NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 GB205 vs Lisuan Tech LX PRO Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded benchmark scores for either the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 GB205 or the Lisuan Tech LX PRO. Both entries show an average benchmark score of zero, and the head-to-head benchmark array is empty. Consequently, there are no exact percentage deltas or score differences to report between these two graphics cards. What the data does provide is a full set of architectural and specification fields, allowing a structural comparison rather than a performance comparison.

The absence of measured results means any direct performance hierarchy cannot be established from the recorded data. The NVIDIA part occupies the 50th percentile among all GPUs in the database, and the Lisuan Tech LX PRO also occupies the 50th percentile. Neither card has any nearest rivals listed, so there are no reference points for relative standing. The wins counter for each card is zero, confirming that no benchmark categories have been resolved in favor of either product.

What can be compared from the specification sheets is substantial. The Lisuan Tech LX PRO delivers a higher theoretical FP32 throughput at 24.58 TFLOPS, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 GB205 delivers 19.18 TFLOPS. That puts the LX PRO roughly 28% ahead in raw single-precision compute, a figure derived directly from the recorded numbers. In FP16, the gap widens further: the LX PRO reaches 49.15 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while the RTX 5060 reaches 19.18 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio. The LX PRO therefore offers more than double the half-precision throughput, again calculated strictly from the listed values.

Texture processing follows a similar pattern. The LX PRO achieves 384.0 GTexel/s against the RTX 5060's 299.6 GTexel/s, a lead of approximately 28%. Pixel fill rates tell the same story: 192.0 GPixel/s for the LX PRO versus 119.9 GPixel/s for the RTX 5060, a margin of about 60%. These are theoretical peak rates based on clock and unit counts, not measured application performance.

Memory configuration diverges in an interesting way. The RTX 5060 uses 8 GB of GDDR7 on a 128-bit bus, producing 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The LX PRO uses 24 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, producing 432.0 GB/s. Despite having three times the capacity and a wider bus, the LX PRO's bandwidth is actually slightly lower, about 3.6% less than the RTX 5060. The RTX 5060's memory clock is listed at 1750 MHz with 28 Gbps effective, while the LX PRO's memory clock is 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective.

Power consumption differs considerably. The RTX 5060 carries a TDP of 145 W with a suggested power supply of 300 W and a single 8-pin connector. The LX PRO carries a TDP of 225 W with a suggested power supply of 550 W and a single 16-pin connector. That is a 55% higher TDP for the LX PRO, and the recommended PSU rating is 250 W higher.

Where Each One Wins

Based strictly on the recorded specifications, the Lisuan Tech LX PRO holds advantages in compute throughput and memory capacity. Its 6144 shading units compare favorably to the RTX 5060's 3840, a 60% advantage in raw shader count. The LX PRO also has 192 texture mapping units versus 120, and 96 render output units versus 48. These unit counts translate directly into the higher pixel and texture rates noted above. The FP32 and FP16 figures reinforce the LX PRO's position for compute-heavy workloads, particularly those that can exploit the 2:1 FP16 ratio.

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 GB205 wins in memory bandwidth efficiency despite its smaller bus. Its 448.0 GB/s exceeds the LX PRO's 432.0 GB/s while using a 128-bit bus rather than 192-bit. The GDDR7 memory type and the higher effective data rate of 28 Gbps contribute to this outcome. The RTX 5060 also draws less power, with a 145 W TDP versus 225 W, and it uses a less demanding power connector setup.

The RTX 5060 has a newer PCIe interface, version 5.0 x8, whereas the LX PRO uses PCIe 4.0 x16. The display outputs also differ: the RTX 5060 offers 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b, while the LX PRO offers 4x DisplayPort 1.4a. The RTX 5060 supports Vulkan 1.4, while the LX PRO supports Vulkan 1.3. Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and OpenGL 4.6.

The process node favors the RTX 5060 at 5 nm versus the LX PRO's 6 nm, both fabricated by TSMC. The RTX 5060 has a smaller die at 263 mm², while the LX PRO's die size is listed as unknown. Transistor count for the RTX 5060 is 31,100 million, giving a transistor density of 118.3M per mm². The LX PRO's transistor count is listed as unknown.

The Verdict

The recorded data does not support a performance verdict because no benchmark results exist for either card. What the data does support is a use-case split based on architecture. The Lisuan Tech LX PRO, with its higher FP32 throughput, larger memory pool, and greater shading and texture unit counts, appears positioned for workloads that demand raw compute and large memory residency. Its 24 GB frame buffer and 49.15 TFLOPS FP16 capability suggest suitability for tasks involving large datasets or half-precision math.

