NVIDIA L4 vs Lisuan Tech LX MAX Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark entries for the NVIDIA L4 and the Lisuan Tech LX MAX. The L4 has recorded benchmark scores, while the LX MAX has no recorded benchmark results. The L4 achieves an average benchmark score of 131072, placing it in the 95th percentile of all GPUs. The LX MAX shows an average benchmark score of 0 and sits in the 50th percentile, reflecting the absence of any benchmark data.

The L4’s recorded results come from two tests: Geekbench OpenCL at 140838 and Geekbench Vulkan at 121306. These scores position the L4 near several established competitors. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Ti averages 131938, putting the L4 just 0.7% behind. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation averages 135218, a 3.1% gap. The NVIDIA A10M averages 135230, also a 3.1% gap. The AMD Radeon PRO W6800 averages 135396, a 3.2% gap. The L4 trails all four rivals by small margins, between 0.7% and 3.2%, which indicates competitive performance despite the absence of head-to-head tests against the LX MAX.

For the LX MAX, the database lists no benchmarks and no nearest rivals, so direct numerical comparisons cannot be made. The only available point of reference is the L4’s own scores versus its nearest rivals, which show the L4 within a few percentage points of high-end workstation and server GPUs. The LX MAX, lacking any scores, cannot be positioned relative to those results.

Where Each One Wins

The L4 wins on benchmark availability. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 140838 and Vulkan score of 121306 provide measurable performance data. The OpenCL result exceeds the Vulkan result by 19532 points, showing a 16.1% advantage in that specific test. The L4’s position in the 95th percentile confirms it outperforms most recorded GPUs in the database.

The LX MAX wins on raw throughput metrics that favor its architecture. Its pixel rate reaches 192.0 GPixel/s, compared to the L4’s 163.2 GPixel/s, a 17.6% advantage. Its memory bandwidth of 432.0 GB/s exceeds the L4’s 300.1 GB/s by 43.9%. Its FP16 compute of 49.15 TFLOPS doubles its FP32 output due to a 2:1 ratio, whereas the L4 delivers 30.29 TFLOPS in both FP32 and FP16 at a 1:1 ratio. The LX MAX’s FP16 figure is 62.3% higher than the L4’s FP16 output. In FP32, however, the L4 leads with 30.29 TFLOPS versus 24.58 TFLOPS, a 23.2% advantage.

The LX MAX also wins on connector and output flexibility. It provides 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, while the L4 has no display outputs. The LX MAX requires a 550 W suggested PSU and uses a single 16-pin power connector, while the L4 has no power connectors and suggests a 250 W PSU. The LX MAX’s dual-slot design with dimensions of 248 mm by 118 mm by 48 mm contrasts with the L4’s single-slot form factor at 169 mm by 56 mm.

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA L4 uses the AD104 chip built on the Ada Lovelace architecture, manufactured on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It contains 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 121.8 million transistors per mm². The architecture includes 60 ray tracing cores and 240 tensor cores, features absent from the LX MAX’s spec sheet. The L4 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The Lisuan Tech LX MAX uses the 7G106 chip on the TrueGPU architecture, manufactured on a 6 nm process at TSMC. Its transistor count and die size are listed as unknown, and no transistor density is recorded. The LX MAX does not list ray tracing cores or tensor cores. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and OpenGL 4.6, but only Vulkan 1.3, one version behind the L4. The LX MAX’s FP16 compute operates at a 2:1 ratio relative to FP32, indicating a different execution model from the L4’s 1:1 ratio.

The L4’s memory clock runs at 1563 MHz with 12.5 Gbps effective speed, while the LX MAX’s memory clock is 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective speed. The LX MAX’s higher memory clock contributes to its higher bandwidth, 432.0 GB/s versus 300.1 GB/s, despite both using a 192-bit bus and GDDR6 memory type. The process node difference, 5 nm versus 6 nm, affects the L4’s higher transistor density, though the LX MAX’s transistor data is unavailable.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across most recorded specifications. The L4 has 7424 shading units, 240 TMUs, and 80 ROPs. The LX MAX has 6144 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The L4’s shading unit count is 20.8% higher, and its TMU count is 25.0% higher. The LX MAX’s ROP count is 20.0% higher, which aligns with its higher pixel rate of 192.0 GPixel/s versus 163.2 GPixel/s.

