AMD Radeon PRO W7900 vs Lisuan Tech LX MAX Comparison

# Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database scores place the AMD Radeon PRO W7900 in a distinct performance tier. Its Geekbench OpenCL result of 84,379 and Vulkan score of 137,070 combine to an average benchmark score of 110,725, positioning it at the 94th percentile among all GPUs. The Lisuan Tech LX MAX, by contrast, has no recorded benchmark entries, an average score of 0, and sits at the 50th percentile, indicating that no comparative head-to-head performance data exists in the database for these two cards.

The Radeon PRO W7900's nearest rivals clarify its standing. It sits 1% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II, which averages 109,617, and 3.2% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro W6600X, which averages 107,342. The gap is narrower in the other direction: the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile averages 113,944, putting the W7900 2.8% behind, and the NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB averages 114,395, also 3.2% ahead of the W7900. These deltas show a card clustered tightly within a competitive band, not a runaway leader.

For the Lisuan Tech LX MAX, the absence of benchmark scores or nearest rivals in the database means its measured performance cannot be compared numerically. The hardware specifications do indicate a substantially lower compute ceiling, with FP32 throughput of 24.58 TFLOPS versus 61.32 TFLOPS for the W7900, but without recorded test results, any performance conclusion remains inferential rather than measured.

# Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 wins on every measurable compute metric in the database. Its pixel rate of 479.0 GPixel/s exceeds the LX MAX's 192.0 GPixel/s by a factor of roughly 2.5. Texture rate follows the same pattern: 958.1 GTexel/s versus 384.0 GTexel/s, a 2.5x advantage. FP32 compute, the standard measure for general GPU work, shows 61.32 TFLOPS against 24.58 TFLOPS, again a 2.5x lead. The W7900 also holds a 2x memory bandwidth edge at 864.0 GB/s compared to 432.0 GB/s, and its 48 GB frame buffer quadruples the LX MAX's 12 GB.

The LX MAX counters in two specific areas. Its FP16 throughput of 49.15 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio exceeds its own FP32 rate, whereas the W7900 delivers 61.32 TFLOPS for FP16 at a 1:1 ratio, meaning the W7900 still produces higher absolute FP16 numbers but does not gain the same relative uplift. The LX MAX also uses a dual-slot cooler versus the W7900's triple-slot design, and its 225 W TDP is lower than the W7900's 295 W, suggesting less demanding power delivery requirements.

Use-case splits follow these numbers. Workloads that depend on FP32 compute, large memory capacity, or high memory bandwidth favor the W7900 decisively. Workloads constrained by physical space or power envelope, where the LX MAX's shorter 248 mm length and 225 W TDP matter, favor the LX MAX, though the database provides no benchmark evidence for its actual throughput in those scenarios.

# Architecture Differences

The two cards represent different architectural generations. The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 uses the Navi 31 chip on the RDNA 3.0 architecture, with the codename Plum Bonito and a generation label of Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series). It is built on a 5 nm process at TSMC, containing 57,700 million transistors on a 529 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 109.1M per mm². The LX MAX uses the 7G106 chip on the TrueGPU architecture, with a generation label of 7G100, built on a 6 nm process at the same foundry, TSMC. Its transistor count and die size are recorded as unknown.

The RDNA 3.0 design pairs 6,144 shading units with 384 TMUs and 192 ROPs, and it includes 96 ray tracing cores. The TrueGPU design also has 6,144 shading units, but halves the TMUs to 192 and the ROPs to 96, and it lists no ray tracing cores in the database. This structural difference explains the large gap in pixel and texture rates: the W7900's higher ROP and TMU counts allow it to process more fragments and texels per clock.

Memory architecture diverges as well. The W7900 uses a 384-bit memory bus with 48 GB of GDDR6, while the LX MAX uses a 192-bit bus with 12 GB of GDDR6. Both run memory at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective, but the wider bus gives the W7900 its 864.0 GB/s bandwidth versus the LX MAX's 432.0 GB/s. The W7900 also supports DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, including a mini-DisplayPort 2.1, whereas the LX MAX uses four DisplayPort 1.4a connectors.

