NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 SE vs Lisuan Tech LX ULTRA Comparison

The Verdict

The database comparison between the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 SE and the Lisuan Tech LX ULTRA presents a study in contrasting design priorities. The RTX 5090 SE is positioned as a high-throughput, large-die graphics processor built on a 5 nm process at TSMC, with a 750 mm² die containing 92,200 million transistors. The LX ULTRA uses a smaller 6 nm TSMC process, reports no transistor count or die size, and instead focuses on efficiency with a 225 W TDP against the NVIDIA card’s 500 W TDP. Both cards hold a 50th percentile ranking among all GPUs in the database, and neither has recorded benchmark scores or nearest rivals, meaning the analysis relies entirely on architectural and specification differences.

For users prioritizing raw compute throughput, the RTX 5090 SE is the clear choice. Its FP32 performance of 66.94 TFLOPS is more than 2.7 times the LX ULTRA’s 24.58 TFLOPS. The NVIDIA card also delivers a texture rate of 1,045.9 GTexel/s compared to 384.0 GTexel/s, and a pixel rate of 380.3 GPixel/s versus 192.0 GPixel/s. These figures indicate a substantial advantage in fill-rate-limited and shader-heavy workloads.

For users prioritizing power efficiency and physical footprint, the LX ULTRA presents a compelling alternative. It draws less than half the power, requires a 550 W suggested PSU instead of 900 W, and still offers 24 GB of memory, albeit on a narrower 192-bit bus with GDDR6 rather than GDDR7. The LX ULTRA’s FP16 rate of 49.15 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio) exceeds its own FP32 rate, suggesting a design optimized for mixed-precision workloads, while the RTX 5090 SE offers a 1:1 FP16/FP32 ratio at 66.94 TFLOPS.

The data indicates that the RTX 5090 SE is built for maximum compute density and bandwidth, while the LX ULTRA is built for adequate performance at a fraction of the power envelope. There are no recorded wins in head-to-head benchmarks, so the verdict rests on specification interpretation. The RTX 5090 SE leads in every raw throughput metric, while the LX ULTRA leads in power efficiency, memory clock speed (2250 MHz versus 1750 MHz), and display output count (4x DisplayPort 1.4a versus 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b).

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 5090 SE wins in scenarios demanding maximum shader throughput. Its 14,080 shading units, 440 TMUs, and 160 ROPs dwarf the LX ULTRA’s 6,144 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The FP32 gap of 66.94 TFLOPS versus 24.58 TFLOPS means the NVIDIA card processes general-purpose single-precision compute at nearly three times the rate. This translates to advantages in 3D rendering, scientific simulation, and any workload that scales with raw ALU count.

The RTX 5090 SE also wins in memory bandwidth. It uses a 384-bit bus with GDDR7 at 1.34 TB/s, while the LX ULTRA uses a 192-bit bus with GDDR6 at 432.0 GB/s. The NVIDIA card delivers more than three times the memory bandwidth, which is critical for high-resolution textures, large datasets, and memory-bound compute tasks. The RTX 5090 SE also has dedicated ray tracing cores (110) and tensor cores (440), while the LX ULTRA lists no such hardware, indicating a lack of dedicated ray tracing and tensor acceleration.

The LX ULTRA wins in power efficiency. Its 225 W TDP versus 500 W means it consumes 55% less power while still delivering 24 GB of memory. The FP32-per-watt ratio for the LX ULTRA is 0.109 TFLOPS/W (24.58 divided by 225), while the RTX 5090 SE achieves 0.134 TFLOPS/W (66.94 divided by 500). The LX ULTRA’s FP16 performance of 49.15 TFLOPS at 225 W yields 0.218 TFLOPS/W, whereas the RTX 5090 SE’s FP16 rate of 66.94 TFLOPS at 500 W yields 0.134 TFLOPS/W. For FP16 workloads, the LX ULTRA is significantly more efficient.

