AMD Radeon PRO V710 vs Lisuan Tech LX PRO Comparison

FAQ

Q: What is the average benchmark score of each card?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO V710 has an average benchmark score of 58,657, while the Lisuan Tech LX PRO has an average benchmark score of 0, reflecting the absence of recorded benchmark results in the database.

Q: How do the memory configurations differ?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO V710 uses 28 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 224-bit bus, with 504.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Lisuan Tech LX PRO uses 24 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, with 432.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What are the process nodes for each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO V710 is built on TSMC's 5 nm node with 28,100 million transistors on a 346 mm² die. The Lisuan Tech LX PRO is built on TSMC's 6 nm node, with transistor count and die size listed as unknown.

Q: Which card has a higher FP32 compute rating?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO V710 delivers 27.65 TFLOPS of FP32 compute. The Lisuan Tech LX PRO delivers 24.58 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, a difference of about 3.07 TFLOPS.

Q: What display outputs does each card provide?

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

Q: What is the percentile ranking for each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO V710 ranks in the 88th percentile among all GPUs in the database. The Lisuan Tech LX PRO ranks in the 50th percentile, with no benchmark data supporting that position.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon PRO V710 uses the Navi 32 chip with RDNA 3.0 architecture, under the codename Wheat Nas. It belongs to the Radeon Pro Navi generation, specifically the Navi III Series. The Lisuan Tech LX PRO uses the 7G105 chip with TrueGPU architecture, belonging to the 7G100 generation. No codename is recorded for the Lisuan part.

Manufacturing details differ notably. The AMD card is fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC, with 28,100 million transistors on a 346 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 81.2M per square millimeter. The Lisuan card uses a 6 nm process at TSMC, but transistor count and die size are unknown fields in the database.

The compute architectures show different ratios. The AMD card has 3,456 shading units, 216 texture mapping units, and 96 ROPs. It also includes 54 ray tracing cores. The Lisuan card has 6,144 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, but no ray tracing cores are listed. The pixel rate for both cards is identical at 192.0 GPixel/s. The texture rate differs: the AMD card reaches 432.0 GTexel/s, while the Lisuan card reaches 384.0 GTexel/s.

FP16 performance reveals a structural difference. The AMD Radeon PRO V710 achieves 27.65 TFLOPS of FP16, matching its FP32 output at a 1:1 ratio. The Lisuan Tech LX PRO achieves 49.15 TFLOPS of FP16, which is exactly double its FP32 output, indicating a 2:1 ratio. This suggests the Lisuan architecture uses a packed math approach for half-precision workloads.

API support is similar but not identical. Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and OpenGL 4.6. The AMD card supports Vulkan 1.4, while the Lisuan card supports Vulkan 1.3. The AMD card uses a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface, and the Lisuan card also uses PCIe 4.0 x16.

Physical specifications differ. The AMD card is single-slot with a 1x 8-pin power connector and a suggested 450 W power supply. The Lisuan card is dual-slot with a 1x 16-pin power connector and a suggested 550 W power supply. The Lisuan card has recorded dimensions of 248 mm length, 118 mm height, and 48 mm width. The AMD card has no dimensions recorded.

Power consumption is recorded for both. The AMD card has a TDP of 158 W. The Lisuan card has a TDP of 225 W, which is 67 W higher. The Lisuan card also has a production status of Active, while the AMD card has no production status listed.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark entries for these two graphics cards. The head-to-head benchmark array is empty, and the wins counters for both cards are zero. This means no direct comparison scores exist between the AMD Radeon PRO V710 and the Lisuan Tech LX PRO.

The AMD card does have two individual benchmark results recorded. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, it scores 853. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 116,460. These results contribute to its average benchmark score of 58,657 and its 88th percentile ranking among all GPUs.

The Lisuan card has no benchmark results in the database. Its average benchmark score is zero, and its nearest rivals list is empty. The 50th percentile ranking appears to be a default or placeholder value rather than a data-driven calculation.

For context on the AMD card's standing, the nearest rivals in the database are listed with small performance deltas. The NVIDIA P102-100 has an average score of 58,528, which is 0.2% below the AMD card. The AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT scores 58,392, a 0.5% deficit. The Intel Arc A570M scores 58,239, a 0.7% deficit. The AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM scores 58,085, a 1% deficit. These margins are tight, indicating the Radeon PRO V710 sits in a densely packed performance cluster.

The Lisuan card cannot be positioned relative to these rivals because no score exists for it. Any comparison between the two cards must rely on architectural specifications and recorded capabilities rather than direct performance measurements.

The Verdict

The data set presents an incomplete comparison. The AMD Radeon PRO V710 has measurable benchmark results, a percentile ranking, and a set of nearest rivals. The Lisuan Tech LX PRO has no benchmark results, no rivals, and only a placeholder percentile. The verdict must reflect this asymmetry.

For compute workloads where FP32 performance matters, the AMD card holds the advantage with 27.65 TFLOPS versus 24.58 TFLOPS. The AMD card also provides more memory at 28 GB versus 24 GB, and higher bandwidth at 504.0 GB/s versus 432.0 GB/s. The AMD card has a wider 224-bit memory bus compared to the 192-bit bus on the Lisuan card.

For workloads that use half-precision math, the Lisuan card has a clear architectural edge. Its FP16 output of 49.15 TFLOPS is nearly double the AMD card's 27.65 TFLOPS. The 2:1 FP16 ratio indicates the Lisuan architecture is designed for AI or machine learning inference tasks that rely on reduced precision.

For display purposes, the Lisuan card is the only viable option. The AMD card has no display outputs, making it unsuitable for any workstation role that requires a monitor connection. The Lisuan card provides 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, enabling multi-monitor setups.

