.65 TFLOPS at 158 W, or roughly 0.175 TFLOPS per watt. Here the LX 7G100 leads by about 25%.

The V710's 28 GB frame buffer is more than double the LX 7G100's 12 GB. For workloads that require large memory residency, such as massive 3D scenes or large batch inference, the V710 has a decisive advantage. The LX 7G100's 192-bit bus limits its bandwidth scaling, while the V710's 224-bit bus provides 16.7% more bandwidth.

The V710's ray tracing cores, 54 of them, enable hardware-accelerated ray tracing that the LX 7G100 lacks entirely. For DirectX 12 Ultimate workloads that use ray tracing, the V710 is the only option of the two. The V710 also supports Vulkan 1.4 versus the LX 7G100's 1.3, a newer API revision.

The LX 7G100's four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs provide display functionality that the V710 cannot offer. For any use case requiring direct monitor output, the LX 7G100 is the sole candidate. Its dual-slot cooler and 294 mm length indicate a larger physical presence, consistent with its higher 225 W TDP.

In the absence of direct head-to-head benchmark results, the specification data indicates a clear split. The V710 dominates FP32, memory capacity, bandwidth, texture rate, ray tracing, efficiency, and API version. The LX 7G100 dominates FP16, shading unit count, and display connectivity. The V710's 88th percentile ranking and average score of 58657 place it among established mid-high range GPUs, while the LX 7G100's 50th percentile with no benchmark scores leaves its real-world performance unverified.