AMD Radeon PRO W7700 vs Lisuan Tech LX 7G100 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a significant performance gap between these two workstation GPUs, though the comparison is limited by available measurements. The AMD Radeon PRO W7700 has two benchmark results in the database: 108,245 in Geekbench OpenCL and 129,706 in Geekbench Vulkan. The Lisuan Tech LX 7G100 has no recorded benchmark scores at the time of data collection, which complicates direct comparison.

What the data does reveal is the AMD card's standing relative to other GPUs in the database. The Radeon PRO W7700 sits in the 95th percentile of all GPUs tracked, with an average benchmark score of 118,976. This places it slightly ahead of the NVIDIA GB10, which averages 117,393 (a 1.3% delta), and the NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation at 117,088 (a 1.6% delta). The margin grows to 4% over the NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB (114,395) and 4.4% over the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile (113,944). These deltas indicate that the W7700 competes directly with upper-midrange NVIDIA workstation offerings, edging them out by small but measurable margins.

The LX 7G100, by contrast, sits at the 50th percentile with an average score of zero, indicating no completed benchmark runs in the database. Its performance profile cannot be verified from recorded measurements. The head-to-head benchmark section in the database contains no direct test results between these two cards, so all conclusions must derive from the individual specifications and the W7700's established benchmark positions.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two cards is substantial. The AMD Radeon PRO W7700 uses the Navi 32 chip built on RDNA 3.0 architecture, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It carries 28,100 million transistors on a 346 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 81.2 million per square millimeter. The Lisuan Tech LX 7G100 uses the 7G106 chip with "TrueGPU" architecture, built on a 6 nm process, also at TSMC. Its transistor count and die size are listed as unknown in the database, which limits die-level analysis.

The shader configuration differs markedly. The W7700 has 3,072 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, and 96 raster output pipelines, along with 48 ray tracing cores. The LX 7G100 lists 6,144 shading units, double the AMD card's count, but also 192 TMUs and 96 ROPs. It lists no ray tracing cores in the database. This doubling of shading units without corresponding increases in TMUs or ROPs suggests a fundamentally different execution architecture despite the same memory type.

Memory subsystems diverge as well. Both use GDDR6 memory, but the W7700 has 16 GB on a 256-bit bus with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the LX 7G100 offers 12 GB on a 192-bit bus with 432.0 GB/s bandwidth. The memory clock is identical at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective speed. The AMD card's wider bus gives it a 33% bandwidth advantage, which matters for large dataset workloads.

Clock behavior is another point of difference. The W7700 has documented base and boost clocks of 1900 MHz and 2600 MHz respectively. The LX 7G100 has no base or boost clock figures recorded in the database. This absence of clock data makes it impossible to calculate real-world frequency behavior for the Lisuan card.

Pixel and texture throughput follow the architectural pattern. The W7700 delivers 249.6 GPixel/s and 499.2 GTexel/s, while the LX 7G100 manages 192.0 GPixel/s and 384.0 GTexel/s. The AMD card leads by 30% in both metrics. Floating point performance shows the AMD card ahead at 31.95 TFLOPS FP32 and 63.90 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1), versus 24.58 TFLOPS FP32 and 49.15 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1) for the Lisuan card, a 30% advantage for AMD in both precisions.

The Verdict

The database measurements point to the AMD Radeon PRO W7700 as the stronger performer on paper and in recorded benchmarks. Its 95th percentile ranking, verified OpenCL and Vulkan scores, and consistent lead over NVIDIA workstation rivals establish a credible performance baseline. The LX 7G100 has no benchmark data whatsoever, placing it at the 50th percentile by default with an average score of zero. Any buyer considering the Lisuan card would be relying on unverified specifications rather than confirmed results.

The W7700 also wins on efficiency metrics. It draws a listed TDP of 190 W versus 225 W for the LX 7G100, and requires a 450 W suggested power supply versus 550 W. The AMD card delivers higher FP32 throughput, higher pixel rates, higher texture rates, and higher memory bandwidth while consuming less power. That combination indicates a more mature and refined implementation.

The LX 7G100 does have two specification advantages. It lists double the shading units (6,144 versus 3,072), and it has a newer release date of June 2026 compared to November 2023 for the W7700. However, without benchmark confirmation, the shading unit advantage cannot be validated as actual performance. The newer release date does not automatically translate to better results, especially given the lack of recorded tests.

For users who require verified performance and established driver support, the Radeon PRO W7700 is the data-backed choice. For those considering the LX 7G100, the database offers no evidence of its real-world capabilities, and its 50th percentile standing reflects that absence of data rather than measured performance.

FAQ

Q: How does the AMD Radeon PRO W7700 compare to the Lisuan Tech LX 7G100 in raw compute performance?

