AMD Radeon PRO W7700 vs Lisuan Tech LX MAX Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data presents an unusual comparison. The AMD Radeon PRO W7700 has two benchmark entries in the database, while the Lisuan Tech LX MAX has no recorded benchmark scores at all. This immediately shapes the analysis: the W7700 can be positioned against its nearest rivals, but the LX MAX cannot be quantified in the same way.

For the AMD Radeon PRO W7700, the benchmark results show a Geekbench OpenCL score of 108,245 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 129,706. The average benchmark score sits at 118,976, placing it in the 95th percentile of all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals, based on average score, are the NVIDIA GB10 at 117,393 (1.3% behind), the NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation at 117,088 (1.6% behind), the NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB at 114,395 (4% behind), and the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile at 113,944 (4.4% behind). This data indicates the W7700 leads its closest competitors by a narrow margin, with the gap widening slightly as you move down the list.

The Lisuan Tech LX MAX, in contrast, has an average benchmark score of 0 and sits in the 50th percentile. There are no recorded wins for either product in head-to-head comparisons, as the head-to-head benchmark field is empty. The LX MAX cannot claim a single measured victory in the database, and neither can the W7700, because no direct comparative tests exist. This means the "wins" split is effectively undefined by the data. The W7700 wins where benchmarks exist, and the LX MAX has no data to contest that position.

FAQ

Q: What benchmark scores are recorded for the AMD Radeon PRO W7700?

A: The database shows a Geekbench OpenCL score of 108,245 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 129,706, producing an average benchmark score of 118,976.

Q: Does the Lisuan Tech LX MAX have any benchmark scores?

A: No. The LX MAX has an empty benchmarks array, an average benchmark score of 0, and a percentile rank of 50 among all GPUs in the database.

Q: How does the W7700 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The W7700 leads the NVIDIA GB10 by 1.3%, the NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation by 1.6%, the NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB by 4%, and the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile by 4.4% based on average benchmark scores.

Q: What are the memory configurations of the two cards?

A: The W7700 has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth. The LX MAX has 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus with 432.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card has a higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The W7700 delivers 31.95 TFLOPS FP32, while the LX MAX delivers 24.58 TFLOPS FP32. The W7700 also leads in FP16 with 63.90 TFLOPS versus 49.15 TFLOPS for the LX MAX.

Q: What is the power consumption for each card?

A: The W7700 has a TDP of 190 W with a suggested PSU of 450 W. The LX MAX has a TDP of 225 W with a suggested PSU of 550 W.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark field in the database is empty, meaning there are no direct comparative test results between the AMD Radeon PRO W7700 and the Lisuan Tech LX MAX. This absence of data forces the analysis to rely on the individual benchmark entries and the specification sheets.

For the W7700, the Geekbench Vulkan score of 129,706 is notably higher than the OpenCL score of 108,245, a difference of roughly 19.8%. This suggests the architecture performs better under Vulkan workloads, which may reflect driver optimization or the RDNA 3.0 design's strengths in that API. The Vulkan score also exceeds the average of its nearest rivals by a meaningful margin: the closest rival, the NVIDIA GB10, averages 117,393, which is 9.5% below the W7700's Vulkan result.

The LX MAX has no scores, so no comparative statement can be made about its performance in any API. The database records a pixel rate of 192.0 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 384.0 GTexel/s for the LX MAX, but these are theoretical specifications, not measured benchmark outcomes. The W7700, by contrast, shows a pixel rate of 249.6 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 499.2 GTexel/s, both higher than the LX MAX's figures. Those theoretical rates align with the W7700's benchmark presence, but they do not constitute head-to-head wins.

The only meaningful "biggest win" in this comparison is the W7700's existence in the benchmark database at all. Its average score of 118,976 places it above every listed rival, and its percentile rank of 95 indicates strong overall positioning. The LX MAX, with no scores, cannot be ranked against it. The data does not support a claim that either product outperforms the other in a direct test, because no such test was recorded.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every measurable specification. Memory capacity is a clear split: the W7700 carries 16 GB of GDDR6, while the LX MAX carries 12 GB. The bus width also differs, with the W7700 using a 256-bit interface versus 192-bit on the LX MAX. Memory bandwidth follows, with the W7700 at 576.0 GB/s and the LX MAX at 432.0 GB/s. Both use GDDR6 memory, and both list the same memory clock of 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective, so the bandwidth gap stems from the bus width difference.

