NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 vs Lisuan Tech LX PRO Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data presents a stark contrast between these two GPUs. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 has a complete set of benchmark scores across ten different tests, while the Lisuan Tech LX PRO has no recorded benchmark scores in the database. This means the RTX 5050 wins every measurable performance comparison by default, not because it is necessarily faster in every theoretical metric, but because the LX PRO lacks any empirical data to challenge it.

The RTX 5050 shows its strongest results in synthetic DirectX workloads. Its PassMark DirectX 9 score of 186 and DirectX 11 score of 150 indicate solid legacy API performance, while the DirectX 12 score of 66 suggests a more moderate showing under modern graphics APIs. The Geekbench Vulkan score of 89381 and OpenCL score of 90334 position it as a capable compute and rendering device in cross-platform tests. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2502 provides a modern gaming benchmark reference point.

For the LX PRO, the absence of benchmark data means the database cannot assign it any wins. Its theoretical specifications suggest it was designed for different priorities, but without measured results, the performance picture remains incomplete. The data indicates the LX PRO sits at the 50th percentile versus all GPUs, while the RTX 5050 occupies the 66th percentile, but this comparison relies on the RTX 5050's measured scores and the LX PRO's zero-score average.

The RTX 5050 also wins in terms of software ecosystem support. It lists DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support, while the LX PRO matches DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and OpenGL 4.6 but only reaches Vulkan 1.3. The RTX 5050 includes 20 ray tracing cores and 80 tensor cores, features the LX PRO does not list at all, suggesting the NVIDIA card targets gaming and AI-accelerated workloads more directly.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs diverge fundamentally at the architecture level. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 uses the GB207 chip built on Blackwell 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It packs 16,900 million transistors into a 149 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 113.4M per mm². The Lisuan Tech LX PRO uses the 7G105 chip with TrueGPU architecture, built on a 6 nm process also at TSMC, though its transistor count and die size are listed as unknown.

The compute configurations differ dramatically. The RTX 5050 has 2560 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, and 32 raster output pipelines. The LX PRO counters with 6144 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, which are substantially higher counts across the board. This suggests the LX PRO was designed for raw parallel throughput, with its FP32 performance of 24.58 TFLOPS nearly doubling the RTX 5050's 13.17 TFLOPS. The LX PRO also reaches 49.15 TFLOPS in FP16 with a 2:1 ratio, while the RTX 5050 delivers 13.17 TFLOPS in FP16 at a 1:1 ratio.

Memory subsystems take different approaches. The RTX 5050 uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 320.0 GB/s bandwidth and memory clocked at 2500 MHz (20 Gbps effective). The LX PRO uses 24 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 432.0 GB/s bandwidth and memory at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective). The LX PRO offers three times the capacity and roughly 35% more bandwidth, which would matter for large datasets or high-resolution textures.

The RTX 5050 includes dedicated ray tracing cores (20) and tensor cores (80), features absent from the LX PRO specification. The LX PRO compensates with higher pixel rate (192.0 GPixel/s versus 82.30 GPixel/s) and texture rate (384.0 GTexel/s versus 205.8 GTexel/s). Power requirements also differ, with the RTX 5050 rated at 130 W TDP using a single 8-pin connector and a 300 W suggested PSU, while the LX PRO draws 225 W TDP with a 16-pin connector and a 550 W suggested PSU.

The Verdict

The data points to distinct use cases for each GPU, though only one has empirical evidence. The RTX 5050, with its measured benchmark scores and 66th percentile ranking, delivers verified performance across gaming and compute workloads. Its ray tracing and tensor cores make it suitable for real-time graphics effects and AI-assisted features, and its lower power draw of 130 W means it fits into systems with modest power supplies. The launch MSRP of 249 USD places it in a specific market segment, though pricing discussions remain outside this analysis.

The LX PRO, despite lacking benchmark data, presents itself as a high-throughput compute card. Its 24 GB memory capacity, 6144 shading units, and 24.58 TFLOPS FP32 performance suggest it targets workloads that demand massive parallel processing and large memory footprints. The 225 W TDP and 550 W suggested PSU indicate it requires a more robust power delivery system. Its Vulkan 1.3 support, one version behind the RTX 5050's Vulkan 1.4, may limit some modern cross-platform applications.

For gaming, the RTX 5050 is the only defensible choice based on available data. Its DirectX and Vulkan scores show it handles graphics APIs effectively, and its ray tracing hardware provides features the LX PRO does not specify. For compute-heavy tasks like rendering, simulation, or data processing where memory capacity dominates, the LX PRO's 24 GB and higher shader counts could theoretically excel, but the absence of measured results means this remains speculative.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw FP32 compute performance?

