NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Max-Q vs Lisuan Tech LX PRO Comparison

# NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Max-Q vs Lisuan Tech LX PRO

The database contains two very different mobile-class GPU entries: the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Max-Q, a low-power Ada Lovelace part designed for thin laptops, and the Lisuan Tech LX PRO, a high-power TrueGPU architecture part aimed at desktop-style workloads. Both occupy the 50th percentile among all GPUs in the database, but their specification sheets diverge sharply in power envelope, memory configuration, and compute characteristics. Direct benchmark comparisons are not recorded, so the analysis relies on architectural and specification differences.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 4090 Max-Q wins in scenarios where power efficiency and compact integration are the dominant constraints. Its 80 W TDP, IGP slot width, and lack of power connectors position it for ultraportable systems. The FP32 throughput of 28.31 TFLOPS exceeds the LX PRO’s 24.58 TFLOPS, giving the NVIDIA part a raw single-precision compute advantage despite its lower power draw. The 576.0 GB/s memory bandwidth, enabled by a 256-bit bus and 16 GB of GDDR6, also outperforms the LX PRO’s 432.0 GB/s figure. For workloads that are bandwidth-limited, such as certain rendering or data-processing tasks, the RTX 4090 Max-Q holds a measurable lead.

The Lisuan Tech LX PRO wins in memory capacity and FP16 throughput. Its 24 GB GDDR6 frame buffer is 50% larger than the RTX 4090 Max-Q’s 16 GB, which matters for large model inference or high-resolution texture-heavy scenes. The FP16 rate of 49.15 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio) is substantially higher than the 28.31 TFLOPS (1:1) of the NVIDIA part, indicating a strong advantage in mixed-precision workloads. The LX PRO also has a higher pixel rate at 192.0 GPixel/s versus 163.0 GPixel/s, suggesting an edge in fill-rate-bound situations. Its 225 W TDP and dual-slot design with a 16-pin connector show it is built for sustained, high-throughput operation rather than battery-constrained use.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Max-Q delivers 28.31 TFLOPS, which is 15% higher than the Lisuan Tech LX PRO’s 24.58 TFLOPS.

Q: How do the memory configurations compare?

A: The RTX 4090 Max-Q uses 16 GB GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth. The LX PRO uses 24 GB GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 432.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Does the LX PRO support faster half-precision math?

A: Yes, the LX PRO reaches 49.15 TFLOPS FP16 with a 2:1 ratio, versus the RTX 4090 Max-Q’s 28.31 TFLOPS FP16 at a 1:1 ratio.

Q: What are the power requirements for each?

A: The RTX 4090 Max-Q has an 80 W TDP and requires no power connectors. The LX PRO has a 225 W TDP, uses a single 16-pin connector, and lists a 550 W suggested PSU.

Q: Which GPU is physically larger?

A: The LX PRO is a dual-slot card measuring 248 mm in length, 118 mm in height, and 48 mm in width. The RTX 4090 Max-Q is classified as IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no listed dimensions.

Q: Do both support DirectX 12 Ultimate?

A: Yes, both report DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and OpenGL 4.6 support. The RTX 4090 Max-Q supports Vulkan 1.4, while the LX PRO supports Vulkan 1.3.

Architecture Differences

The RTX 4090 Max-Q uses the AD103 chip on NVIDIA’s Ada Lovelace architecture, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The chip contains 45,900 million transistors on a 379 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 121.1 million per mm². The architecture includes dedicated RT cores (76) and tensor cores (304), which are absent from the LX PRO’s specification sheet. The shading unit count is 9728, with 304 TMUs and 112 ROPs.

The Lisuan Tech LX PRO uses the 7G105 chip on a TrueGPU architecture, fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC. The transistor count and die size are listed as unknown. The architecture omits RT and tensor core counts, instead relying on 6144 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The FP16 ratio of 2:1 indicates a different compute pipeline design compared to the NVIDIA part’s 1:1 FP16/FP32 ratio.

