Intel Arc A380E vs Lisuan Tech LX PRO Comparison

The Intel Arc A380E and the Lisuan Tech LX PRO occupy opposite ends of the graphics card spectrum. The recorded data shows two distinct designs: a compact, low-power solution from Intel based on the Xe-HPG architecture, and a large, high-throughput card from Lisuan Tech based on the TrueGPU architecture. Both share a 6 nm TSMC process node and DirectX 12 Ultimate support, but their specifications and performance characteristics diverge sharply. This analysis examines the database entries to determine where each card excels and which user profile each serves best.

FAQ

Q: What is the memory configuration difference between the two cards?

A: The Intel Arc A380E features 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 96-bit bus, providing 186.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Lisuan Tech LX PRO features 24 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, providing 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: How do the shading unit counts compare?

A: The Intel Arc A380E has 1024 shading units, while the Lisuan Tech LX PRO has 6144 shading units. This sixfold difference directly correlates with the FP32 compute figures: 4.096 TFLOPS for the Intel card versus 24.58 TFLOPS for the Lisuan Tech card.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The Intel Arc A380E has a TDP of 75 W and requires no external power connectors, with a suggested PSU of 250 W. The Lisuan Tech LX PRO has a TDP of 225 W and requires one 16-pin power connector, with a suggested PSU of 550 W.

Q: Which card has a higher pixel fill rate?

A: The Lisuan Tech LX PRO has a pixel rate of 192.0 GPixel/s, which is three times the 64.00 GPixel/s of the Intel Arc A380E. This stems from the 96 ROPs on the Lisuan Tech card versus 32 ROPs on the Intel card.

Q: What is the production status of each card?

A: The Intel Arc A380E is listed as end-of-life, with a release date of 2024-03-31. The Lisuan Tech LX PRO is listed as active, with a release date of 2026-03-16.

Q: Do both cards support the same API levels?

A: Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and OpenGL 4.6. The Intel Arc A380E supports Vulkan 1.4, while the Lisuan Tech LX PRO supports Vulkan 1.3.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Arc A380E uses the DG2-128 chip, built on the Xe-HPG architecture, and belongs to the Alchemist (Arc 3) generation. The die size is 157 mm² with 7,200 million transistors, yielding a transistor density of 45.9M per mm². The Lisuan Tech LX PRO uses the 7G105 chip, built on the TrueGPU architecture, and belongs to the 7G100 generation. The transistor count and die size for the Lisuan Tech chip are listed as unknown.

Both cards are fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC, but the architectural philosophies differ. The Xe-HPG architecture on the Intel card includes 8 ray tracing cores, while the Lisuan Tech card lists no RT cores. The Intel card also has a base and boost clock of 2000 MHz, while the Lisuan Tech card has no base or boost clock listed. The memory clock for the Intel card is 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective), while the Lisuan Tech card runs at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective).

The Intel Arc A380E uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, while the Lisuan Tech LX PRO uses a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface. The display outputs also differ: the Intel card has 4x DisplayPort 2.0, while the Lisuan Tech card has 4x DisplayPort 1.4a. The Lisuan Tech card is a dual-slot design measuring 248 mm in length, 118 mm in height, and 48 mm in width. The Intel card is a single-slot design measuring 254 mm in length, 127 mm in height, and 20 mm in width.

The FP16 compute figures reveal the compute structure. The Intel Arc A380E delivers 8.192 TFLOPS FP16 with a 2:1 ratio to FP32. The Lisuan Tech LX PRO delivers 49.15 TFLOPS FP16 with a 2:1 ratio to FP32. This ratio indicates that both cards use a similar FP16 to FP32 execution approach, but the raw throughput is vastly different.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded benchmark scores for either card. The head-to-head benchmark array is empty, and both cards have an average benchmark score of 0. Both cards also share the same percentile versus all GPUs, at 50. The wins count for each card is 0.