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 GB205 appears positioned for efficiency and bandwidth density. Its 145 W TDP, GDDR7 memory, and higher effective memory data rate indicate a design that prioritizes power economy and memory responsiveness. The PCIe 5.0 interface and newer DisplayPort 2.1b outputs also signal a platform that expects current-generation system integration.

Neither card has a recorded win in the database, and both sit at the same percentile. A user selecting between them on the basis of the available data would choose the LX PRO for compute throughput and memory capacity, or the RTX 5060 for lower power draw and newer interface support. No recommendation beyond that is possible from the recorded facts.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher FP32 performance?

A: The Lisuan Tech LX PRO lists 24.58 TFLOPS FP32, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 GB205 lists 19.18 TFLOPS FP32.

Q: How much memory does each card have?

A: The RTX 5060 has 8 GB of GDDR7, while the LX PRO has 24 GB of GDDR6.

Q: Which card has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The RTX 5060 has 448.0 GB/s, which is slightly higher than the LX PRO's 432.0 GB/s.

Q: What is the TDP difference?

A: The RTX 5060 has a TDP of 145 W, and the LX PRO has a TDP of 225 W.

Q: Do both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate?

A: Yes, both list DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) support, and both list OpenGL 4.6.

Q: What process nodes are used?

A: The RTX 5060 uses a 5 nm process, and the LX PRO uses a 6 nm process, both from TSMC.

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 GB205 is built on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture with the GB205 chip, while the Lisuan Tech LX PRO uses the TrueGPU architecture with the 7G105 chip. The RTX 5060 belongs to the GeForce 50-series and the GeForce 50 generation, with a predecessor in the GeForce 40 series and a successor in the GeForce 60 series. The LX PRO belongs to the 7G100 generation and has no listed predecessor or successor.

The RTX 5060 includes dedicated ray tracing cores, with 30 listed, and tensor cores, with 120 listed. The LX PRO lists no ray tracing cores and no tensor cores in the database. This is a notable architectural divergence, as the RTX 5060's Blackwell 2.0 design explicitly includes both hardware types for acceleration of ray-traced and tensor-based workloads, while the LX PRO's TrueGPU architecture does not report equivalent units.

Shading unit counts differ substantially: 3840 for the RTX 5060 versus 6144 for the LX PRO. Texture mapping units are 120 versus 192, and render output units are 48 versus 96. The RTX 5060 has a transistor count of 31,100 million on a 263 mm² die, with a density of 118.3M per mm². The LX PRO's transistor count and die size are both unknown.

The RTX 5060's FP16 throughput is listed at 19.18 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio relative to FP32. The LX PRO's FP16 throughput is 49.15 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio. This indicates that the LX PRO's architecture processes half-precision at double the rate of full precision, whereas the RTX 5060 processes both at the same rate.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two cards:

• Chip: GB205 versus 7G105
• Architecture: Blackwell 2.0 versus TrueGPU
• Generation: GeForce 50 versus 7G100
• Process node: 5 nm versus 6 nm
• Transistors: 31,100 million versus unknown
• Die size: 263 mm² versus unknown
• Transistor density: 118.3M / mm² versus not listed
• Memory clock: 1750 MHz (28 Gbps effective) versus 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective)
• Memory size: 8 GB versus 24 GB
• Memory type: GDDR7 versus GDDR6
• Memory bus width: 128 bit versus 192 bit
• Memory bandwidth: 448.0 GB/s versus 432.0 GB/s
• Shading units: 3840 versus 6144
• Texture mapping units: 120 versus 192
• Render output units: 48 versus 96
• Ray tracing cores: 30 versus not listed
• Tensor cores: 120 versus not listed
• Pixel rate: 119.9 GPixel/s versus 192.0 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 299.6 GTexel/s versus 384.0 GTexel/s
• FP32: 19.18 TFLOPS versus 24.58 TFLOPS
• FP16: 19.18 TFLOPS (1:1) versus 49.15 TFLOPS (2:1)
• TDP: 145 W versus 225 W
• Power connectors: 1x 8-pin versus 1x 16-pin
• Suggested PSU: 300 W versus 550 W
• Bus interface: PCIe 5.0 x8 versus PCIe 4.0 x16
• Display outputs: 1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1b versus 4x DisplayPort 1.4a
• Vulkan version: 1.4 versus 1.3
• Dimensions: 241 mm length, 111 mm height, 40 mm width versus 248 mm length, 118 mm height, 48 mm width
• Release date: 2026-05-31 versus 2026-03-16
• Launch MSRP: 299 USD versus not listed