Intel Arc A310E vs Lisuan Tech LX 7G100 Comparison

The Verdict

The data presents two fundamentally different GPUs with almost no overlap in target use. The Intel Arc A310E is a 75 W, single-slot, end-of-life part built for low-profile and embedded workloads. The Lisuan Tech LX 7G100 is a 225 W, dual-slot, actively produced card with 12 GB of memory and roughly 8 times the FP32 throughput. The benchmark database shows the LX 7G100 delivering 24.58 TFLOPS FP32 against 3.072 TFLOPS for the Arc A310E, a performance gap that places them in entirely separate segments. The Arc A310E is for compact, low-power systems that need modern API support and multi-display output. The LX 7G100 is for compute or graphics tasks that require high throughput and large memory capacity. There is no scenario in the data where the Arc A310E competes with the LX 7G100 on raw performance, and no scenario where the LX 7G100 fits the physical or power constraints of the Arc A310E.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Arc A310E uses the DG2-128 chip built on TSMC 6 nm with 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 45.9M per mm². It is part of the Alchemist (Arc 3) generation and uses the Xe-HPG architecture. The Lisuan Tech LX 7G100 uses the 7G106 chip, also on TSMC 6 nm, but the database records no transistor count or die size for it. Its architecture is designated TrueGPU, and it belongs to the 7G100 generation.

The shading resources differ sharply. The Arc A310E has 768 shading units, 32 TMUs, 16 ROPs, and 6 ray tracing cores. The LX 7G100 has 6,144 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, with no ray tracing core count recorded. The LX 7G100 also has no recorded tensor core count, and neither does the Arc A310E. The memory architectures diverge completely. The Arc A310E uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 124.0 GB/s bandwidth. The LX 7G100 uses 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 432.0 GB/s bandwidth, which is 3.5 times the bandwidth and 3 times the capacity.

API support shows both cards reaching DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and OpenGL 4.6. The Arc A310E supports Vulkan 1.4, while the LX 7G100 supports Vulkan 1.3. Display output also differs: the Arc A310E provides 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0, while the LX 7G100 provides 4x DisplayPort 1.4a. The bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x8 for the Arc A310E and PCIe 4.0 x16 for the LX 7G100.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The FP32 compute figures set the tone. The LX 7G100 reaches 24.58 TFLOPS, which is exactly 8 times the 3.072 TFLOPS of the Arc A310E. In FP16, the LX 7G100 delivers 49.15 TFLOPS against 6.144 TFLOPS for the Arc A310E, again an 8:1 ratio. Pixel fill rate favors the LX 7G100 at 192.0 GPixel/s versus 32.00 GPixel/s, a 6x advantage. Texture fill rate favors the LX 7G100 at 384.0 GTexel/s versus 64.00 GTexel/s, also a 6x advantage.

Memory bandwidth is the next largest divergence. The LX 7G100 provides 432.0 GB/s, which exceeds the Arc A310E's 124.0 GB/s by a factor of 3.5. Memory capacity is 12 GB versus 4 GB. The memory clock is 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective on the LX 7G100, compared to 1937 MHz with 15.5 Gbps effective on the Arc A310E.

The Arc A310E does hold advantages in a few measured fields. Its base and boost clocks are both 2000 MHz, while the LX 7G100 has no recorded base or boost clock in the database. The Arc A310E supports Vulkan 1.4, one minor version ahead of the LX 7G100's Vulkan 1.3. The Arc A310E also uses mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs, which are a newer display standard than the DisplayPort 1.4a found on the LX 7G100. Power draw is dramatically lower: 75 W versus 225 W, and the Arc A310E requires no power connectors while the LX 7G100 needs a single 8-pin connector. The suggested PSU is 250 W for the Arc A310E and 550 W for the LX 7G100.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The Lisuan Tech LX 7G100. It records 24.58 TFLOPS FP32 and 49.15 TFLOPS FP16, versus 3.072 TFLOPS FP32 and 6.144 TFLOPS FP16 for the Intel Arc A310E. That is an 8x advantage in both precisions.

Q: How do memory capacity and bandwidth compare?

A: The LX 7G100 has 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 432.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Arc A310E has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 124.0 GB/s bandwidth. The LX 7G100 offers 3 times the capacity and 3.5 times the bandwidth.

Q: What are the physical size and power requirements?

