NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 SUPER vs Lisuan Tech LX ULTRA Comparison

The Verdict

The database comparison between the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 SUPER and the Lisuan Tech LX ULTRA presents a clear split based on workload priorities. The RTX 5070 SUPER is the choice for raw compute density and rendering throughput, while the LX ULTRA offers a substantially larger memory pool and higher output resolution capabilities.

The RTX 5070 SUPER delivers 32.15 TFLOPS of FP32 compute against 24.58 TFLOPS for the LX ULTRA, a 30.8% advantage in raw shader throughput. It also leads in texture fill rate at 502.4 GTexel/s versus 384.0 GTexel/s, and in pixel throughput at 201.0 GPixel/s versus 192.0 GPixel/s. For users running GPU-bound compute tasks, the NVIDIA card is the stronger option.

The LX ULTRA counters with 24 GB of GDDR6 memory versus 18 GB of GDDR7, a 33.3% capacity advantage. Its memory clock runs at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) compared to 1750 MHz (28 Gbps effective) for the RTX 5070 SUPER. However, the NVIDIA card still wins on memory bandwidth: 672.0 GB/s against 432.0 GB/s, a 55.6% lead. The LX ULTRA also pushes a higher FP16 rate at 49.15 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio) versus 32.15 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio) for the NVIDIA part.

The recorded benchmark data shows the RTX 5070 SUPER scoring 2690 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, placing it in the 18th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals, the Quadro K1100M and GT 1030, score 2664 and 2662 respectively, with deltas of 1.0% and 1.1%. The LX ULTRA has no recorded benchmarks and no rivals listed, so its real-world standing remains unverified. Users who need proven performance should favor the NVIDIA card; those who prioritize memory capacity and display outputs should consider the LX ULTRA.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different architectural lineages. The RTX 5070 SUPER uses the GB205 chip built on Blackwell 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The LX ULTRA uses the 7G105 chip with TrueGPU architecture, fabricated on a 6 nm process, also at TSMC. The NVIDIA chip packs 31,100 million transistors into a 263 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 118.3M per mm². The LX ULTRA's transistor count and die size are not recorded in the database.

The RTX 5070 SUPER belongs to the GeForce 50 generation and includes dedicated hardware for ray tracing and tensor operations. It carries 50 RT cores and 200 tensor cores. The LX ULTRA lists no RT cores or tensor cores in its specifications, indicating a simpler execution unit layout. The NVIDIA card also supports Vulkan 1.4, while the LX ULTRA tops out at Vulkan 1.3. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and OpenGL 4.6.

Process node differences matter for power efficiency. The 5 nm node on the NVIDIA card pairs with a 275 W TDP, while the 6 nm node on the LX ULTRA runs at 225 W. The LX ULTRA has a suggested PSU rating of 550 W, a figure not listed for the NVIDIA card. Both use a single 16-pin power connector and dual-slot cooling.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records no direct head-to-head benchmark runs between these two cards, and the LX ULTRA has no standalone benchmark entries. The only measured score comes from the RTX 5070 SUPER: 2690 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. That result puts the NVIDIA card in the 18th percentile of all GPUs, a modest standing that reflects its position relative to the wider database. Its closest recorded competitors are the Quadro K1100M at 2664 (1.0% behind), the GT 1030 at 2662 (1.1% behind), the Intel Arc Pro B50 at 2660 (1.1% behind), and the GT 440 at 2645 (1.7% behind).

Without benchmark data for the LX ULTRA, the comparison rests on specification-derived compute rates. The RTX 5070 SUPER leads in FP32 by 7.57 TFLOPS, a 30.8% margin. It also leads in texture rate by 118.4 GTexel/s, a 30.8% margin. Pixel rate favors the NVIDIA card by 9.0 GPixel/s, a 4.7% margin. Memory bandwidth favors NVIDIA by 240.0 GB/s, a 55.6% margin.

The LX ULTRA wins on FP16 throughput by 17.0 TFLOPS, a 52.9% margin, but this comes from its 2:1 FP16 ratio against the NVIDIA card's 1:1 ratio. The LX ULTRA also has more ROPs: 96 versus 80, a 20% advantage. Its shading unit count is 6144 versus 6400, a 4% deficit. Texture mapping units stand at 192 versus 200, a 4% deficit.

FAQ

Q: Which card has more memory?

A: The Lisuan Tech LX ULTRA has 24 GB of GDDR6 memory, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 SUPER has 18 GB of GDDR7 memory. The LX ULTRA leads by 6 GB, a 33.3% capacity advantage.

Q: Which card delivers higher memory bandwidth?

