AMD Radeon RX 7400 OEM vs Lisuan Tech LX MAX Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark results for the AMD Radeon RX 7400 OEM and the Lisuan Tech LX MAX. Both cards register an average benchmark score of 0 and occupy the 50th percentile against all GPUs in the database. This absence of recorded measurements means the comparison must rest entirely on the technical specifications and architectural data available.

The raw compute figures show a substantial divide. The RX 7400 OEM delivers 7.885 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the LX MAX reaches 24.58 TFLOPS. That places the Lisuan card at roughly three times the raw single-precision throughput of the AMD part. For FP16 workloads, the gap widens further. The RX 7400 OEM runs FP16 at a 1:1 ratio, producing the same 7.885 TFLOPS. The LX MAX uses a 2:1 ratio, reaching 49.15 TFLOPS, which is over six times the AMD card's FP16 output.

Pixel throughput follows the same pattern. The LX MAX renders 192.0 GPixel/s against 70.40 GPixel/s for the RX 7400 OEM. Texture fill rates show 384.0 GTexel/s for the Lisuan card versus 123.2 GTexel/s for the AMD card. The memory subsystem reinforces this hierarchy. The LX MAX carries 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, yielding 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 7400 OEM has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 172.8 GB/s. The Lisuan card offers roughly 2.5 times the memory bandwidth.

The shading resources differ dramatically. The LX MAX contains 6144 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, and 96 raster output units. The RX 7400 OEM has 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The Lisuan card more than triples the shader count and doubles the ROP count. The AMD card does include 28 ray accelerators, while the LX MAX lists no dedicated ray tracing cores in the database, so RT workloads cannot be directly compared.

Clock behavior tells a different story. The RX 7400 OEM runs a base clock of 330 MHz and a boost clock of 1100 MHz. The LX MAX lists no base or boost clock figures in the database. Its memory clock is 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective), while the AMD card's memory runs at 1350 MHz (10.8 Gbps effective). The higher memory clock on the Lisuan card, combined with the wider bus, explains its bandwidth advantage.

FAQ

Q: Which card has more raw compute power?

A: The Lisuan Tech LX MAX delivers 24.58 TFLOPS of FP32 performance versus 7.885 TFLOPS for the AMD Radeon RX 7400 OEM. For FP16, the LX MAX reaches 49.15 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while the RX 7400 OEM produces 7.885 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio.

Q: How do the memory configurations compare?

A: The LX MAX uses 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 432.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 7400 OEM has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 172.8 GB/s bandwidth. The Lisuan card also runs its memory at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) versus 1350 MHz (10.8 Gbps effective) for the AMD card.

Q: Which card supports newer display outputs?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7400 OEM provides 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1. The Lisuan Tech LX MAX offers 4x DisplayPort 1.4a. The AMD card supports the DisplayPort 2.1 standard, while the Lisuan card uses the older DisplayPort 1.4a standard.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The RX 7400 OEM carries a 55 W TDP with a single 6-pin power connector and a suggested 250 W power supply. The LX MAX has a 225 W TDP with a single 16-pin connector and a suggested 550 W power supply.

Q: Do both cards support the same API levels?

A: Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and OpenGL 4.6. They differ on Vulkan: the RX 7400 OEM supports Vulkan 1.4, while the LX MAX supports Vulkan 1.3.

Q: What physical size difference exists between the two cards?

A: The RX 7400 OEM measures 167 mm (6.6 inches) in length and is a single-slot card. The LX MAX measures 248 mm (9.8 inches) in length, 118 mm (4.6 inches) in height, and 48 mm (1.9 inches) in width, occupying a dual-slot design.

Where Each One Wins

The Lisuan Tech LX MAX dominates in compute-heavy workloads. Its 24.58 TFLOPS FP32 and 49.15 TFLOPS FP16 outputs, combined with 6144 shading units, make it the clear choice for rendering tasks, scientific computation, or any application that scales with raw shader throughput. The 192 TMUs and 96 ROPs support high-resolution texturing and fill-rate demands. The 12 GB memory pool and 432.0 GB/s bandwidth provide ample headroom for large datasets and high-resolution textures.

The AMD Radeon RX 7400 OEM wins on efficiency and physical footprint. Its 55 W TDP is a fraction of the LX MAX's 225 W, and it requires only a 250 W power supply versus 550 W. The single-slot design and 167 mm length fit in compact builds where the LX MAX's 248 mm dual-slot body will not. The RX 7400 OEM also supports newer display standards with DisplayPort 2.1 and HDMI 2.1a, which matters for users with modern monitors. Its Vulkan 1.4 support exceeds the LX MAX's Vulkan 1.3, offering a newer API implementation.

