AMD Radeon PRO W7400 vs Lisuan Tech LX PRO Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results for the AMD Radeon PRO W7400 and the Lisuan Tech LX PRO. Both entries show zero benchmark scores, zero wins for either side, and no nearest rival data. Consequently, any performance comparison must be derived from the architectural specifications and theoretical throughput figures recorded in the database.

The most significant disparity appears in raw compute throughput. The Lisuan Tech LX PRO delivers 24.58 TFLOPS FP32, while the AMD Radeon PRO W7400 produces 7.885 TFLOPS FP32. That places the LX PRO at approximately 3.1 times the FP32 throughput of the W7400. In FP16, the gap widens further: the LX PRO reaches 49.15 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while the W7400 manages 7.885 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio. The LX PRO's FP16 output is roughly 6.2 times higher.

Pixel and texture rates follow the same pattern. The LX PRO records 192.0 GPixel/s and 384.0 GTexel/s, against the W7400's 70.40 GPixel/s and 123.2 GTexel/s. The LX PRO leads by a factor of 2.7 in pixel throughput and 3.1 in texture throughput. Memory bandwidth also favors the LX PRO: 432.0 GB/s versus 172.8 GB/s, a 2.5 times advantage. The LX PRO's 24 GB frame buffer is triple the W7400's 8 GB.

The W7400 does hold advantages in certain areas. It supports DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, whereas the LX PRO uses DisplayPort 1.4a. The W7400 also lists Vulkan 1.4 support, while the LX PRO lists Vulkan 1.3. Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and OpenGL 4.6, so feature parity exists there. The W7400's power draw is substantially lower at 55 W, compared to the LX PRO's 225 W, a fourfold difference.

Architecture Differences

The two cards use entirely different chip designs. The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 is built on the Navi 33 chip, which uses the RDNA 3.0 architecture with the codename Hotpink Bonefish. It belongs to the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) generation. The Lisuan Tech LX PRO uses the 7G105 chip under the TrueGPU architecture, part of the 7G100 generation. No codename is recorded for the LX PRO.

Both chips are manufactured by TSMC on a 6 nm process node. The W7400's die size is 204 mm² with 13,300 million transistors, yielding a transistor density of 65.2M per mm². The LX PRO's transistor count, die size, and density are recorded as unknown or null in the database, preventing direct comparison of implementation density.

The W7400 has 1792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 64 raster output pipelines. It also includes 28 ray tracing cores. The LX PRO has 6144 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, but no ray tracing cores are listed. The LX PRO therefore has roughly 3.4 times the shading units, 1.7 times the TMUs, and 1.5 times the ROPs of the W7400, while the W7400 is the only one with dedicated ray tracing hardware.

Memory subsystems differ in capacity and width. The W7400 uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128 bit bus, with memory clocked at 1350 MHz and 10.8 Gbps effective. The LX PRO uses 24 GB of GDDR6 on a 192 bit bus, with memory clocked at 2250 MHz and 18 Gbps effective. The LX PRO's wider bus and faster memory combine for the 432.0 GB/s bandwidth figure, as opposed to the W7400's 172.8 GB/s.

The bus interface differs as well. The W7400 connects via PCIe 4.0 x8, while the LX PRO uses PCIe 4.0 x16. Physical design separates them: the W7400 is a single-slot card measuring 168 mm in length, 69 mm in height, and 20 mm in width, with no power connectors. The LX PRO is a dual-slot card at 248 mm length, 118 mm height, and 48 mm width, requiring a single 16-pin power connector.

Where Each One Wins

Based strictly on recorded specifications, the Lisuan Tech LX PRO wins in every raw compute and memory metric. Its FP32 throughput of 24.58 TFLOPS, FP16 throughput of 49.15 TFLOPS, pixel rate of 192.0 GPixel/s, texture rate of 384.0 GTexel/s, memory bandwidth of 432.0 GB/s, and 24 GB capacity make it the stronger choice for workloads that scale with these parameters. The LX PRO's 6144 shading units and 192 TMUs further reinforce this position for shader-heavy and texture-heavy rendering tasks.

The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 wins in efficiency and certain interface features. Its 55 W power draw, with no external power connectors and a 250 W suggested PSU, contrasts with the LX PRO's 225 W draw and 550 W suggested PSU. The W7400 occupies a single slot and is considerably smaller at 168 mm length versus 248 mm. It also supports DisplayPort 2.1, which offers newer display signaling compared to the LX PRO's DisplayPort 1.4a. The W7400's Vulkan 1.4 support is one revision ahead of the LX PRO's Vulkan 1.3.

