AMD Radeon PRO W7900D vs Lisuan Tech LX PRO Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows no direct benchmark scores for either the AMD Radeon PRO W7900D or the Lisuan Tech LX PRO. Both entries carry an average benchmark score of zero and a percentile rank of 50 against all GPUs in the database. Without measurable performance results, the comparison rests entirely on architectural and specification differences rather than empirical test outcomes.

The most significant arithmetic gap appears in raw compute throughput. The AMD Radeon PRO W7900D delivers 52.99 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the Lisuan Tech LX PRO delivers 24.58 TFLOPS. That places the AMD part at more than double the single-precision throughput of the LX PRO, a 115.5% advantage. In FP16 workloads, the AMD card again posts 52.99 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, whereas the LX PRO reaches 49.15 TFLOPS using a 2:1 ratio. The FP16 comparison is far closer, with the AMD part ahead by only 7.8%, and the LX PRO achieves its higher FP16 figure through shader packing rather than dedicated hardware.

Memory bandwidth shows a similar split. The Radeon PRO W7900D has 864.0 GB/s of bandwidth across a 384-bit bus with 48 GB of GDDR6 memory. The LX PRO has 432.0 GB/s across a 192-bit bus with 24 GB of GDDR6 memory. The AMD card therefore offers exactly double the memory capacity, double the bus width, and double the bandwidth. Pixel throughput follows the same pattern: 414.0 GPixel/s for the AMD card versus 192.0 GPixel/s for the LX PRO, a 115.6% advantage. Texture rate stands at 827.9 GTexel/s for the AMD part and 384.0 GTexel/s for the LX PRO, again a 115.6% lead for the Radeon PRO.

The TMU and ROP counts reinforce these ratios. The AMD card has 384 texture mapping units and 192 render output units. The LX PRO has 192 TMUs and 96 ROPs. Both parts list 6144 shading units, which is the only compute-related specification where they match. The AMD card also includes 96 ray tracing cores; the LX PRO lists no ray tracing core count at all.

Clock behavior differs in completeness. The AMD part has a base clock of 1327 MHz and a boost clock of 2156 MHz. The LX PRO has no base or boost clock listed in the database. Memory clocks are identical at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective speed, but the wider bus on the AMD card turns that same memory clock into double the bandwidth.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7900D delivers 52.99 TFLOPS of FP32, while the Lisuan Tech LX PRO delivers 24.58 TFLOPS. The AMD card is 115.5% higher in single-precision throughput.

Q: How do the memory configurations compare?

A: The AMD card has 48 GB of GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus with 864.0 GB/s bandwidth. The LX PRO has 24 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 432.0 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD part doubles capacity, bus width, and bandwidth.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same API levels?

A: Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and OpenGL 4.6. They differ in Vulkan support: the AMD card supports Vulkan 1.4, while the LX PRO supports Vulkan 1.3.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7900D has a 295 W TDP and a suggested PSU of 600 W. The Lisuan Tech LX PRO has a 225 W TDP and a suggested PSU of 550 W.

Q: Which GPU has a higher pixel fillrate?

A: The AMD card achieves 414.0 GPixel/s, while the LX PRO achieves 192.0 GPixel/s. The AMD part has a 115.6% higher pixel throughput.

Q: Are the shading unit counts identical?

A: Yes, both GPUs list 6144 shading units. However, the AMD card pairs those units with 384 TMUs and 192 ROPs, while the LX PRO has 192 TMUs and 96 ROPs.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural lineages. The AMD Radeon PRO W7900D uses the Navi 31 chip built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture with the codename Plum Bonito. It belongs to the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) generation. The Lisuan Tech LX PRO uses a 7G105 chip built on the TrueGPU architecture and belongs to the 7G100 generation, with no codename listed.

Process technology separates them as well. The AMD chip is fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The LX PRO uses a 6 nm process, also at TSMC. Die characteristics differ sharply: the AMD chip has 57,700 million transistors on a 529 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 109.1M per mm². The LX PRO has no transistor count, die size, or density recorded in the database.

Ray tracing support marks a clear architectural split. The AMD card includes 96 dedicated ray tracing cores. The LX PRO lists no ray tracing core count. Both cards expose DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), so the API surface supports ray tracing concepts, but the hardware implementation differs in the AMD part's favor.

FP16 execution also reveals an architectural choice. The AMD card achieves 52.99 TFLOPS in FP16 with a 1:1 ratio relative to FP32, indicating unified execution hardware. The LX PRO reaches 49.15 TFLOPS in FP16 with a 2:1 ratio, indicating that its FP16 throughput comes from packed math on FP32 hardware rather than dedicated FP16 datapaths.

Display output capabilities differ. The AMD card provides 3x DisplayPort 2.1 and 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1, supporting the newer DisplayPort 2.1 standard. The LX PRO provides 4x DisplayPort 1.4a, an older standard. The AMD card uses a triple-slot cooler with 2x 8-pin power connectors. The LX PRO uses a dual-slot cooler with a single 16-pin connector.