Compute resources show an interesting inversion. The W7700 has 3,072 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The LX MAX has 6,144 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The LX MAX doubles the shading unit count yet produces lower theoretical throughput: 24.58 TFLOPS FP32 versus 31.95 TFLOPS for the W7700, and 49.15 TFLOPS FP16 versus 63.90 TFLOPS. The W7700 also has 48 ray tracing cores, while the LX MAX lists none. The pixel rate favors the W7700 at 249.6 GPixel/s versus 192.0 GPixel/s, and the texture rate favors it as well at 499.2 GTexel/s versus 384.0 GTexel/s.

Power and physical dimensions diverge. The W7700 has a TDP of 190 W with a single 8-pin power connector and a suggested PSU of 450 W. The LX MAX has a TDP of 225 W with a single 16-pin power connector and a suggested PSU of 550 W. The LX MAX is slightly longer at 248 mm versus 241 mm, taller at 118 mm versus 111 mm, and has a recorded width of 48 mm, while the W7700's width is not listed. Both are dual-slot cards and use PCIe 4.0 x16.

Display outputs differ: the W7700 offers 4x DisplayPort 2.1, while the LX MAX offers 4x DisplayPort 1.4a. The API support shows the W7700 supports Vulkan 1.4, while the LX MAX supports Vulkan 1.3. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and OpenGL 4.6. The W7700 has a launch MSRP of 999 USD, a release date of 2023-11-12, and no production status listed. The LX MAX has no launch MSRP, a release date of 2026-03-16, and a production status of Active.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon PRO W7700 uses the Navi 32 chip built on RDNA 3.0 architecture, with the codename Wheat Nas and a generation label of Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series). It is fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC, containing 28,100 million transistors on a 346 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 81.2M per mm². The architecture includes 48 ray tracing cores, a feature the LX MAX does not list.

The Lisuan Tech LX MAX uses the 7G106 chip on what is labeled TrueGPU architecture, with a generation label of 7G100 and no codename. It is fabricated on a 6 nm process, also at TSMC, but the transistor count and die size are listed as unknown, with no transistor density recorded. The LX MAX lists no ray tracing cores, and its shading unit count of 6,144 is double the W7700's 3,072, yet its FP32 throughput is lower. This suggests the TrueGPU architecture may organize its compute units differently, or the clock speeds (which are unlisted for the LX MAX) may be substantially lower than the W7700's base clock of 1900 MHz and boost clock of 2600 MHz.

The W7700's predecessor is listed as Radeon Pro Vega, and it has no successor. The LX MAX has no predecessor or successor in the database. Both cards are manufactured by different entities: AMD for the W7700, and an unknown manufacturer for the LX MAX. The W7700's FP16 performance is exactly double its FP32, indicating a 2:1 ratio typical of RDNA 3.0. The LX MAX also shows a 2:1 ratio (49.15 TFLOPS FP16 versus 24.58 TFLOPS FP32), which suggests a similar compute structure despite the different architecture name.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear choice for users who rely on measured performance: the AMD Radeon PRO W7700. It has two benchmark scores in the database, an average score of 118,976, and a 95th percentile rank. Its nearest rivals trail by margins from 1.3% to 4.4%, which confirms it sits at the top of its immediate competitive set. The W7700 also leads in memory capacity (16 GB versus 12 GB), bandwidth (576.0 GB/s versus 432.0 GB/s), FP32 throughput (31.95 TFLOPS versus 24.58 TFLOPS), and ray tracing capability (48 cores versus none). It does so at a lower TDP of 190 W versus 225 W, which suggests better efficiency per watt based on the recorded compute figures.

The Lisuan Tech LX MAX has no benchmark results, no average score, and a 50th percentile rank. Its higher shading unit count of 6,144 does not translate to higher recorded throughput, and its lack of ray tracing cores limits feature parity. The LX MAX does offer a newer release date of 2026-03-16 and an Active production status, which may indicate availability, but the database contains no performance evidence to recommend it. Its theoretical rates of 192.0 GPixel/s and 384.0 GTexel/s fall below the W7700's 249.6 GPixel/s and 499.2 GTexel/s.

For a user prioritizing measured performance, the W7700 is the only option with supporting data. For a user considering the LX MAX, the database offers no benchmark evidence, only specifications. The W7700's launch MSRP of 999 USD provides a reference point, while the LX MAX has none. The verdict, strictly from the data, is that the W7700 is the verified performer, and the LX MAX remains an unquantified alternative.