The ray tracing cores in the W7400 provide a hardware feature the LX PRO lacks entirely. For any workload that relies on dedicated ray tracing acceleration, the W7400 has the only recorded implementation. The LX PRO's FP16 2:1 ratio suggests potential advantage in mixed-precision workloads, but the W7400's 1:1 FP16 ratio indicates no such acceleration.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The Lisuan Tech LX PRO records 24.58 TFLOPS FP32, while the AMD Radeon PRO W7400 records 7.885 TFLOPS FP32. The LX PRO is approximately 3.1 times higher.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon PRO W7400 support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the W7400 includes 28 ray tracing cores. The Lisuan Tech LX PRO has no ray tracing cores recorded in the database.

Q: What are the memory capacity and bandwidth differences?

A: The LX PRO has 24 GB of GDDR6 on a 192 bit bus with 432.0 GB/s bandwidth. The W7400 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128 bit bus with 172.8 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card requires more power?

A: The LX PRO has a 225 W TDP and requires a 550 W suggested PSU, plus one 16-pin power connector. The W7400 has a 55 W TDP, a 250 W suggested PSU, and needs no external power connectors.

Q: Do both cards support the same display output standards?

A: No. The W7400 provides 4x DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, while the LX PRO provides 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

Q: Are the API versions different between the two cards?

A: Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and OpenGL 4.6. The W7400 supports Vulkan 1.4, while the LX PRO supports Vulkan 1.3.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to two distinct profiles. The Lisuan Tech LX PRO is the higher-throughput card across every computational and memory metric in the database. Its 24.58 TFLOPS FP32, 49.15 TFLOPS FP16, 432.0 GB/s bandwidth, and 24 GB capacity make it suitable for workloads where raw processing power and large memory pools are the primary constraints. The absence of ray tracing cores does not diminish its recorded lead in conventional rasterization metrics like pixel rate and texture rate.

The AMD Radeon PRO W7400 is the lower-power, more compact option. Its 55 W TDP, single-slot form factor, and lack of external power connectors allow installation in constrained systems. Its DisplayPort 2.1 outputs and Vulkan 1.4 support represent newer interface standards than the LX PRO's DisplayPort 1.4a and Vulkan 1.3. The 28 ray tracing cores give the W7400 a hardware capability the LX PRO cannot match.

Users prioritizing maximum compute throughput, memory capacity, and memory bandwidth should select the Lisuan Tech LX PRO. Users prioritizing power efficiency, physical size, newer display outputs, or ray tracing acceleration should select the AMD Radeon PRO W7400. Both cards are listed as Active production status, and both sit at the 50th percentile versus all GPUs in the database, though neither has benchmark scores to substantiate that percentile.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon PRO W7400 | Lisuan Tech LX PRO |

|---|---|---|

| Chip | Navi 33 | 7G105 |

| Architecture | RDNA 3.0 | TrueGPU |

| Generation | Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) | 7G100 |

| Process Node | 6 nm (TSMC) | 6 nm (TSMC) |

| Transistors | 13,300 million | unknown |

| Die Size | 204 mm² | unknown |

| Transistor Density | 65.2M / mm² | null |

| Base Clock | 330 MHz | null |

| Boost Clock | 1100 MHz | null |

| Memory Clock | 1350 MHz 10.8 Gbps effective | 2250 MHz 18 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 24 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 172.8 GB/s | 432.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1792 | 6144 |

| TMUs | 112 | 192 |

| ROPs | 64 | 96 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 28 | null |

| Pixel Rate | 70.40 GPixel/s | 192.0 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 123.2 GTexel/s | 384.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 7.885 TFLOPS | 24.58 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 7.885 TFLOPS (1:1) | 49.15 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 55 W | 225 W |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 16-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | 550 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 4x DisplayPort 2.1 | 4x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | 1.3 |

| Length | 168 mm 6.6 inches | 248 mm 9.8 inches |

| Height | 69 mm 2.7 inches | 118 mm 4.6 inches |

| Width | 20 mm 0.8 inches | 48 mm 1.9 inches |

| Release Date | 2025-08-02 | 2026-03-16 |