A: The Arc A310E is 168 mm long, 69 mm tall, and 20 mm wide, single-slot, with a 75 W TDP and no power connectors. The LX 7G100 is 294 mm long, 120 mm tall, and 49 mm wide, dual-slot, with a 225 W TDP and one 8-pin connector. The suggested PSU is 250 W for the Arc A310E and 550 W for the LX 7G100.

Q: Which card has better display output capabilities?

A: Both cards support four display outputs. The Arc A310E uses 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0, while the LX 7G100 uses 4x DisplayPort 1.4a. The Arc A310E uses the newer DisplayPort 2.0 standard.

Q: What is the production status of each card?

A: The Intel Arc A310E is end-of-life and was released on 2024-03-31. The Lisuan Tech LX 7G100 is active and was released on 2026-06-17.

Q: Do both cards support the same graphics APIs?

A: Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and OpenGL 4.6. The Arc A310E supports Vulkan 1.4, while the LX 7G100 supports Vulkan 1.3.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc A310E wins in system integration. Its 75 W TDP, single-slot profile, and 168 mm length allow installation in compact chassis where the LX 7G100 cannot fit. It requires no auxiliary power connector, and the suggested 250 W PSU is less than half the 550 W suggested for the LX 7G100. The Arc A310E also carries the newer DisplayPort 2.0 output standard through its mini-DisplayPort 2.0 connectors, and it supports Vulkan 1.4 compared to Vulkan 1.3 on the LX 7G100. Its 2000 MHz base and boost clocks are the only recorded clock speeds in this comparison, since the LX 7G100 has no clock data in the database.

The Lisuan Tech LX 7G100 wins in every throughput category. It delivers 8 times the FP32 and FP16 compute of the Arc A310E. It provides 6 times the pixel fill rate and 6 times the texture fill rate. It offers 3 times the memory capacity and 3.5 times the memory bandwidth. The 192-bit memory bus and 432.0 GB/s bandwidth make it suitable for workloads with large data sets, while the 12 GB frame buffer removes capacity constraints that the 4 GB Arc A310E would face. The PCIe 4.0 x16 interface doubles the lane count of the Arc A310E's PCIe 4.0 x8 link, which benefits data transfer in compute scenarios.

The production status also splits the field. The Arc A310E is end-of-life, with its predecessor listed as Xe Graphics and successor as Battlemage. The LX 7G100 is actively produced, with no predecessor or successor recorded. For any new deployment, the LX 7G100 is the only one of the two that the database marks as currently available.

Specification Differences

| Field | Intel Arc A310E | Lisuan Tech LX 7G100 |

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

| Chip | DG2-128 | 7G106 |

| Architecture | Xe-HPG | TrueGPU |

| Generation | Alchemist (Arc 3) | 7G100 |

| Process node | 6 nm | 6 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | TSMC |

| Transistors | 7,200 million | unknown |

| Die size | 157 mm² | unknown |

| Transistor density | 45.9M / mm² | null |

| Base clock | 2000 MHz | null |

| Boost clock | 2000 MHz | null |

| Memory clock | 1937 MHz 15.5 Gbps effective | 2250 MHz 18 Gbps effective |

| Memory size | 4 GB | 12 GB |

| Memory type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |

| Memory bus width | 64 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory bandwidth | 124.0 GB/s | 432.0 GB/s |

| Shading units | 768 | 6,144 |

| TMUs | 32 | 192 |

| ROPs | 16 | 96 |

| RT cores | 6 | null |

| Pixel rate | 32.00 GPixel/s | 192.0 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 64.00 GTexel/s | 384.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 3.072 TFLOPS | 24.58 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 6.144 TFLOPS (2:1) | 49.15 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 75 W | 225 W |

| Slot width | Single-slot | Dual-slot |

| Power connectors | None | 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | 550 W |

| Bus interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display outputs | 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 | 4x DisplayPort 1.4a |

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

| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | 1.3 |

| Length | 168 mm 6.6 inches | 294 mm 11.6 inches |

| Height | 69 mm 2.7 inches | 120 mm 4.7 inches |

| Width | 20 mm 0.8 inches | 49 mm 1.9 inches |

| Production status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release date | 2024-03-31 | 2026-06-17 |

| Predecessor | Xe Graphics | null |

| Successor | Battlemage | null |