Without benchmark data, the specification differences serve as the primary comparison tool. The texture rate provides a clear indicator. The Intel Arc A380E produces 128.0 GTexel/s, while the Lisuan Tech LX PRO produces 384.0 GTexel/s. This is a 3x advantage for the Lisuan Tech card, driven by 192 TMUs versus 64 TMUs.

The FP32 compute shows a larger gap. The Intel card delivers 4.096 TFLOPS, while the Lisuan Tech card delivers 24.58 TFLOPS. The Lisuan Tech card is 6 times faster in raw FP32 throughput. The FP16 figures follow the same pattern, with 8.192 TFLOPS for Intel and 49.15 TFLOPS for Lisuan Tech.

Memory bandwidth shows a 2.32x advantage for the Lisuan Tech card, with 432.0 GB/s versus 186.0 GB/s. The memory capacity difference is even more pronounced, with 24 GB versus 6 GB, a 4x gap. The bus width difference (192-bit versus 96-bit) explains part of the bandwidth gap, but the higher memory clock on the Lisuan Tech card also contributes.

The pixel rate favors the Lisuan Tech card by 3x, at 192.0 GPixel/s versus 64.00 GPixel/s. The ROP count of 96 versus 32 directly drives this difference.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two cards:

• Chip: DG2-128 (Intel) versus 7G105 (Lisuan Tech)
• Architecture: Xe-HPG (Intel) versus TrueGPU (Lisuan Tech)
• Generation: Alchemist (Arc 3) (Intel) versus 7G100 (Lisuan Tech)
• Transistors: 7,200 million (Intel) versus unknown (Lisuan Tech)
• Die size: 157 mm² (Intel) versus unknown (Lisuan Tech)
• Transistor density: 45.9M / mm² (Intel) versus null (Lisuan Tech)
• Base clock: 2000 MHz (Intel) versus null (Lisuan Tech)
• Boost clock: 2000 MHz (Intel) versus null (Lisuan Tech)
• Memory clock: 1937 MHz 15.5 Gbps effective (Intel) versus 2250 MHz 18 Gbps effective (Lisuan Tech)
• Memory size: 6 GB (Intel) versus 24 GB (Lisuan Tech)
• Memory bus width: 96 bit (Intel) versus 192 bit (Lisuan Tech)
• Memory bandwidth: 186.0 GB/s (Intel) versus 432.0 GB/s (Lisuan Tech)
• Shading units: 1024 (Intel) versus 6144 (Lisuan Tech)
• TMUs: 64 (Intel) versus 192 (Lisuan Tech)
• ROPs: 32 (Intel) versus 96 (Lisuan Tech)
• RT cores: 8 (Intel) versus null (Lisuan Tech)
• Pixel rate: 64.00 GPixel/s (Intel) versus 192.0 GPixel/s (Lisuan Tech)
• Texture rate: 128.0 GTexel/s (Intel) versus 384.0 GTexel/s (Lisuan Tech)
• FP32: 4.096 TFLOPS (Intel) versus 24.58 TFLOPS (Lisuan Tech)
• FP16: 8.192 TFLOPS (Intel) versus 49.15 TFLOPS (Lisuan Tech)
• TDP: 75 W (Intel) versus 225 W (Lisuan Tech)
• Slot width: Single-slot (Intel) versus Dual-slot (Lisuan Tech)
• Power connectors: None (Intel) versus 1x 16-pin (Lisuan Tech)
• Suggested PSU: 250 W (Intel) versus 550 W (Lisuan Tech)
• Bus interface: PCIe 4.0 x8 (Intel) versus PCIe 4.0 x16 (Lisuan Tech)
• Display outputs: 4x DisplayPort 2.0 (Intel) versus 4x DisplayPort 1.4a (Lisuan Tech)
• Vulkan version: 1.4 (Intel) versus 1.3 (Lisuan Tech)
• Dimensions: 254 mm length, 127 mm height, 20 mm width (Intel) versus 248 mm length, 118 mm height, 48 mm width (Lisuan Tech)
• Production status: End-of-life (Intel) versus Active (Lisuan Tech)
• Release date: 2024-03-31 (Intel) versus 2026-03-16 (Lisuan Tech)
• Predecessor: Xe Graphics (Intel) versus null (Lisuan Tech)
• Successor: Battlemage (Intel) versus null (Lisuan Tech)

