NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation vs Lisuan Tech LX MAX Comparison

The NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation and the Lisuan Tech LX MAX are two very different interpretations of a 12 GB graphics card. The RTX 3500 is a mobile workstation part, designed for constrained power envelopes, while the LX MAX is a large, dual-slot desktop card with a much higher power draw. The data shows two devices that share a memory configuration but diverge sharply on almost every other measured specification, leading to a clear use-case split.

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data indicates a complete separation of strengths. The Lisuan Tech LX MAX is the raw performance leader across every computational metric listed in the database. Its FP32 throughput of 24.58 TFLOPS is significantly higher than the RTX 3500's 15.82 TFLOPS, a 55% advantage in raw single-precision compute. The LX MAX also delivers a higher pixel rate of 192.0 GPixel/s compared to 98.88 GPixel/s, and a texture rate of 384.0 GTexel/s versus 247.2 GTexel/s. For any workload that is bound by shading, texturing, or fill rate, the LX MAX is the definitive choice based on the numbers.

The NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile, however, wins in the category of efficiency and physical integration. Its thermal design power is 100 W, compared to the LX MAX's 225 W. It is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) package with no power connectors, meaning it is designed to be soldered onto a motherboard. The LX MAX is a dual-slot card requiring a 16-pin power connector and a 550 W suggested power supply. The RTX 3500 also carries the advantage of a newer API feature set, supporting Vulkan 1.4, while the LX MAX is listed with Vulkan 1.3.

The use-case split is therefore stark. The RTX 3500 Mobile wins in scenarios where power draw, physical space, and portability are the primary constraints, such as in a thin-and-light mobile workstation. The LX MAX wins in any scenario where raw performance is the sole criterion and the system has the power supply and chassis space to accommodate it.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures. The NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile uses the AD104 chip, based on the Ada Lovelace architecture, and is fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The LX MAX uses a chip designated as 7G106, based on an architecture called "TrueGPU," and is fabricated on a 6 nm process, also at TSMC. The RTX 3500's process node is smaller, which is consistent with its much lower 100 W power draw.

The transistor count is a major divergence. The RTX 3500 integrates 35,800 million transistors on a die size of 294 mm², giving a transistor density of 121.8 million per square millimeter. The LX MAX's transistor count and die size are not recorded in the database. This missing data prevents a direct comparison of design complexity, but the difference in power consumption suggests a very different design philosophy.

The memory subsystems are identical in capacity and type. Both cards use 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, yielding the same 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock is also the same at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective. This is a point of parity that cannot be ignored. The LX MAX's raw compute advantage is not accompanied by a bandwidth advantage, meaning that memory-bound workloads will see less of a gap than compute-bound ones.

The execution resources differ significantly. The RTX 3500 has 5120 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, and 64 raster output units. The LX MAX has 6144 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The LX MAX has 20% more shading units, 20% more TMUs, and 50% more ROPs. The RTX 3500 does include dedicated hardware for ray tracing and tensor operations, with 40 RT cores and 160 tensor cores. The LX MAX's record has null values for RT cores and tensor cores, indicating these are either not present or not disclosed.

The FP16 performance is another clear architectural difference. The RTX 3500 achieves 15.82 TFLOPS FP16 with a 1:1 ratio to FP32, meaning it processes both at the same rate. The LX MAX achieves 49.15 TFLOPS FP16 with a 2:1 ratio, meaning its FP16 throughput is double its FP32 throughput. This suggests the LX MAX has dedicated hardware for half-precision compute, whereas the RTX 3500 treats FP16 and FP32 with equal throughput.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database currently has no recorded head-to-head benchmark results, and neither card has an average benchmark score or any specific benchmark entries. The winsA and winsB fields are both zero. The analysis must therefore rely entirely on the theoretical specifications and computed rates.

The largest recorded win for the LX MAX is in FP32 compute. At 24.58 TFLOPS versus 15.82 TFLOPS, the LX MAX is ahead by 8.76 TFLOPS, which is a 55% advantage. This is the single largest delta in the entire comparison. For a workload that scales perfectly with shader throughput, this would translate directly into a 55% faster processing time.

The second-largest win is in pixel fill rate. The LX MAX's 192.0 GPixel/s is roughly 94% higher than the RTX 3500's 98.88 GPixel/s. This is an even larger relative gap than the FP32 difference, driven by the LX MAX's 96 ROPs compared to 64 ROPs. Rasterization-bound tasks, such as high-resolution rendering with heavy overdraw, would favor the LX MAX substantially.

The texture rate shows a similar pattern. The LX MAX delivers 384.0 GTexel/s against the RTX 3500's 247.2 GTexel/s, a 55% advantage. This aligns almost exactly with the FP32 difference, which is expected since both are proportional to the number of TMUs and shading units.

The FP16 comparison is the most extreme. At 49.15 TFLOPS, the LX MAX is more than three times the RTX 3500's 15.82 TFLOPS, a 210% advantage. This is the single biggest recorded gap in the entire dataset. Any workload that can use FP16 arithmetic, such as certain AI inference tasks or image processing, would see a dramatic benefit on the LX MAX.

