NVIDIA H200 NVL vs Lisuan Tech LX PRO Comparison

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA H200 NVL and Lisuan Tech LX PRO occupy entirely different corners of the GPU design space, and the architectural gulf between them explains nearly every performance and feature divergence in the database.

The H200 NVL is built on NVIDIA's Hopper architecture, specifically the GH100 chip, manufactured on TSMC's 5 nm process. The die contains 80,000 million transistors packed into an 814 mm² area, yielding a transistor density of 98.3 million transistors per square millimeter. This is a massive, compute-optimized silicon designed for server acceleration. The LX PRO, in contrast, uses the 7G105 chip under Lisuan Tech's "TrueGPU" architecture, fabricated on TSMC's 6 nm process. Transistor counts and die size are not recorded for the LX PRO, but the process node difference alone suggests a less dense, smaller-scale design.

Memory architecture separates the two decisively. The H200 NVL carries 141 GB of HBM3e across a 6144-bit bus, delivering 4.89 TB/s of bandwidth. The LX PRO ships with 24 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, reaching 432.0 GB/s. That is a 10x gap in memory capacity and an 11x gap in bandwidth, both favoring the H200 NVL. The H200's memory clock is listed at 1593 MHz (6.4 Gbps effective), while the LX PRO's memory clock is 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective). The LX PRO's faster per-pin signaling does not compensate for its narrower bus.

Compute resources follow the same pattern. The H200 NVL has 16,896 shading units, 528 TMUs, 24 ROPs, and 528 tensor cores. The LX PRO has 6,144 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, with no tensor cores recorded. The H200's FP32 throughput is 60.32 TFLOPS, and its FP16 throughput is 120.6 TFLOPS (2:1). The LX PRO delivers 24.58 TFLOPS FP32 and 49.15 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1). The H200 NVL leads in raw shading power by a factor of roughly 2.5x in both precision classes.

Pixel and texture rates tell a subtler story. The H200 NVL posts 42.84 GPixel/s and 942.5 GTexel/s. The LX PRO counters with 192.0 GPixel/s and 384.0 GTexel/s. The LX PRO has a 4.5x advantage in pixel fill rate, a consequence of its 96 ROPs versus the H200's 24. The H200 NVL more than doubles the texture rate, reflecting its 528 TMUs against the LX PRO's 192. The two cards are optimized for different bottlenecks.

Feature support also diverges. The H200 NVL has no display outputs, no DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan API support recorded, and relies on an 8-pin EPS power connector with a 600 W TDP and a suggested 1000 W PSU. The LX PRO includes 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3, draws 225 W via a single 16-pin connector, and suggests a 550 W PSU. The H200 NVL is a compute accelerator without graphics output; the LX PRO is a functional graphics card.

Bus interfaces also differ: the H200 NVL uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the LX PRO uses PCIe 4.0 x16. Physical dimensions show the H200 NVL at 267 mm length and 111 mm height, versus the LX PRO at 248 mm length, 118 mm height, and 48 mm width. Both are dual-slot cards.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data in the database contains a single recorded score for the H200 NVL and no recorded scores for the LX PRO, which shapes the analysis. The H200 NVL's Geekbench OpenCL score is 334,891, placing it at the 100th percentile of all GPUs in the database. The LX PRO has no benchmark entries and sits at the 50th percentile by default, with an average score of zero. The head-to-head benchmark list is empty, and the win counts for both items are zero. This lack of direct comparison data means the practical strengths must be inferred from the architectural and specification records.

The H200 NVL wins decisively in memory capacity, memory bandwidth, FP32 throughput, FP16 throughput, texture rate, shading units, TMUs, tensor cores, transistor count, and die size. It is built for large-scale compute workloads: training and inference on massive models, scientific simulation, and data-center acceleration. Its 141 GB HBM3e pool and 4.89 TB/s bandwidth allow it to hold and process datasets that the LX PRO's 24 GB GDDR6 cannot approach. The FP16 performance of 120.6 TFLOPS, combined with tensor cores, positions it for AI workloads where mixed-precision matrix math dominates.