Specification Differences

The table below covers only the fields where the two GPUs differ:

| Specification | AMD Radeon PRO W7900D | Lisuan Tech LX PRO |

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

| Chip | Navi 31 | 7G105 |

| Architecture | RDNA 3.0 | TrueGPU |

| Codename | Plum Bonito | None |

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

| 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 | 1327 MHz | Not listed |

| Boost clock | 2156 MHz | Not listed |

| Memory size | 48 GB | 24 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 | 414.0 GPixel/s | 192.0 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 827.9 GTexel/s | 384.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 performance | 52.99 TFLOPS | 24.58 TFLOPS |

| FP16 performance | 52.99 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 support | 1.4 | 1.3 |

| Length | 280 mm (11 inches) | 248 mm (9.8 inches) |

| Height | 110 mm (4.3 inches) | 118 mm (4.6 inches) |

| Width | 51 mm (2 inches) | 48 mm (1.9 inches) |

| Release date | 2025-09-24 | 2026-03-16 |

Identical fields include shading units (6144), memory type (GDDR6), memory clock (2250 MHz, 18 Gbps effective), PCIe interface (PCIe 4.0 x16), DirectX support (12 Ultimate 12_2), OpenGL support (4.6), foundry (TSMC), and production status (Active). The AMD card has a predecessor listed as Radeon Pro Vega; the LX PRO has none. Neither part has a launch MSRP recorded. Both sit at the 50th percentile among all GPUs with an average benchmark score of zero.

The Verdict

The data points to the AMD Radeon PRO W7900D as the stronger GPU across nearly every measured specification. It doubles the LX PRO in memory capacity, bus width, bandwidth, pixel rate, texture rate, TMUs, and ROPs. It carries more than double the FP32 compute throughput and adds 96 ray tracing cores that the LX PRO lacks entirely. It supports the newer DisplayPort 2.1 standard and a higher Vulkan API revision.

The Lisuan Tech LX PRO holds advantages only in physical footprint and power draw. It runs at a 225 W TDP versus 295 W, fits in a dual-slot cooler versus a triple-slot design, and requires a 550 W suggested PSU versus 600 W. It is also shorter at 248 mm versus 280 mm, though taller at 118 mm versus 110 mm. The LX PRO has four DisplayPort outputs versus the AMD card's three full-size ports plus one mini-DisplayPort, which may matter for multi-monitor setups using full-size connectors.

Both cards share 6144 shading units, identical memory clocks, PCIe 4.0 x16 interfaces, and the same DirectX and OpenGL support. Those commonalities do not offset the AMD card's dominance in memory subsystem and rasterization throughput. The FP16 comparison is the only performance metric where the two approach parity, with the AMD card ahead by 7.8%.

The absence of recorded benchmark scores means the verdict rests on specification analysis. On that basis, the AMD Radeon PRO W7900D is the superior compute and rendering device. The LX PRO is the more power-efficient, physically compact alternative.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon PRO W7900D wins in heavy compute scenarios. Its 52.99 TFLOPS FP32 rating doubles the LX PRO's 24.58 TFLOPS, which matters for simulation, scientific computing, and any workload that relies on single-precision math. The 48 GB memory capacity with 864.0 GB/s bandwidth supports larger datasets and higher-resolution textures than the 24 GB, 432.0 GB/s configuration of the LX PRO. The 96 ray tracing cores give the AMD card a hardware path for ray-traced rendering that the LX PRO does not document.

The AMD card also wins in rasterization-bound work. Its 414.0 GPixel/s pixel rate and 827.9 GTexel/s texture rate are 115.6% higher than the LX PRO's corresponding figures. The 384 TMUs and 192 ROPs provide proportionally more geometry and pixel processing headroom. The triple-slot cooler and 600 W suggested PSU reflect the higher power envelope required to sustain those rates.

The Lisuan Tech LX PRO wins in constrained physical environments. Its dual-slot design, 248 mm length, and 225 W TDP allow installation in smaller chassis than the AMD card's 280 mm triple-slot body with a 295 W TDP. The single 16-pin power connector simplifies cabling compared to the AMD card's 2x 8-pin arrangement. The 550 W suggested PSU also places lighter demands on the power supply.

The LX PRO's four full-size DisplayPort 1.4a outputs exceed the AMD card's three full-size plus one mini-DisplayPort arrangement, which benefits setups needing multiple standard connectors without adapters. The LX PRO's 49.15 TFLOPS FP16 throughput, achieved at a 2:1 ratio, brings it within 7.8% of the AMD card's FP16 performance, making it a viable option for FP16-centric workloads where the AMD card's full 1:1 FP16 capability is not required.

For memory-bound tasks, the AMD card is the clear choice: double the capacity, double the bandwidth. For FP32 compute, the AMD card again wins by a wide margin. For compact, lower-power deployments with multiple full-size display outputs, the LX PRO offers a leaner alternative without the AMD card's rasterization and memory advantages.