NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell vs Lisuan Tech LX ULTRA Comparison

FAQ

Q: What is the core specification difference between the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell and the Lisuan Tech LX ULTRA?

A: The RTX PRO 6000 uses a GB202 chip on a 5 nm process, while the LX ULTRA uses a 7G105 chip on a 6 nm process. The NVIDIA card has 96 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 512-bit bus, whereas the Lisuan card has 24 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus.

Q: Which card has higher raw compute throughput?

A: The RTX PRO 6000 delivers 126.0 TFLOPS FP32 and 126.0 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1 ratio). The LX ULTRA delivers 24.58 TFLOPS FP32 and 49.15 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1 ratio). The NVIDIA card is substantially ahead in both metrics.

Q: What are the memory bandwidth figures for each card?

A: The RTX PRO 6000 has 1.79 TB/s bandwidth, while the LX ULTRA has 432.0 GB/s. The NVIDIA card operates memory at 1750 MHz (28 Gbps effective), and the Lisuan card runs at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective).

Q: How do the power requirements differ?

A: The RTX PRO 6000 has a 600 W TDP and suggests a 1000 W PSU. The LX ULTRA has a 225 W TDP and suggests a 550 W PSU. Both use a single 16-pin power connector and are dual-slot cards.

Q: What display outputs are available on each?

A: The RTX PRO 6000 provides 4x DisplayPort 2.1b. The LX ULTRA provides 4x DisplayPort 1.4a. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and OpenGL 4.6; Vulkan support is 1.4 on NVIDIA and 1.3 on Lisuan.

Q: What benchmark data exists for these cards?

A: The database records a single 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 16408 for the RTX PRO 6000, placing it at the 59th percentile among all GPUs. The LX ULTRA has no recorded benchmark scores and sits at the 50th percentile.

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell is built on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture with a GB202 chip, fabricated on TSMC's 5 nm process. The die measures 750 mm² and contains 92,200 million transistors, yielding a density of 122.9 million transistors per square millimeter. This is a large, high-complexity design with 24,064 shading units, 752 TMUs, 192 ROPs, 188 RT cores, and 752 tensor cores. The architecture supports a 1:1 FP16 to FP32 ratio, meaning both precision modes run at 126.0 TFLOPS.

The Lisuan Tech LX ULTRA uses the TrueGPU architecture with a 7G105 chip on a 6 nm TSMC process. The die size and transistor count are not recorded in the database. It has 6,144 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, with no RT cores or tensor cores listed. The FP16 performance runs at a 2:1 ratio relative to FP32, giving 49.15 TFLOPS FP16 versus 24.58 TFLOPS FP32. This indicates a different compute design that prioritizes reduced precision throughput rather than maintaining a 1:1 ratio.

Memory architecture diverges significantly. The RTX PRO 6000 uses 96 GB of GDDR7 across a 512-bit bus, producing 1.79 TB/s bandwidth. The LX ULTRA uses 24 GB of GDDR6 across a 192-bit bus, producing 432.0 GB/s. The NVIDIA card also uses a PCIe 5.0 x16 interface, while the Lisuan card uses PCIe 4.0 x16. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and OpenGL 4.6, but Vulkan support differs: version 1.4 on NVIDIA versus 1.3 on Lisuan. Display output also differs, with DisplayPort 2.1b on the RTX PRO 6000 and DisplayPort 1.4a on the LX ULTRA.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records no direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons between these two cards. The only available benchmark score belongs to the RTX PRO 6000: 16,408 points in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. This places the NVIDIA card at the 59th percentile among all GPUs. The LX ULTRA has no benchmark entries, making direct numerical comparison impossible from the recorded data.

However, the RTX PRO 6000's nearest rivals provide context. The AMD Radeon PRO W7500 scores 16,415, a 0% delta. The AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT scores 16,361, a 0.3% delta. The AMD Radeon Pro 5600M scores 16,351, a 0.4% delta. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D V2 scores 16,504, a -0.6% delta (meaning the RTX PRO 6000 trails by 0.6%). These deltas are all within a 1% band, indicating that the RTX PRO 6000 performs essentially on par with these four cards in this specific workload.

The LX ULTRA's absence from benchmark records means its actual performance cannot be verified against the RTX PRO 6000 or any other GPU. The percentile field for the LX ULTRA (50th percentile) is listed without supporting scores, so it does not represent a measured result. In contrast, the RTX PRO 6000's percentile is backed by its recorded score.

The compute specifications suggest a large gap in raw throughput. The RTX PRO 6000's 126.0 TFLOPS FP32 is 5.12 times the LX ULTRA's 24.58 TFLOPS. Texture rate shows 1,968.0 GTexel/s versus 384.0 GTexel/s, a 5.13 times difference. Pixel rate is 502.5 GPixel/s versus 192.0 GPixel/s, a 2.62 times difference. Memory bandwidth is 1.79 TB/s versus 432.0 GB/s, a 4.14 times difference. These ratios come directly from the recorded specifications and indicate a substantial performance margin, assuming the Lisuan card's actual behavior aligns with its listed specs.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across every major specification category. The RTX PRO 6000 uses a 5 nm process, the LX ULTRA uses 6 nm. The NVIDIA chip is GB202 with 92,200 million transistors on a 750 mm² die; the Lisuan chip is 7G105 with unknown transistor count and die size. The RTX PRO 6000 has 24,064 shading units, 752 TMUs, 192 ROPs, 188 RT cores, and 752 tensor cores. The LX ULTRA has 6,144 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, with no RT cores or tensor cores recorded.