The AMD card uses less power at 158 W versus 225 W, and requires a smaller power supply at 450 W versus 550 W. The single-slot form factor of the AMD card allows denser server installations, while the dual-slot Lisuan card takes more space.

The release dates differ substantially. The AMD card was released on 2024-10-02, while the Lisuan card is dated 2026-03-16. The Lisuan card is marked as Active production, while the AMD card has no production status.

The data does not support a definitive overall winner because the Lisuan card lacks measured performance. The AMD card is the only one with verifiable benchmark data. Users needing display output must choose the Lisuan card. Users needing confirmed compute performance must choose the AMD card.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two cards:

• Chip: Navi 32 (AMD) versus 7G105 (Lisuan)
• Architecture: RDNA 3.0 (AMD) versus TrueGPU (Lisuan)
• Codename: Wheat Nas (AMD) versus none listed (Lisuan)
• Generation: Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) (AMD) versus 7G100 (Lisuan)
• Process node: 5 nm (AMD) versus 6 nm (Lisuan)
• Transistors: 28,100 million (AMD) versus unknown (Lisuan)
• Die size: 346 mm² (AMD) versus unknown (Lisuan)
• Transistor density: 81.2M / mm² (AMD) versus not listed (Lisuan)
• Base clock: 1900 MHz (AMD) versus not listed (Lisuan)
• Boost clock: 2000 MHz (AMD) versus not listed (Lisuan)
• Memory size: 28 GB (AMD) versus 24 GB (Lisuan)
• Memory bus width: 224 bit (AMD) versus 192 bit (Lisuan)
• Memory bandwidth: 504.0 GB/s (AMD) versus 432.0 GB/s (Lisuan)
• Shading units: 3456 (AMD) versus 6144 (Lisuan)
• Texture mapping units: 216 (AMD) versus 192 (Lisuan)
• Ray tracing cores: 54 (AMD) versus none listed (Lisuan)
• Texture rate: 432.0 GTexel/s (AMD) versus 384.0 GTexel/s (Lisuan)
• FP32 performance: 27.65 TFLOPS (AMD) versus 24.58 TFLOPS (Lisuan)
• FP16 performance: 27.65 TFLOPS (AMD) versus 49.15 TFLOPS (Lisuan)
• FP16 ratio: 1:1 (AMD) versus 2:1 (Lisuan)
• TDP: 158 W (AMD) versus 225 W (Lisuan)
• Slot width: Single-slot (AMD) versus Dual-slot (Lisuan)
• Power connector: 1x 8-pin (AMD) versus 1x 16-pin (Lisuan)
• Suggested PSU: 450 W (AMD) versus 550 W (Lisuan)
• Display outputs: No outputs (AMD) versus 4x DisplayPort 1.4a (Lisuan)
• Vulkan version: 1.4 (AMD) versus 1.3 (Lisuan)
• Dimensions: Not listed (AMD) versus 248 mm x 118 mm x 48 mm (Lisuan)
• Production status: Not listed (AMD) versus Active (Lisuan)
• Release date: 2024-10-02 (AMD) versus 2026-03-16 (Lisuan)
• Predecessor: Radeon Pro Vega (AMD) versus none listed (Lisuan)

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon PRO V710 wins in several measurable categories. Its FP32 compute of 27.65 TFLOPS exceeds the Lisuan card by 3.07 TFLOPS, making it the stronger choice for single-precision graphics rendering, simulation, and scientific computing. Its memory capacity of 28 GB provides 4 GB more than the Lisuan card, which matters for large datasets that approach the 24 GB limit. Its memory bandwidth of 504.0 GB/s is 72 GB/s higher, reducing bottlenecks in memory-intensive workloads. Its texture rate of 432.0 GTexel/s is 48 GTexel/s higher. Its power draw of 158 W is 67 W lower, and its single-slot design allows more cards per chassis. Its 54 ray tracing cores give it hardware acceleration for ray-traced workloads, a capability the Lisuan card does not list. Its Vulkan 1.4 support is newer than the Lisuan card's Vulkan 1.3.

The Lisuan Tech LX PRO wins in other areas. Its FP16 compute of 49.15 TFLOPS is nearly double the AMD card's 27.65 TFLOPS, giving it a decisive advantage in half-precision workloads such as neural network training and inference. Its 6,144 shading units outnumber the AMD card's 3,456 by 2,688, which may provide an advantage in shader-bound scenarios despite the lower FP32 rating. Its 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs make it the only option for display-connected workstations, while the AMD card has no outputs at all. Its dual-slot cooler and 225 W TDP suggest a more robust thermal solution for sustained loads. Its Active production status indicates current availability, while the AMD card's production status is unlisted. Its 24 GB memory capacity, while smaller than the AMD card, is still substantial. Its dimensions are recorded, which aids planning for system integration.

The use-case split follows the data. For server-side compute acceleration without display needs, the AMD card offers confirmed benchmark performance, lower power draw, and ray tracing support. For AI inference and training that benefits from FP16 throughput, the Lisuan card's 2:1 ratio provides nearly double the half-precision compute. For any workstation requiring direct display output, the Lisuan card is the only functional choice. For dense multi-GPU installations where slot width and power matter, the AMD card's single-slot 158 W design is more accommodating. For workloads that need the highest FP32 throughput per watt, the AMD card delivers 27.65 TFLOPS at 158 W, while the Lisuan card delivers 24.58 TFLOPS at 225 W. The benchmark data confirms the AMD card's position in the 88th percentile, while the Lisuan card's 50th percentile ranking carries no supporting measurements.