The LX ULTRA also wins on interface flexibility. It offers four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, while the RTX 5090 SE offers one HDMI 2.1b and three DisplayPort 2.1b. For multi-monitor setups that rely solely on DisplayPort, the LX ULTRA provides one additional output. The LX ULTRA also uses PCIe 4.0 x16, which is backward compatible with older platforms, while the RTX 5090 SE uses PCIe 5.0 x16, which requires a newer platform to take full advantage.

Architecture Differences

The RTX 5090 SE uses the GB202 chip with Blackwell 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The die measures 750 mm² and houses 92,200 million transistors, yielding a transistor density of 122.9 million per square millimeter. The LX ULTRA uses the 7G105 chip with TrueGPU architecture, fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC. Its transistor count and die size are not recorded in the database.

The memory subsystems differ fundamentally. The RTX 5090 SE uses GDDR7 on a 384-bit bus, achieving 1.34 TB/s bandwidth. The LX ULTRA uses GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, achieving 432.0 GB/s. The memory clock also differs: the RTX 5090 SE runs at 1750 MHz (28 Gbps effective), while the LX ULTRA runs at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective). The higher physical clock on the LX ULTRA does not compensate for the narrower bus.

The compute architectures differ in FP16 handling. The RTX 5090 SE provides FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, both at 66.94 TFLOPS. The LX ULTRA provides FP16 at a 2:1 ratio, delivering 49.15 TFLOPS FP16 versus 24.58 TFLOPS FP32. This suggests the LX ULTRA’s shader cores are optimized for packed half-precision operations, while the RTX 5090 SE treats FP16 and FP32 equally.

The RTX 5090 SE includes 110 ray tracing cores and 440 tensor cores; the LX ULTRA lists neither. The RTX 5090 SE supports Vulkan 1.4, while the LX ULTRA supports Vulkan 1.3. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and OpenGL 4.6. The power delivery differs: both use a single 16-pin connector, but the RTX 5090 SE has a 500 W TDP and 900 W suggested PSU, while the LX ULTRA has a 225 W TDP and 550 W suggested PSU.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher raw FP32 compute?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 SE delivers 66.94 TFLOPS FP32, while the Lisuan Tech LX ULTRA delivers 24.58 TFLOPS FP32. The RTX 5090 SE is approximately 2.7 times faster in single-precision throughput.

Q: How do the memory bandwidth figures compare?

A: The RTX 5090 SE uses 24 GB of GDDR7 on a 384-bit bus for 1.34 TB/s bandwidth. The LX ULTRA uses 24 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus for 432.0 GB/s. The NVIDIA card has roughly 3.1 times the memory bandwidth.

Q: Which card is more power-efficient?

A: The LX ULTRA has a 225 W TDP versus the RTX 5090 SE’s 500 W TDP. In FP16 workloads, the LX ULTRA achieves 0.218 TFLOPS/W versus 0.134 TFLOPS/W for the RTX 5090 SE. In FP32 workloads, the RTX 5090 SE achieves 0.134 TFLOPS/W versus 0.109 TFLOPS/W for the LX ULTRA.

Q: Do both cards support the same APIs?

A: Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and OpenGL 4.6. The RTX 5090 SE supports Vulkan 1.4, while the LX ULTRA supports Vulkan 1.3.

Q: What display outputs does each card offer?

A: The RTX 5090 SE has 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b. The LX ULTRA has 4x DisplayPort 1.4a. The LX ULTRA offers one more DisplayPort output, but the RTX 5090 SE supports the newer DisplayPort 2.1b standard.

Q: Which card has dedicated ray tracing and tensor hardware?

A: The RTX 5090 SE includes 110 ray tracing cores and 440 tensor cores. The LX ULTRA lists no ray tracing cores and no tensor cores in the database, indicating it lacks dedicated hardware for these functions.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records no head-to-head benchmark results for these two cards, and neither has individual benchmark scores or nearest rivals. The comparison must therefore be drawn from the recorded specification data, which reveals consistent and substantial differences across every compute metric.

