NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 vs Lisuan Tech LX ULTRA Comparison

FAQ

Q: What is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050's position in the overall GPU landscape?

A: The RTX 5050 sits at the 66th percentile of all GPUs in the database. Its average benchmark score is 21035, which places it within 1.6% of the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT (score 20713), and it trails the NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile by 1.6% (score 21379).

Q: How much memory does the Lisuan Tech LX ULTRA have compared to the RTX 5050?

A: The LX ULTRA has 24 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, delivering 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX 5050 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 320.0 GB/s.

Q: What is the difference in FP32 compute throughput between these two cards?

A: The LX ULTRA delivers 24.58 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, which is nearly double the 13.17 TFLOPS of the RTX 5050. The LX ULTRA also offers FP16 at 49.15 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), while the RTX 5050 provides FP16 at 13.17 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio).

Q: Which card uses a newer PCIe interface?

A: The RTX 5050 uses PCIe 5.0 x8, while the LX ULTRA uses PCIe 4.0 x16. The RTX 5050's interface is the newer revision, though the LX ULTRA's x16 width provides more physical lanes.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The RTX 5050 has a 130 W TDP with a single 8-pin power connector and a suggested 300 W power supply. The LX ULTRA has a 225 W TDP with a single 16-pin connector and a suggested 550 W power supply.

Q: Are there any benchmark scores recorded for the LX ULTRA?

A: No. The database contains no benchmark entries for the LX ULTRA, and its average benchmark score is 0. The RTX 5050 has ten recorded benchmark results, ranging from a Passmark DirectX 9 score of 186 to a Geekbench OpenCL score of 90334.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from entirely different design philosophies. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 uses the GB207 chip built on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture, fabricated by TSMC on a 5 nm process. It contains 16,900 million transistors on a 149 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 113.4M per mm². The Lisuan Tech LX ULTRA uses the 7G105 chip based on the TrueGPU architecture, also from TSMC but on a 6 nm process. Its transistor count and die size are listed as unknown in the database, which limits direct density comparisons.

The RTX 5050 is a GeForce 50-series part with 2560 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, and 32 raster output units. It includes dedicated hardware for ray tracing with 20 RT cores and 80 tensor cores. The LX ULTRA has a markedly different compute configuration: 6144 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The database lists no RT cores or tensor cores for the LX ULTRA, so its ray tracing and AI acceleration capabilities cannot be confirmed from recorded data.

Memory architecture differs substantially. The RTX 5050 uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 320.0 GB/s bandwidth. The LX ULTRA uses 24 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 432.0 GB/s. Memory clocks also differ: the RTX 5050 runs at 2500 MHz (20 Gbps effective), while the LX ULTRA runs at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective). The wider bus on the LX ULTRA more than compensates for its lower memory clock.

API support shows a split. Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and OpenGL 4.6. The RTX 5050 supports Vulkan 1.4, while the LX ULTRA supports Vulkan 1.3. Display output also differs: the RTX 5050 provides 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b, while the LX ULTRA provides 4x DisplayPort 1.4a.

The RTX 5050 connects via PCIe 5.0 x8, whereas the LX ULTRA uses PCIe 4.0 x16. The LX ULTRA has recorded physical dimensions of 268 mm length, 112 mm height, and 40 mm width; the RTX 5050's dimensions are not listed. Both are dual-slot cards.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark entries for these two products. The RTX 5050 has ten standalone benchmark scores; the LX ULTRA has none. This absence of comparative data means the analysis must rely on the RTX 5050's recorded results and the LX ULTRA's raw specifications.

The RTX 5050 achieves a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2502. In Geekbench, it scores 90334 in OpenCL and 89381 in Vulkan. Passmark results show 103 in DirectX 10, 150 in DirectX 11, 66 in DirectX 12, 186 in DirectX 9, 1113 in G2D, 17326 in G3D, and 9184 in GPU Compute. Its average benchmark score is 21035, placing it at the 66th percentile.

Against its nearest rivals, the RTX 5050 trails the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL by 0.6% (rival score 21153) and the AMD Radeon HD 8970M by 1% (rival score 21237). It leads the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT by 1.6% (rival score 20713). The NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile leads it by 1.6% (rival score 21379).