API support shows minor differences. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and OpenGL 4.6. The W7900 lists Vulkan 1.4, while the LX MAX lists Vulkan 1.3. The W7900's FP16 execution runs at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, indicating full-rate half-precision, while the LX MAX's FP16 runs at a 2:1 ratio, indicating it doubles FP32 throughput for half-precision workloads.

# Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon PRO W7900 | Lisuan Tech LX MAX |

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

| Chip | Navi 31 | 7G106 |

| Architecture | RDNA 3.0 | TrueGPU |

| Process node | 5 nm | 6 nm |

| Transistors | 57,700 million | unknown |

| Die size | 529 mm² | unknown |

| Transistor density | 109.1M / mm² | not listed |

| Base clock | 1760 MHz | not listed |

| Boost clock | 2495 MHz | not listed |

| Memory size | 48 GB | 12 GB |

| Memory bus width | 384 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory bandwidth | 864.0 GB/s | 432.0 GB/s |

| TMUs | 384 | 192 |

| ROPs | 192 | 96 |

| Ray tracing cores | 96 | not listed |

| Pixel rate | 479.0 GPixel/s | 192.0 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 958.1 GTexel/s | 384.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 61.32 TFLOPS | 24.58 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 61.32 TFLOPS (1:1) | 49.15 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 295 W | 225 W |

| Slot width | Triple-slot | Dual-slot |

| Power connectors | 2x 8-pin | 1x 16-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 600 W | 550 W |

| Display outputs | 3x DisplayPort 2.1, 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1 | 4x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| Vulkan version | 1.4 | 1.3 |

| Length | 280 mm | 248 mm |

| Height | 110 mm | 118 mm |

| Width | 51 mm | 48 mm |

| Release date | 2023-05-25 | 2026-03-16 |

| Launch MSRP | 3,999 USD | not listed |

Shading units are identical at 6,144, and both cards use GDDR6 memory, PCIe 4.0 x16 interfaces, and TSMC as the foundry. The W7900's predecessor is listed as Radeon Pro Vega, while the LX MAX has no predecessor or successor entries.

# FAQ

Q: How much faster is the AMD Radeon PRO W7900 in FP32 compute?

A: The W7900 delivers 61.32 TFLOPS, which is 2.5 times the LX MAX's 24.58 TFLOPS. The same 2.5x ratio applies to pixel rate (479.0 GPixel/s versus 192.0 GPixel/s) and texture rate (958.1 GTexel/s versus 384.0 GTexel/s).

Q: Does the Lisuan Tech LX MAX have any performance advantage in the database?

A: No benchmark scores are recorded for the LX MAX, so no measured performance advantage exists in the database. Its FP16 rate of 49.15 TFLOPS is higher than its own FP32 rate, but still below the W7900's FP16 output of 61.32 TFLOPS.

Q: What memory capacity and bandwidth does each card provide?

A: The W7900 has 48 GB of GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus, providing 864.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The LX MAX has 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, providing 432.0 GB/s, exactly half the bandwidth.

Q: How does the W7900 compare to its nearest rivals in average benchmark score?

A: The W7900 averages 110,725. It is 1% ahead of the Radeon Pro Vega II (109,617) and 3.2% ahead of the Radeon Pro W6600X (107,342). It trails the RTX A5500 Mobile (113,944) by 2.8% and the Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB (114,395) by 3.2%.

Q: Are there differences in physical dimensions and power requirements?

A: The W7900 measures 280 mm in length, 110 mm in height, and 51 mm in width, using a triple-slot cooler with a 295 W TDP and 2x 8-pin connectors. The LX MAX measures 248 mm by 118 mm by 48 mm, uses a dual-slot cooler with a 225 W TDP and 1x 16-pin connector, and suggests a 550 W PSU versus the W7900's 600 W suggestion.

Q: Which card has newer display outputs and API support?

A: The W7900 supports DisplayPort 2.1 (three full-size ports and one mini-DisplayPort) and Vulkan 1.4. The LX MAX supports DisplayPort 1.4a across four ports and Vulkan 1.3. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and OpenGL 4.6.