A: The RTX 5070 SUPER delivers 672.0 GB/s against 432.0 GB/s for the LX ULTRA. The NVIDIA card leads by 240.0 GB/s, a 55.6% margin, despite using a lower memory clock of 1750 MHz (28 Gbps effective) versus 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) on the LX ULTRA.

Q: How do the compute capabilities compare?

A: The RTX 5070 SUPER achieves 32.15 TFLOPS in FP32 and 32.15 TFLOPS in FP16 (1:1 ratio). The LX ULTRA achieves 24.58 TFLOPS in FP32 and 49.15 TFLOPS in FP16 (2:1 ratio). The NVIDIA card leads in FP32 by 30.8%, while the LX ULTRA leads in FP16 by 52.9%.

Q: What are the display output differences?

A: The RTX 5070 SUPER provides 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b outputs. The LX ULTRA provides 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The NVIDIA card supports the newer DisplayPort 2.1b standard, while the LX ULTRA offers an extra DisplayPort output.

Q: Which card has a lower power draw?

A: The LX ULTRA has a 225 W TDP, while the RTX 5070 SUPER has a 275 W TDP. The LX ULTRA draws 50 W less, an 18.2% reduction, and carries a suggested PSU rating of 550 W.

Q: What is the RTX 5070 SUPER's benchmark standing?

A: The RTX 5070 SUPER scores 2690 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, placing it in the 18th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the Quadro K1100M, scores 2664, a 1.0% delta. The LX ULTRA has no recorded benchmark scores.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 5070 SUPER wins in scenarios that stress raw compute and memory throughput. Its 32.15 TFLOPS FP32 rate outpaces the LX ULTRA by 30.8%, which benefits shader-heavy workloads, physics simulations, and general GPU compute. The 672.0 GB/s bandwidth is 55.6% higher, which helps texture streaming and large data transfers. The 502.4 GTexel/s texture rate leads by 30.8%, and the 201.0 GPixel/s pixel rate leads by 4.7%. The 200 tensor cores and 50 RT cores provide dedicated acceleration that the LX ULTRA lacks entirely. The PCIe 5.0 x16 interface doubles the bus bandwidth of the LX ULTRA's PCIe 4.0 x16 connection. The DisplayPort 2.1b outputs support newer display protocols.

The LX ULTRA wins in memory capacity, FP16 compute, and power efficiency. Its 24 GB pool is 33.3% larger, which suits large datasets, high-resolution textures, and multi-tasking. The 49.15 TFLOPS FP16 rate is 52.9% higher, benefiting half-precision workloads. The 96 ROPs provide a 20% advantage in raster operations. The 225 W TDP is 18.2% lower, and the 550 W suggested PSU rating gives a clear power supply requirement. The 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs support up to four displays. The 6 nm process node may offer different thermal characteristics, though both cards use dual-slot coolers.

The RTX 5070 SUPER is the safer choice for users who need proven benchmark results. The database records its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2690 and places it at the 18th percentile. The LX ULTRA has no recorded performance data, so its real-world behavior remains unquantified. Users who prioritize memory capacity and are willing to accept unverified performance should evaluate the LX ULTRA carefully.

Specification Differences

| Field | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 SUPER | Lisuan Tech LX ULTRA |

|-------|-------------------------------|----------------------|

| Chip | GB205 | 7G105 |

| Architecture | Blackwell 2.0 | TrueGPU |

| Generation | GeForce 50 | 7G100 |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 6 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | TSMC |

| Transistors | 31,100 million | Unknown |

| Die Size | 263 mm² | Unknown |

| Base Clock | 2325 MHz | Not listed |

| Boost Clock | 2512 MHz | Not listed |

| Memory Clock | 1750 MHz (28 Gbps effective) | 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 18 GB | 24 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR7 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 192 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 672.0 GB/s | 432.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 6400 | 6144 |

| TMUs | 200 | 192 |

| ROPs | 80 | 96 |

| RT Cores | 50 | Not listed |

| Tensor Cores | 200 | Not listed |

| Pixel Rate | 201.0 GPixel/s | 192.0 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 502.4 GTexel/s | 384.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 32.15 TFLOPS | 24.58 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 32.15 TFLOPS (1:1) | 49.15 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 275 W | 225 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | 1x 16-pin | 1x 16-pin |

| Suggested PSU | Not listed | 550 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 5.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1b | 4x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | 1.3 |

| Length | 245 mm (9.6 inches) | 268 mm (10.6 inches) |

| Height | 115 mm (4.5 inches) | 112 mm (4.4 inches) |

| Width | 40 mm (1.6 inches) | 40 mm (1.6 inches) |

| Release Date | 2025-12-31 | 2026-03-16 |

| Benchmark Score | 2690 (3DMark Steel Nomad DX12) | None recorded |

| Percentile | 18th | 50th (no score basis) |