For memory bandwidth sensitive workloads, the LX MAX wins decisively. The 432.0 GB/s bandwidth is 2.5 times the RX 7400 OEM's 172.8 GB/s. The 192-bit bus and 12 GB capacity support larger frame buffers and more aggressive texture streaming. The RX 7400 OEM's 8 GB capacity may limit performance in memory-heavy scenarios, though its lower memory clock of 10.8 Gbps effective still provides functional bandwidth for lighter tasks.

The RX 7400 OEM includes 28 ray accelerators, which the LX MAX does not list. This suggests the AMD card has dedicated hardware for ray tracing workloads, though no benchmark data confirms how it performs in actual RT scenarios. The LX MAX's higher raw compute may compensate for the lack of dedicated RT cores in some cases, but the database provides no direct evidence.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ on nearly every measurable specification. The RX 7400 OEM uses the Navi 33 chip from the Radeon RX 7000 series, while the LX MAX uses the 7G106 chip from the 7G100 generation. The AMD card belongs to the Navi III (RX 7000) generation with the codename Hotpink Bonefish; the Lisuan card lists no codename.

Process nodes match at 6 nm from TSMC, but transistor counts diverge. The RX 7400 OEM contains 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die, giving a density of 65.2M per mm². The LX MAX lists unknown transistor count and die size, so density cannot be calculated.

Clock specifications show the RX 7400 OEM with explicit base and boost clocks of 330 MHz and 1100 MHz. The LX MAX has no base or boost clocks recorded. Memory clocks favor the LX MAX at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) versus 1350 MHz (10.8 Gbps effective) for the AMD card.

The RX 7400 OEM uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, while the LX MAX uses PCIe 4.0 x16. This doubles the available bus width for the Lisuan card. The AMD card draws power through a single 6-pin connector, the Lisuan card through a single 16-pin connector. The RX 7400 OEM is single-slot, the LX MAX is dual-slot.

The RX 7400 OEM measures 167 mm in length with no recorded height or width. The LX MAX measures 248 mm by 118 mm by 48 mm. The production status of the RX 7400 OEM is not recorded, while the LX MAX is marked as Active. Release dates also differ: the RX 7400 OEM released on 2025-08-07, and the LX MAX on 2026-03-16.

Architecture Differences

The RX 7400 OEM uses the RDNA 3.0 architecture, a modern GPU design from AMD. The LX MAX uses an architecture labeled TrueGPU, which appears to be a distinct design from Lisuan Tech. The AMD card's predecessor is Navi II and its successor is Navi IV, placing it in a known product lineage. The LX MAX has no recorded predecessor or successor.

The compute architecture differs in fundamental ways. The RX 7400 OEM has 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, with 28 ray accelerators for RT workloads. The LX MAX has 6144 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, with no ray accelerators listed. The Lisuan card's FP16 throughput doubles its FP32 rate at a 2:1 ratio, while the AMD card runs FP16 at a 1:1 ratio, meaning no throughput advantage for half-precision workloads.

Memory architecture reflects the different bus widths. The RX 7400 OEM's 128-bit bus supports 172.8 GB/s, and the LX MAX's 192-bit bus supports 432.0 GB/s. Both use GDDR6 memory, but the Lisuan card pairs a wider bus with a higher effective clock rate of 18 Gbps versus 10.8 Gbps.

API support shows small differences. Both cards reach DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and OpenGL 4.6. The RX 7400 OEM supports Vulkan 1.4, while the LX MAX supports Vulkan 1.3. Display outputs differ: the AMD card offers HDMI 2.1a and DisplayPort 2.1, while the Lisuan card provides only DisplayPort 1.4a, an older standard.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear performance hierarchy. The Lisuan Tech LX MAX offers 24.58 TFLOPS FP32, 49.15 TFLOPS FP16, 12 GB memory, and 432.0 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD Radeon RX 7400 OEM offers 7.885 TFLOPS FP32, 7.885 TFLOPS FP16, 8 GB memory, and 172.8 GB/s bandwidth. For any workload that depends on raw compute, memory capacity, or bandwidth, the LX MAX is the stronger card by a wide margin.

The RX 7400 OEM wins in practical deployment scenarios. Its 55 W TDP, single-slot profile, and 167 mm length suit small form factor systems. The 250 W suggested PSU requirement makes it easy to integrate into existing builds. The DisplayPort 2.1 and HDMI 2.1a outputs support current display standards, and Vulkan 1.4 offers a newer API version.

The LX MAX demands more from the system. Its 225 W TDP, dual-slot size, and 550 W suggested PSU require a larger chassis and more robust power delivery. The 16-pin power connector may need an adapter in older power supplies. Its DisplayPort 1.4a outputs limit connectivity to older monitor standards.

The choice depends on the workload. For compute-heavy tasks, rendering, or high-resolution texture work, the LX MAX provides overwhelming advantages in every measured specification. For compact builds, low-power operation, or systems prioritizing modern display outputs, the RX 7400 OEM is the practical option. Neither card has recorded benchmark scores, so real-world performance remains unverified, but the specification gaps are large enough to define distinct usage profiles.