The LX PRO wins in pixel fill rate, display outputs, API support, power efficiency (225 W versus 600 W TDP), and physical compactness (248 mm versus 267 mm length). Its 192.0 GPixel/s pixel rate, 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, and full DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3 support make it a functional workstation or consumer graphics card. The 24 GB GDDR6 frame buffer, while small next to the H200, is adequate for rendering tasks, and the 192-bit bus with 432 GB/s bandwidth supports real-time graphics workloads. The lower 225 W power draw and 550 W suggested PSU mean it can slot into systems without the power infrastructure the H200 requires. The LX PRO's 6 nm process and 24.58 TFLOPS FP32 still outclass many previous-generation server cards, but its role is clearly graphics-first rather than compute-first.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the H200 NVL and the LX PRO. The winsA and winsB counters are both zero, and the headToHeadBenchmarks array is empty. However, the H200 NVL's single benchmark score allows a comparison by proxy against its nearest rivals, which provides context for where it stands.

The H200 NVL's Geekbench OpenCL score of 334,891 sits between several NVIDIA and AMD data-center parts. The NVIDIA B200 scores 345,482, which is 3.1% higher than the H200 NVL. The NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC scores 369,831, 9.4% higher. The AMD Instinct MI300X scores 317,994, which is 5.3% lower than the H200 NVL. The NVIDIA L40S scores 295,763, 13.2% lower. These deltas indicate that the H200 NVL is competitive with the current generation of accelerators, trailing the B200 and B300 but leading the MI300X and L40S by meaningful margins.

The 5.3% advantage over the MI300X is notable because the MI300X is AMD's flagship data-center GPU with a large HBM memory pool. The 13.2% lead over the L40S, a popular inference and rendering card, reinforces the H200 NVL's position as a high-end compute part. The 3.1% gap to the B200 suggests the H200 NVL is not obsolete but rather one step behind NVIDIA's newest Blackwell architecture. The 9.4% deficit to the B300 SXM6 AC shows the performance ceiling has moved upward, yet the H200 NVL remains within striking distance.

For the LX PRO, the absence of benchmark scores means no quantitative comparison to rivals or to the H200 NVL is possible from the recorded data. The 50th percentile ranking is a placeholder, not a measured result. The only inference available is from specifications: the LX PRO's 24.58 TFLOPS FP32 and 49.15 TFLOPS FP16 are roughly 40% and 41% of the H200 NVL's corresponding figures, respectively. Its 432 GB/s bandwidth is about 8.8% of the H200's 4.89 TB/s. These ratios give a rough sense of relative compute and memory performance, but without benchmark runs, the practical impact remains unquantified.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more memory bandwidth?

A: The NVIDIA H200 NVL has 4.89 TB/s of bandwidth from its 6144-bit HBM3e interface. The Lisuan Tech LX PRO has 432.0 GB/s from a 192-bit GDDR6 bus. The H200 NVL leads by a factor of roughly 11x.

Q: Can the LX PRO output to displays?

A: Yes. The LX PRO includes 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The H200 NVL has no display outputs and no graphics API support recorded.

Q: What is the FP16 compute performance of each card?

A: The H200 NVL delivers 120.6 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1), while the LX PRO delivers 49.15 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1). The H200 NVL is roughly 2.5x faster in FP16 throughput.

Q: How does the H200 NVL compare to its nearest rivals in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The H200 NVL scores 334,891. The NVIDIA B200 scores 345,482 (3.1% higher), the NVIDIA B300 SXM6 AC scores 369,831 (9.4% higher), the AMD Instinct MI300X scores 317,994 (5.3% lower), and the NVIDIA L40S scores 295,763 (13.2% lower).

Q: What are the power requirements for each GPU?

A: The H200 NVL has a 600 W TDP and suggests a 1000 W PSU. The LX PRO has a 225 W TDP and suggests a 550 W PSU. The LX PRO uses a single 16-pin power connector, while the H200 NVL uses an 8-pin EPS connector.