A: The Lisuan Tech LX PRO lists 24.58 TFLOPS FP32, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 delivers 13.17 TFLOPS.

Q: How much memory does each card offer?

A: The RTX 5050 has 8 GB of GDDR6, while the LX PRO has 24 GB of GDDR6.

Q: Does the RTX 5050 support ray tracing?

A: Yes, it includes 20 dedicated ray tracing cores. The LX PRO specification does not list ray tracing cores.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The RTX 5050 provides 320.0 GB/s, and the LX PRO provides 432.0 GB/s.

Q: Which GPU has a higher percentile ranking?

A: The RTX 5050 sits at the 66th percentile versus all GPUs, while the LX PRO sits at the 50th percentile.

Q: What power connector does each card use?

A: The RTX 5050 uses a single 8-pin connector with a 130 W TDP, while the LX PRO uses a single 16-pin connector with a 225 W TDP.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark results between these two GPUs, so the comparison relies on the RTX 5050's individual scores and the LX PRO's absence of data. The RTX 5050 records a PassMark G3D score of 17326, a PassMark GPU Compute score of 9184, and a PassMark G2D score of 1113. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 90334 and Vulkan score of 89381 show near parity between those two APIs. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 result of 2502 provides a modern gaming reference.

The LX PRO has no scores to compare directly. The nearest rivals to the RTX 5050 in the database include the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL with an average score of 21153 and a delta of -0.6%, the AMD Radeon HD 8970M at 21237 with a delta of -1%, the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT at 20713 with a delta of 1.6%, and the NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile at 21379 with a delta of -1.6%. These deltas show the RTX 5050 sits within roughly 2% of these competing cards, indicating it performs in a similar band despite its lower average score of 21035.

The RTX 5050's DirectX legacy scores show variation: PassMark DirectX 9 at 186, DirectX 10 at 103, DirectX 11 at 150, and DirectX 12 at 66. This pattern suggests older APIs run more efficiently relative to the card's capabilities, while DirectX 12 workloads demand more from the hardware. The LX PRO, with no such measurements, cannot be assessed on this axis.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every listed specification. The process node favors the RTX 5050 at 5 nm versus the LX PRO's 6 nm, both from TSMC. The RTX 5050 uses Blackwell 2.0 architecture with the GB207 chip, while the LX PRO uses TrueGPU architecture with the 7G105 chip. The RTX 5050 belongs to the GeForce 50 generation, and the LX PRO belongs to the 7G100 generation.

Core counts show the LX PRO leading: 6144 shading units versus 2560, 192 TMUs versus 80, and 96 ROPs versus 32. The RTX 5050 adds 20 ray tracing cores and 80 tensor cores, which the LX PRO does not specify. Clock rates also differ, with the RTX 5050 listing base 2317 MHz and boost 2572 MHz, while the LX PRO lists no base or boost clocks. Memory clocks favor the RTX 5050 at 2500 MHz versus the LX PRO's 2250 MHz.

Memory capacity and bus width go to the LX PRO: 24 GB versus 8 GB, and 192-bit versus 128-bit. Bandwidth follows at 432.0 GB/s versus 320.0 GB/s. The LX PRO also leads in pixel rate (192.0 GPixel/s versus 82.30) and texture rate (384.0 GTexel/s versus 205.8). FP16 performance shows a major gap, with the LX PRO at 49.15 TFLOPS versus the RTX 5050's 13.17 TFLOPS.

Power and connectivity differ. The RTX 5050 uses 130 W TDP, a dual-slot design, one 8-pin connector, and a 300 W suggested PSU. The LX PRO uses 225 W TDP, also dual-slot, one 16-pin connector, and a 550 W suggested PSU. Bus interfaces diverge with PCIe 5.0 x8 on the RTX 5050 versus PCIe 4.0 x16 on the LX PRO. Display outputs favor the LX PRO with 4x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the RTX 5050 offers 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b. The LX PRO has physical dimensions of 248 mm length, 118 mm height, and 48 mm width, while the RTX 5050 lists no dimensions. API support matches on DirectX 12 Ultimate and OpenGL 4.6, but Vulkan differs at 1.4 for the RTX 5050 and 1.3 for the LX PRO. The RTX 5050 released on 2025-06-30 with a launch MSRP of 249 USD, while the LX PRO released on 2026-03-16 with no launch MSRP listed. Production status for both is Active.