The LX ULTRA's specification sheet suggests much higher theoretical throughput. Its FP32 figure of 24.58 TFLOPS is 86.6% higher than the RTX 5050's 13.17 TFLOPS. Pixel rate on the LX ULTRA is 192.0 GPixel/s versus 82.30 GPixel/s on the RTX 5050. Texture rate is 384.0 GTexel/s versus 205.8 GTexel/s. These are large margins, but without recorded benchmark results, they remain theoretical.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two cards:

• Process node: RTX 5050 uses 5 nm; LX ULTRA uses 6 nm
• Architecture: Blackwell 2.0 versus TrueGPU
• Chip: GB207 versus 7G105
• Generation: GeForce 50 versus 7G100
• Transistors: 16,900 million versus unknown
• Die size: 149 mm² versus unknown
• Transistor density: 113.4M per mm² versus not listed
• Base clock: 2317 MHz versus not listed
• Boost clock: 2572 MHz versus not listed
• Memory clock: 2500 MHz (20 Gbps) versus 2250 MHz (18 Gbps)
• Memory size: 8 GB versus 24 GB
• Bus width: 128 bit versus 192 bit
• Bandwidth: 320.0 GB/s versus 432.0 GB/s
• Shading units: 2560 versus 6144
• TMUs: 80 versus 192
• ROPs: 32 versus 96
• RT cores: 20 versus not listed
• Tensor cores: 80 versus not listed
• Pixel rate: 82.30 GPixel/s versus 192.0 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 205.8 GTexel/s versus 384.0 GTexel/s
• FP32: 13.17 TFLOPS versus 24.58 TFLOPS
• FP16: 13.17 TFLOPS (1:1) versus 49.15 TFLOPS (2:1)
• TDP: 130 W versus 225 W
• Power connector: 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: not listed versus 268 mm x 112 mm x 40 mm
• Release date: 2025-06-30 versus 2026-03-16
• Predecessor: GeForce 40 versus not listed
• Successor: GeForce 60 versus not listed
• Launch MSRP: 249 USD versus not listed

The Verdict

The data shows two cards aimed at different segments. The RTX 5050 is a complete, measured product with a 66th percentile ranking, an average benchmark score of 21035, and ten recorded test results. It carries a launch MSRP of 249 USD. The LX ULTRA has no recorded benchmarks, no average score, and no nearest rivals in the database. Its percentile stands at 50, but that figure is based on zero measured performance data.

The RTX 5050's nearest rivals bracket it tightly. It is 0.6% behind the RX Vega M GL, 1% behind the HD 8970M, 1.6% behind the RTX A4000 Mobile, and 1.6% ahead of the RX 5600 XT. This indicates the RTX 5050 performs in a narrow band around those four cards. Its 66th percentile places it above the median GPU in the database.

The LX ULTRA's specifications suggest far higher raw capability. Its 24.58 TFLOPS FP32, 432.0 GB/s bandwidth, and 24 GB memory are all significantly above the RTX 5050's figures. However, the absence of any benchmark results means the database cannot confirm whether those specifications translate into real-world performance. A card with a 225 W TDP and 550 W suggested PSU clearly targets higher power envelopes than the RTX 5050's 130 W and 300 W requirements.

For a builder who needs confirmed performance data, the RTX 5050 is the only card with measured results. For a builder who prioritizes raw specifications and memory capacity, the LX ULTRA presents a compelling spec sheet, but the lack of validation data introduces uncertainty. The RTX 5050 is the safer choice based on verifiable information.

Where Each One Wins

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 wins on verified performance and ecosystem integration. It has ten recorded benchmark scores across DirectX 9, 10, 11, 12, OpenCL, Vulkan, and compute workloads. Its 66th percentile ranking is backed by actual measurements. It uses newer PCIe 5.0, supports Vulkan 1.4, and provides HDMI 2.1b output alongside DisplayPort 2.1b. Its lower TDP of 130 W and suggested 300 W PSU make it suitable for systems with modest power budgets. The RTX 5050 includes 20 RT cores and 80 tensor cores, which the database confirms for hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI workloads. Its launch MSRP of 249 USD provides a reference point for positioning.

Lisuan Tech LX ULTRA wins on raw specification headroom. The card's 6144 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs are more than double the RTX 5050's counts. Its FP32 throughput of 24.58 TFLOPS is 86.6% higher. Memory capacity of 24 GB is triple the RTX 5050's 8 GB, and bandwidth of 432.0 GB/s is 35% higher. The 192-bit bus and 2:1 FP16 ratio indicate design intent for compute-heavy or large-dataset workloads. The LX ULTRA's 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs support multi-monitor configurations. Its PCIe 4.0 x16 interface provides full-width lane access, and its physical dimensions (268 mm length) are recorded for chassis compatibility checks.

The split is clear: the RTX 5050 wins wherever measured performance, driver maturity, or confirmed compatibility matters. The LX ULTRA wins wherever memory capacity, compute throughput, or specification limits are the deciding factor. The database contains no benchmark evidence for the LX ULTRA, so any performance claims for it remain unverified. The RTX 5050's nearest rival data shows it trades blows within a 3.2% window across four cards, confirming its performance class. The LX ULTRA's 50th percentile, assigned without benchmark data, does not reflect measured capability.