Clock speeds: the RTX PRO 6000 has a 1590 MHz base and 2617 MHz boost, while the LX ULTRA has no base or boost clock recorded. Memory clocks are 1750 MHz (28 Gbps effective) for NVIDIA and 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) for Lisuan. Memory size is 96 GB GDDR7 versus 24 GB GDDR6. Bus width is 512-bit versus 192-bit. Bandwidth is 1.79 TB/s versus 432.0 GB/s.

Power and physical specs: TDP is 600 W versus 225 W. Suggested PSU is 1000 W versus 550 W. Both use one 16-pin connector and dual-slot designs. The RTX PRO 6000 measures 304 mm by 137 mm by 40 mm; the LX ULTRA measures 268 mm by 112 mm by 40 mm. Bus interface is PCIe 5.0 x16 versus PCIe 4.0 x16. Display outputs are 4x DisplayPort 2.1b versus 4x DisplayPort 1.4a.

Compute rates: pixel rate is 502.5 GPixel/s versus 192.0 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 1,968.0 GTexel/s versus 384.0 GTexel/s. FP32 is 126.0 TFLOPS versus 24.58 TFLOPS. FP16 is 126.0 TFLOPS (1:1) versus 49.15 TFLOPS (2:1). The RTX PRO 6000 supports Vulkan 1.4, the LX ULTRA supports Vulkan 1.3. Release dates differ: the RTX PRO 6000 launched on 2025-03-17, the LX ULTRA on 2026-03-16. The RTX PRO 6000 has a recorded launch MSRP of 8,565 USD; the LX ULTRA has no launch MSRP recorded.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX PRO 6000 wins on every recorded performance-related specification. Its FP32 compute is 126.0 TFLOPS, which is 5.12 times the LX ULTRA's 24.58 TFLOPS. The texture rate of 1,968.0 GTexel/s is 5.13 times the Lisuan card's 384.0 GTexel/s. The pixel rate of 502.5 GPixel/s is 2.62 times the 192.0 GPixel/s of the LX ULTRA. Memory bandwidth of 1.79 TB/s is 4.14 times the 432.0 GB/s available on the LX ULTRA. The 96 GB GDDR7 memory capacity is four times the 24 GB GDDR6 on the Lisuan card.

The RTX PRO 6000 also has more shading units (24,064 versus 6,144), more TMUs (752 versus 192), and more ROPs (192 versus 96). It includes 188 RT cores and 752 tensor cores, features entirely absent from the LX ULTRA's recorded specifications. The NVIDIA card uses a newer PCIe 5.0 x16 interface versus PCIe 4.0 x16, and a newer DisplayPort 2.1b standard versus DisplayPort 1.4a.

The LX ULTRA wins on power efficiency based on the recorded figures. It draws 225 W TDP versus 600 W for the RTX PRO 6000, a 2.67 times lower power draw. The suggested PSU is 550 W versus 1000 W. The Lisuan card is also physically smaller at 268 mm length versus 304 mm, and 112 mm height versus 137 mm. The LX ULTRA has a higher memory clock in MHz (2250 MHz versus 1750 MHz), though the effective data rate is lower (18 Gbps versus 28 Gbps) due to different memory standards.

The LX ULTRA's FP16 ratio of 2:1 means its FP16 throughput (49.15 TFLOPS) is double its FP32 throughput (24.58 TFLOPS), a configuration that could benefit workloads optimized for reduced precision. The RTX PRO 6000's 1:1 ratio keeps FP16 equal to FP32 at 126.0 TFLOPS.

For use cases, the RTX PRO 6000 is positioned for workloads requiring maximum compute, large memory capacity, and RT/tensor acceleration. The LX ULTRA, with lower power draw and smaller footprint, may suit environments with power constraints or physical space limits, though its actual performance is unverified by benchmark data.

The Verdict

The recorded data strongly favors the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell. It holds a measured 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 16,408, placing it at the 59th percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are within a 0.6% band, confirming competitive performance against established cards like the AMD Radeon PRO W7500 and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D V2. The LX ULTRA has no benchmark scores, leaving its real-world performance unmeasured.

The specification gap is decisive. The RTX PRO 6000 offers 5.12 times the FP32 compute, 5.13 times the texture rate, 2.62 times the pixel rate, and 4.14 times the memory bandwidth of the LX ULTRA. It provides 96 GB of GDDR7 memory versus 24 GB of GDDR6, and it is the only card with RT cores and tensor cores. The NVIDIA card also supports newer PCIe and DisplayPort standards.

The LX ULTRA's advantages are limited to power draw (225 W versus 600 W), suggested PSU (550 W versus 1000 W), and physical dimensions (268 mm versus 304 mm length). These are meaningful for constrained builds, but the lack of any recorded benchmark performance means the card cannot be validated against the RTX PRO 6000 in actual workloads. The 50th percentile listing for the LX ULTRA is not supported by any benchmark entry.

Users requiring maximum compute, large memory, and ray tracing or tensor acceleration should select the RTX PRO 6000. Users with strict power or space limits may consider the LX ULTRA, but the absence of performance data means any decision rests on unverified specifications. The database contains one measured score for the NVIDIA card and none for the Lisuan card, so the RTX PRO 6000 is the only option with confirmed performance.