A: The W7700 delivers 31.95 TFLOPS FP32 and 63.90 TFLOPS FP16, while the LX 7G100 delivers 24.58 TFLOPS FP32 and 49.15 TFLOPS FP16. The AMD card leads by roughly 30% in both precision levels.

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The Radeon PRO W7700 has 576.0 GB/s bandwidth from its 16 GB GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus. The LX 7G100 has 432.0 GB/s from 12 GB GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus. The W7700 leads by 33%.

Q: Has the LX 7G100 been benchmarked in the database?

A: No. The LX 7G100 has no recorded benchmark scores, with an average benchmark score of zero and a 50th percentile ranking. The W7700 has scores of 108,245 in Geekbench OpenCL and 129,706 in Geekbench Vulkan.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The W7700 lists a TDP of 190 W with a suggested 450 W power supply. The LX 7G100 lists a TDP of 225 W with a suggested 550 W power supply. Both use a single 8-pin power connector and are dual-slot cards.

Q: How does the W7700 rank against NVIDIA workstation GPUs?

A: The W7700's average score of 118,976 puts it 1.3% ahead of the NVIDIA GB10, 1.6% ahead of the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation, 4% ahead of the Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB, and 4.4% ahead of the RTX A5500 Mobile.

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The LX 7G100 lists 6,144 shading units, exactly double the W7700's 3,072. However, the LX 7G100 also lists no ray tracing cores, while the W7700 has 48.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon PRO W7700 wins in every measured or listed performance category in the database. Its FP32 throughput of 31.95 TFLOPS exceeds the LX 7G100's 24.58 TFLOPS, and its FP16 throughput of 63.90 TFLOPS exceeds the Lisuan card's 49.15 TFLOPS. Pixel rate favors AMD at 249.6 GPixel/s versus 192.0 GPixel/s, as does texture rate at 499.2 GTexel/s versus 384.0 GTexel/s. Memory bandwidth goes to AMD at 576.0 GB/s versus 432.0 GB/s, and the W7700's 16 GB capacity exceeds the LX 7G100's 12 GB.

The W7700 also wins on power efficiency. It achieves higher throughput at 190 W TDP compared to 225 W for the LX 7G100, and requires a smaller suggested power supply (450 W versus 550 W). The AMD card has a smaller physical footprint at 241 mm length and 111 mm height, versus 294 mm length and 120 mm height for the Lisuan card. The LX 7G100 is also thicker at 49 mm width, while the W7700's width is not listed.

Display output favors AMD as well. The W7700 provides four DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, while the LX 7G100 provides four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The newer DisplayPort 2.1 standard supports higher bandwidth for demanding display configurations. Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate and OpenGL 4.6, but the W7700 supports Vulkan 1.4 while the LX 7G100 supports Vulkan 1.3.

The LX 7G100 wins in only two recorded categories: shading unit count (6,144 versus 3,072) and release date (June 2026 versus November 2023). Neither of these advantages is confirmed by benchmark results. The database shows no test where the LX 7G100 outperforms the W7700.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the two cards:

• Chip: Navi 32 (W7700) versus 7G106 (LX 7G100)
• Architecture: RDNA 3.0 versus TrueGPU
• Process node: 5 nm versus 6 nm (both TSMC)
• Transistors: 28,100 million versus unknown
• Die size: 346 mm² versus unknown
• Shading units: 3,072 versus 6,144
• Ray tracing cores: 48 versus none listed
• Base clock: 1900 MHz versus not listed
• Boost clock: 2600 MHz versus not listed
• Memory size: 16 GB versus 12 GB
• Memory bus width: 256-bit versus 192-bit
• Memory bandwidth: 576.0 GB/s versus 432.0 GB/s
• Pixel rate: 249.6 GPixel/s versus 192.0 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 499.2 GTexel/s versus 384.0 GTexel/s
• FP32 performance: 31.95 TFLOPS versus 24.58 TFLOPS
• FP16 performance: 63.90 TFLOPS versus 49.15 TFLOPS
• TDP: 190 W versus 225 W
• Suggested PSU: 450 W versus 550 W
• Display outputs: DisplayPort 2.1 versus DisplayPort 1.4a
• Vulkan support: 1.4 versus 1.3
• Length: 241 mm versus 294 mm
• Height: 111 mm versus 120 mm
• Width: not listed versus 49 mm
• Release date: November 2023 versus June 2026
• Launch MSRP: 999 USD versus not listed
• Production status: not listed versus Active
• Bus interface: PCIe 4.0 x16 on both (same)
• Memory type: GDDR6 on both (same)
• TMUs: 192 on both (same)
• ROPs: 96 on both (same)
• Memory clock: 2250 MHz / 18 Gbps on both (same)
• Slot width: Dual-slot on both (same)
• Power connectors: 1x 8-pin on both (same)
• DirectX: 12 Ultimate (12_2) on both (same)
• OpenGL: 4.6 on both (same)