Memory capacity differs: the L4 has 24 GB of GDDR6, while the LX MAX has 12 GB. Both use a 192-bit bus, but the bandwidth favors the LX MAX at 432.0 GB/s versus 300.1 GB/s. Clock speeds also differ, with the L4 listing a base clock of 795 MHz and a boost clock of 2040 MHz, while the LX MAX lists no base or boost clocks. The LX MAX’s memory clock of 2250 MHz exceeds the L4’s 1563 MHz.

Power requirements diverge significantly. The L4 has a TDP of 72 W and no power connectors, with a suggested PSU of 250 W. The LX MAX has a TDP of 225 W, uses a single 16-pin connector, and suggests a 550 W PSU. Physical dimensions differ: the L4 is single-slot at 169 mm by 56 mm, while the LX MAX is dual-slot at 248 mm by 118 mm by 48 mm. The L4 has no display outputs; the LX MAX has 4x DisplayPort 1.4a. Release dates differ: the L4 launched on March 20, 2023, while the LX MAX is dated March 16, 2026. The L4 lists Server Ampere as its predecessor and Server Hopper as its successor; the LX MAX lists neither.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA L4 delivers 30.29 TFLOPS in FP32, which is 23.2% higher than the Lisuan Tech LX MAX’s 24.58 TFLOPS.

Q: How does memory bandwidth compare between the two?

A: The LX MAX provides 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which is 43.9% higher than the L4’s 300.1 GB/s. Both use GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus.

Q: Does the LX MAX support ray tracing or tensor cores?

A: The database does not record ray tracing cores or tensor cores for the LX MAX. The L4 includes 60 ray tracing cores and 240 tensor cores.

Q: What is the difference in power consumption?

A: The L4 has a TDP of 72 W with no power connectors, while the LX MAX has a TDP of 225 W and uses a single 16-pin connector. The suggested PSU is 250 W for the L4 and 550 W for the LX MAX.

Q: Which GPU has better benchmark data?

A: The L4 has recorded scores of 140838 in Geekbench OpenCL and 121306 in Geekbench Vulkan, with an average of 131072. The LX MAX has no recorded benchmarks and an average score of 0.

Q: How does the L4 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The L4 trails the GeForce RTX 3090 Ti by 0.7%, the RTX 4000 Ada Generation by 3.1%, the A10M by 3.1%, and the Radeon PRO W6800 by 3.2%, based on average benchmark scores.

The Verdict

The data indicates two very different products. The NVIDIA L4 is a single-slot, low-power accelerator with a 72 W TDP, 24 GB of memory, and no display outputs. Its benchmark scores place it in the 95th percentile, within 0.7% to 3.2% of four established rivals. Its FP32 throughput of 30.29 TFLOPS leads the LX MAX by 23.2%, and its 7424 shading units and 240 TMUs outnumber the LX MAX’s 6144 and 192. The L4 also includes ray tracing and tensor cores, plus Vulkan 1.4 support. The L4 is the only one of the two with recorded benchmark results, making it the measurable choice.

The Lisuan Tech LX MAX is a dual-slot card with a 225 W TDP, 12 GB of memory, and 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. Its strengths are in memory bandwidth, 432.0 GB/s versus 300.1 GB/s, and pixel rate, 192.0 GPixel/s versus 163.2 GPixel/s. Its FP16 output of 49.15 TFLOPS is 62.3% higher than the L4’s 30.29 TFLOPS, though its FP32 output is lower. The LX MAX lacks benchmark scores, ray tracing cores, tensor cores, and Vulkan 1.4 support. Its 6 nm process and unknown transistor counts leave gaps in the architecture picture.

Who should pick which depends on the workload. For FP32 compute, established benchmark validation, and a small footprint with low power draw, the L4 fits. For higher memory bandwidth, faster pixel throughput, FP16 workloads, or direct display connectivity, the LX MAX offers those features on paper. The absence of LX MAX benchmarks means its real-world performance cannot be confirmed from the data, while the L4’s recorded scores and close rival positioning provide a concrete baseline. The L4’s 95th percentile ranking versus the LX MAX’s 50th percentile underscores the measurement gap, but the LX MAX’s higher bandwidth and pixel rates show a different design intent.