The foundry, process node, memory type, API support for DirectX and OpenGL, and display output count are identical between the two cards.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc A380E wins in several categories. It has a lower TDP at 75 W versus 225 W, which makes it suitable for systems with limited power delivery. The single-slot design and 20 mm width allow installation in tighter chassis compared to the dual-slot, 48 mm wide Lisuan Tech card. The Intel card requires no external power connectors, simplifying installation. The suggested PSU of 250 W is substantially lower than the 550 W requirement for the Lisuan Tech card.

The Intel card also has ray tracing cores, with 8 dedicated units. The Lisuan Tech card lists no RT cores in the database. This indicates that the Intel architecture includes hardware specifically for ray tracing workloads, while the Lisuan Tech card may handle such tasks through other means or not at all.

The Intel card supports DisplayPort 2.0, which is a newer standard than the DisplayPort 1.4a found on the Lisuan Tech card. The Vulkan API support is also newer on the Intel card, at version 1.4 versus 1.3. The Intel card is end-of-life with a successor listed as Battlemage, indicating a clear product roadmap.

The Lisuan Tech LX PRO wins decisively in raw compute and memory performance. The FP32 throughput of 24.58 TFLOPS is 6 times the Intel card's 4.096 TFLOPS. The FP16 throughput of 49.15 TFLOPS is 6 times the Intel card's 8.192 TFLOPS. The texture rate of 384.0 GTexel/s is 3 times the Intel card's 128.0 GTexel/s. The pixel rate of 192.0 GPixel/s is 3 times the Intel card's 64.00 GPixel/s.

Memory capacity and bandwidth strongly favor the Lisuan Tech card. The 24 GB frame buffer is 4 times larger than the 6 GB on the Intel card. The 432.0 GB/s bandwidth is 2.32 times higher. The 192-bit bus width provides a wider path for data movement. This configuration suits workloads that require large datasets or high-resolution textures.

The Lisuan Tech card has a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface, which provides twice the lane count of the Intel card's PCIe 4.0 x8 interface. This can reduce transfer bottlenecks for data-heavy applications. The card is also listed as active production, meaning it is currently available, while the Intel card is end-of-life.

The Verdict

The data indicates two distinct use cases. The Intel Arc A380E fits systems where power consumption and physical space are primary constraints. The 75 W TDP, no external power connectors, and single-slot profile make it appropriate for compact or low-power builds. The ray tracing cores and DisplayPort 2.0 support provide modern features within this power envelope. The end-of-life status and successor named Battlemage suggest this card represents a specific point in Intel's product evolution.

The Lisuan Tech LX PRO targets workloads that demand maximum throughput. The 24.58 TFLOPS FP32, 432.0 GB/s bandwidth, and 24 GB memory capacity position it for compute-intensive tasks, high-resolution rendering, or large model inference. The 225 W TDP and 550 W suggested PSU indicate a system designed for performance over efficiency. The active production status and 2026 release date suggest this is a current product.

Users with power supply limitations or small form factor requirements should examine the Intel Arc A380E. Users with compute-heavy workloads and adequate power delivery should examine the Lisuan Tech LX PRO. The benchmark database shows no recorded scores for either card, so the specification comparison above serves as the only quantitative basis for this analysis. The 50th percentile ranking for both cards indicates they sit at the median of all GPUs in the database, though this percentile is based on the zero benchmark scores and provides limited differentiation. The choice between the two cards depends entirely on whether power efficiency or raw compute throughput takes priority in the target system.