The RTX 3500 has no recorded wins in any computational metric. Its only advantages are in power draw (100 W vs 225 W), API support (Vulkan 1.4 vs 1.3), and physical form factor (IGP vs dual-slot). These are not benchmark scores, but they are decisive for certain deployment scenarios.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the two cards, with all figures taken directly from the database records.

• Process Node: 5 nm (RTX 3500) vs 6 nm (LX MAX)
• Transistors: 35,800 million (RTX 3500) vs unknown (LX MAX)
• Die Size: 294 mm² (RTX 3500) vs unknown (LX MAX)
• Transistor Density: 121.8M / mm² (RTX 3500) vs null (LX MAX)
• Base Clock: 1110 MHz (RTX 3500) vs null (LX MAX)
• Boost Clock: 1545 MHz (RTX 3500) vs null (LX MAX)
• Shading Units: 5120 (RTX 3500) vs 6144 (LX MAX)
• TMUs: 160 (RTX 3500) vs 192 (LX MAX)
• ROPs: 64 (RTX 3500) vs 96 (LX MAX)
• RT Cores: 40 (RTX 3500) vs null (LX MAX)
• Tensor Cores: 160 (RTX 3500) vs null (LX MAX)
• Pixel Rate: 98.88 GPixel/s (RTX 3500) vs 192.0 GPixel/s (LX MAX)
• Texture Rate: 247.2 GTexel/s (RTX 3500) vs 384.0 GTexel/s (LX MAX)
• FP32: 15.82 TFLOPS (RTX 3500) vs 24.58 TFLOPS (LX MAX)
• FP16: 15.82 TFLOPS (RTX 3500) vs 49.15 TFLOPS (LX MAX)
• TDP: 100 W (RTX 3500) vs 225 W (LX MAX)
• Slot Width: IGP (RTX 3500) vs Dual-slot (LX MAX)
• Power Connectors: None (RTX 3500) vs 1x 16-pin (LX MAX)
• Suggested PSU: null (RTX 3500) vs 550 W (LX MAX)
• Vulkan Support: 1.4 (RTX 3500) vs 1.3 (LX MAX)
• Display Outputs: Portable Device Dependent (RTX 3500) vs 4x DisplayPort 1.4a (LX MAX)
• Dimensions: null (RTX 3500) vs 248 mm length, 118 mm height, 48 mm width (LX MAX)
• Release Date: 2023-03-20 (RTX 3500) vs 2026-03-16 (LX MAX)

The memory specifications are identical: 12 GB GDDR6, 192-bit bus, 432.0 GB/s bandwidth, and 18 Gbps effective memory speed. Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate and OpenGL 4.6. Both use PCIe 4.0 x16. Neither card has a recorded launch MSRP.

FAQ

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: They are equal. Both the NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile and the Lisuan Tech LX MAX use 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, delivering 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: What is the FP32 performance difference?

A: The LX MAX has 24.58 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the RTX 3500 has 15.82 TFLOPS. The LX MAX is 55% ahead in this metric.

Q: Can the RTX 3500 Mobile be installed in a desktop tower?

A: The data lists the RTX 3500 as an IGP with no power connectors and display outputs that are "Portable Device Dependent." It is designed for mobile integration, not standard desktop slots.

Q: Does the LX MAX support hardware ray tracing?

A: The database lists null values for RT cores and tensor cores on the LX MAX. The RTX 3500 has 40 RT cores and 160 tensor cores. The LX MAX's ray tracing capabilities are not recorded.

Q: Which card has a higher thermal design power?

A: The LX MAX has a TDP of 225 W, which is 125 W higher than the RTX 3500's 100 W. The LX MAX also requires a 16-pin power connector and a 550 W suggested power supply.

Q: Which card is more recent?

A: The LX MAX has a release date of 2026-03-16, while the RTX 3500 was released on 2023-03-20. The LX MAX is the newer product by approximately three years.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to a clear conclusion. The Lisuan Tech LX MAX is the superior choice for any application that prioritizes raw computational throughput. Its FP32 rate is 55% higher, its pixel fill rate is 94% higher, and its FP16 rate is 210% higher than the RTX 3500. It also has a significantly higher texture rate. For rendering, simulation, or compute workloads that are not power-limited, the LX MAX is the stronger card.

The NVIDIA RTX 3500 Mobile Ada Generation is the appropriate choice for systems where power consumption and physical footprint are critical. Its 100 W TDP, IGP form factor, and lack of power connectors make it suitable for mobile workstations where a 225 W card with a dual-slot cooler and a 16-pin connector is not feasible. The RTX 3500 also has dedicated RT cores and tensor cores, which the LX MAX does not list, and it supports a newer Vulkan version.

The identical memory configuration means that neither card has a bandwidth advantage. Any performance difference in memory-bound tasks will be smaller than the compute differences suggest. The LX MAX's advantage in raw throughput is substantial, but it comes with a power draw more than double that of the RTX 3500. The choice between these two cards is not about which is better overall, but which constraint matters more: performance or power envelope.