The largest gap appears in FP32 throughput. The RTX 5090 SE’s 66.94 TFLOPS is 42.36 TFLOPS higher than the LX ULTRA’s 24.58 TFLOPS, a difference of 172%. This is the single biggest numerical advantage in the comparison. The texture rate shows a similar pattern: 1,045.9 GTexel/s versus 384.0 GTexel/s, a 661.9 GTexel/s gap. The pixel rate differs by 188.3 GPixel/s, from 380.3 to 192.0 GPixel/s.

Memory bandwidth presents the second-largest relative difference. The RTX 5090 SE’s 1.34 TB/s is more than three times the LX ULTRA’s 432.0 GB/s. This bandwidth advantage is driven by both a wider bus (384-bit versus 192-bit) and a faster memory type (GDDR7 versus GDDR6). The effective memory clock is higher on the RTX 5090 SE at 28 Gbps versus 18 Gbps, despite the physical clock being lower (1750 MHz versus 2250 MHz).

The LX ULTRA’s FP16 rate of 49.15 TFLOPS exceeds its own FP32 rate by a factor of two, while the RTX 5090 SE’s FP16 rate equals its FP32 rate. In absolute terms, the RTX 5090 SE still leads FP16 at 66.94 TFLOPS versus 49.15 TFLOPS, but the LX ULTRA’s FP16 efficiency is notable. The LX ULTRA also leads in memory clock frequency at 2250 MHz versus 1750 MHz, though this does not translate to a bandwidth advantage.

The power figures show the largest gap in the opposite direction. The RTX 5090 SE’s 500 W TDP is 275 W higher than the LX ULTRA’s 225 W TDP. The suggested PSU requirement differs by 350 W, from 900 W to 550 W. Both cards are dual-slot and have nearly identical physical dimensions: the RTX 5090 SE measures 267 mm length, 111 mm height, 40 mm width, while the LX ULTRA measures 268 mm length, 112 mm height, 40 mm width.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every recorded specification category. The RTX 5090 SE uses the GB202 chip with Blackwell 2.0 architecture, while the LX ULTRA uses the 7G105 chip with TrueGPU architecture. The process nodes differ: 5 nm for NVIDIA, 6 nm for Lisuan Tech, both at TSMC. The RTX 5090 SE reports 92,200 million transistors on a 750 mm² die with 122.9 million transistors per mm²; the LX ULTRA reports none of these figures.

The clock specifications differ in memory only. The RTX 5090 SE has base and boost clocks of 1740 MHz and 2377 MHz, while the LX ULTRA lists no base or boost clock. Memory clocks are 1750 MHz (28 Gbps effective) for the RTX 5090 SE and 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) for the LX ULTRA. The memory type differs: GDDR7 versus GDDR6. Both have 24 GB capacity, but the bus width is 384-bit for NVIDIA and 192-bit for Lisuan Tech.

The compute unit counts differ substantially. The RTX 5090 SE has 14,080 shading units, 440 TMUs, 160 ROPs, 110 RT cores, and 440 tensor cores. The LX ULTRA has 6,144 shading units, 192 TMUs, 96 ROPs, and no listed RT or tensor cores. The pixel rate is 380.3 GPixel/s versus 192.0 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 1,045.9 GTexel/s versus 384.0 GTexel/s.

The power and physical specifications show both similarities and differences. The TDP is 500 W for the RTX 5090 SE and 225 W for the LX ULTRA. Both use a single 16-pin power connector and are dual-slot. The suggested PSU is 900 W for NVIDIA and 550 W for Lisuan Tech. The bus interface is PCIe 5.0 x16 for the RTX 5090 SE and PCIe 4.0 x16 for the LX ULTRA. Display outputs are 1x HDMI 2.1b with 3x DisplayPort 2.1b for NVIDIA, and 4x DisplayPort 1.4a for Lisuan Tech.

The API support is identical for DirectX (12 Ultimate, 12_2) and OpenGL (4.6), but differs for Vulkan: 1.4 for the RTX 5090 SE and 1.3 for the LX ULTRA. The release dates differ, with the RTX 5090 SE launching on 2025-12-31 and the LX ULTRA on 2026-03-16. The RTX 5090 SE has a recorded launch MSRP of 1,499 USD, while the LX ULTRA has no launch MSRP in the database. The production status is Active for both.