The process node difference (5 nm versus 6 nm) and the transistor density gap (121.1M/mm² versus unknown) suggest that the RTX 4090 Max-Q packs more logic into a smaller area, while the LX PRO’s higher TDP allows for a larger power budget. The RTX 4090 Max-Q supports PCIe 4.0 x16, as does the LX PRO, and both are listed as Active production status.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

No direct head-to-head benchmark results are recorded in the database for these two GPUs. The wins count is zero for both sides, and the benchmark arrays are empty. Consequently, the comparison must be drawn from the specification-derived metrics.

The FP32 performance gap is the most concrete point: the RTX 4090 Max-Q’s 28.31 TFLOPS versus the LX PRO’s 24.58 TFLOPS represents a 15.2% advantage for NVIDIA in single-precision compute. This is a meaningful difference for general-purpose GPU compute, where FP32 is the standard currency.

In FP16, the LX PRO’s 49.15 TFLOPS is 73.6% higher than the RTX 4090 Max-Q’s 28.31 TFLOPS. This is a substantial margin that would show up clearly in half-precision workloads such as training or inference with reduced precision.

On the memory side, the RTX 4090 Max-Q’s 576.0 GB/s bandwidth is 33.3% higher than the LX PRO’s 432.0 GB/s. However, the LX PRO’s 24 GB capacity is 50% larger. The combination of lower bandwidth but higher capacity suggests the LX PRO targets workloads that need large working sets, while the RTX 4090 Max-Q favors faster data movement for smaller datasets.

The pixel rate also differs: 192.0 GPixel/s for the LX PRO versus 163.0 GPixel/s for the RTX 4090 Max-Q, a 17.8% advantage for the LX PRO. The texture rate favors the RTX 4090 Max-Q at 442.3 GTexel/s versus 384.0 GTexel/s, a 15.2% lead.

Specification Differences

| Field | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Max-Q | Lisuan Tech LX PRO |

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

| Chip | AD103 | 7G105 |

| Architecture | Ada Lovelace | TrueGPU |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 6 nm |

| Transistors | 45,900 million | unknown |

| Die Size | 379 mm² | unknown |

| Transistor Density | 121.1M / mm² | null |

| Base Clock | 930 MHz | null |

| Boost Clock | 1455 MHz | null |

| Memory Size | 16 GB | 24 GB |

| Memory Bus | 256 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 576.0 GB/s | 432.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 9728 | 6144 |

| TMUs | 304 | 192 |

| ROPs | 112 | 96 |

| RT Cores | 76 | null |

| Tensor Cores | 304 | null |

| Pixel Rate | 163.0 GPixel/s | 192.0 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 442.3 GTexel/s | 384.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 28.31 TFLOPS | 24.58 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 28.31 TFLOPS (1:1) | 49.15 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 80 W | 225 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Dual-slot |

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

| Suggested PSU | null | 550 W |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 4x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| Vulkan API | 1.4 | 1.3 |

| Release Date | 2023-01-02 | 2026-03-16 |

| Dimensions | null | 248 mm x 118 mm x 48 mm |

The Verdict

The RTX 4090 Max-Q is the choice for systems where power draw and physical space are limited. Its 80 W TDP, IGP form factor, and connector-free design fit within thin-and-light chassis. The data shows it holds a clear lead in FP32 throughput, memory bandwidth, and texture rate, making it suitable for compute tasks that prioritize single-precision speed and data movement over capacity.

The Lisuan Tech LX PRO targets a different profile: desktop-replacement laptops or compact desktops with a 550 W PSU. Its 225 W TDP and dual-slot footprint are substantial, but the payoff is a 24 GB frame buffer and FP16 performance that doubles the RTX 4090 Max-Q’s half-precision output. The higher pixel rate also gives it an edge in rasterization-heavy scenarios.

The release date gap (2023 for the NVIDIA part versus 2026 for the LX PRO) suggests the LX PRO is a newer design, but the RTX 4090 Max-Q remains competitive in core compute metrics. The RTX 4090 Max-Q does not include RT or tensor core counts in the LX PRO’s specification, so any ray tracing or tensor-based workload advantage for the NVIDIA part cannot be quantified from the recorded data.

Ultimately, the RTX 4090 Max-Q wins on efficiency and bandwidth, while the LX PRO wins on capacity and half-precision throughput. The choice depends on whether the workload demands faster data movement or larger memory residency.