Q: Does the LX PRO have tensor cores?

A: No tensor core count is recorded for the LX PRO. The H200 NVL has 528 tensor cores, which support its FP16 compute and AI-oriented workload profile.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every measurable specification. The H200 NVL uses the GH100 chip on a 5 nm TSMC process with 80,000 million transistors on an 814 mm² die. The LX PRO uses the 7G105 chip on a 6 nm TSMC process, with transistor count and die size unknown. The H200 NVL's transistor density is 98.3M per mm²; the LX PRO's is not recorded.

Memory: H200 NVL has 141 GB HBM3e on a 6144-bit bus with 4.89 TB/s bandwidth. LX PRO has 24 GB GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 432.0 GB/s bandwidth. Memory clocks differ: 1593 MHz (6.4 Gbps effective) versus 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective).

Compute: H200 NVL has 16,896 shading units, 528 TMUs, 24 ROPs, and 528 tensor cores. LX PRO has 6,144 shading units, 192 TMUs, 96 ROPs, and no tensor cores recorded. FP32 is 60.32 TFLOPS versus 24.58 TFLOPS. FP16 is 120.6 TFLOPS versus 49.15 TFLOPS. Pixel rate is 42.84 GPixel/s versus 192.0 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 942.5 GTexel/s versus 384.0 GTexel/s.

Power and physical: H200 NVL has a 600 W TDP, 8-pin EPS connector, and 1000 W suggested PSU. LX PRO has a 225 W TDP, single 16-pin connector, and 550 W suggested PSU. The H200 NVL is 267 mm long and 111 mm tall. The LX PRO is 248 mm long, 118 mm tall, and 48 mm wide. Both are dual-slot.

Interfaces and outputs: H200 NVL uses PCIe 5.0 x16 and has no display outputs. LX PRO uses PCIe 4.0 x16 and has 4x DisplayPort 1.4a. The H200 NVL has no DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan support recorded. The LX PRO supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The H200 NVL was released on 2024-11-17, while the LX PRO has a release date of 2026-03-16. The H200 NVL lists predecessors and successors in the Server Ada and Server Blackwell families; the LX PRO has neither recorded.

The Verdict

The data directs a clear split. The NVIDIA H200 NVL is a data-center compute accelerator with 141 GB HBM3e, 4.89 TB/s bandwidth, 60.32 TFLOPS FP32, and 120.6 TFLOPS FP16. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 334,891 places it at the 100th percentile of all GPUs, ahead of the AMD Instinct MI300X by 5.3% and the NVIDIA L40S by 13.2%, though behind the NVIDIA B200 by 3.1% and the B300 SXM6 AC by 9.4%. It has no display outputs and no graphics API support, so it cannot serve as a rendering card. Its 600 W TDP and 1000 W suggested PSU require dedicated power infrastructure. Buyers who need massive memory capacity, high-bandwidth tensor compute, and FP16 throughput for AI or scientific workloads should select the H200 NVL.

The Lisuan Tech LX PRO is a functional graphics card with 24 GB GDDR6, 432 GB/s bandwidth, 24.58 TFLOPS FP32, and 49.15 TFLOPS FP16. Its 192.0 GPixel/s pixel rate is 4.5x higher than the H200 NVL, and its 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs plus DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3 support make it usable for rendering and workstation tasks. The 225 W TDP and 550 W suggested PSU allow installation in standard desktop systems. However, the database contains no benchmark scores for the LX PRO, so its measured performance remains unknown. The 50th percentile ranking is unverified. Users who require display output, graphics API compatibility, and lower power draw should choose the LX PRO, but they should note the absence of recorded performance data.

The H200 NVL outperforms the LX PRO in raw compute, memory capacity, and memory bandwidth by wide margins, while the LX PRO counters with pixel throughput, display connectivity, and power efficiency. Without head-to-head benchmark results, the specification gap is the only reliable comparison tool, and it favors the H200 NVL for compute-heavy workloads and the LX PRO for graphics-oriented use.