Intel Arc A380E vs Lisuan Tech LX ULTRA Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the Intel Arc A380E and the Lisuan Tech LX ULTRA. The database shows zero wins for each product in direct comparison testing, and the average benchmark score for both is zero. This absence of measured performance data means the comparison must rely entirely on the specification sheets and architectural characteristics recorded for each GPU.

The most significant performance indicator available is raw compute throughput. The Lisuan Tech LX ULTRA delivers 24.58 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, which is exactly six times the 4.096 TFLOPS of the Intel Arc A380E. This is the largest single numerical gap between the two products. In FP16 workloads, the LX ULTRA reaches 49.15 TFLOPS while the Arc A380E manages 8.192 TFLOPS, again a sixfold difference. The texture rate follows the same pattern: the LX ULTRA processes 384.0 GTexel/s versus 128.0 GTexel/s for the Arc A380E, a 3x advantage. Pixel throughput shows the LX ULTRA at 192.0 GPixel/s versus 64.00 GPixel/s, a 3x margin.

Memory bandwidth also heavily favors the LX ULTRA. The Lisuan card provides 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth across a 192-bit bus, compared to 186.0 GB/s on a 96-bit bus for the Arc A380E. That is a 2.32x bandwidth advantage. The LX ULTRA also carries 24 GB of GDDR6 memory versus 6 GB, a 4x capacity difference. The effective memory clock of the LX ULTRA is 18 Gbps versus 15.5 Gbps for the Arc A380E.

The Arc A380E does hold advantages in a few specific areas. Its base and boost clocks are both locked at 2000 MHz, while the LX ULTRA records no base or boost clock values in the database. The Arc A380E supports Vulkan 1.4, whereas the LX ULTRA is listed with Vulkan 1.3. Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and OpenGL 4.6. The Arc A380E uses DisplayPort 2.0 outputs, while the LX ULTRA uses DisplayPort 1.4a. Both provide four display outputs.

Neither product shows a percentile ranking above 50, meaning both sit at the median of the database's GPU population. Without benchmark scores, the percentile field is identical for both, offering no differentiation.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The Lisuan Tech LX ULTRA delivers 24.58 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, which is 6x the 4.096 TFLOPS of the Intel Arc A380E.

Q: How much memory does each card offer?

A: The LX ULTRA has 24 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, while the Arc A380E has 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The LX ULTRA provides 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth, while the Arc A380E provides 186.0 GB/s. The LX ULTRA has a 2.32x bandwidth advantage.

Q: Which card has a higher pixel fill rate?

A: The LX ULTRA achieves 192.0 GPixel/s, three times the 64.00 GPixel/s of the Arc A380E.

Q: Do both cards support the same DirectX version?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). The LX ULTRA supports Vulkan 1.3, while the Arc A380E supports Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The LX ULTRA has a 225 W TDP with a suggested 550 W PSU, while the Arc A380E has a 75 W TDP with a suggested 250 W PSU.

Where Each One Wins

The Lisuan Tech LX ULTRA wins decisively in all measured compute and memory categories. Its 24.58 TFLOPS FP32 output, 49.15 TFLOPS FP16 output, 384.0 GTexel/s texture rate, 192.0 GPixel/s pixel rate, and 432.0 GB/s memory bandwidth all exceed the Arc A380E by significant margins. The 24 GB memory capacity is four times larger, which suits workloads requiring large datasets resident in VRAM. The dual-slot design with a 16-pin power connector indicates a card built for sustained high-load operation.

The Intel Arc A380E wins in power efficiency. Its 75 W TDP is one-third of the LX ULTRA's 225 W, and its suggested 250 W PSU is less than half of the LX ULTRA's 550 W requirement. The single-slot form factor at 20 mm width allows installation in space-constrained chassis, while the LX ULTRA requires 40 mm width. The Arc A380E also carries no power connectors, drawing entirely from the PCIe slot, which simplifies installation. Its 254 mm length is shorter than the LX ULTRA's 268 mm.

The Arc A380E has the newer display interface, supporting DisplayPort 2.0, while the LX ULTRA uses DisplayPort 1.4a. The Arc A380E also has a higher Vulkan version (1.4 vs 1.3). The Arc A380E is designated end-of-life, while the LX ULTRA is active production. The LX ULTRA uses a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface, while the Arc A380E uses PCIe 4.0 x8, giving the LX ULTRA double the host interface bandwidth.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every recorded specification. The Arc A380E uses the DG2-128 chip with Xe-HPG architecture from the Alchemist (Arc 3) generation. The LX ULTRA uses the 7G105 chip with TrueGPU architecture from the 7G100 generation. Both are fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC, but the Arc A380E records 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die with a transistor density of 45.9M / mm², while the LX ULTRA has unknown transistor count, die size, and density.

Shading units differ massively: 1024 for the Arc A380E versus 6144 for the LX ULTRA. Texture mapping units are 64 versus 192. Raster output units are 32 versus 96. The Arc A380E has 8 ray tracing cores, while the LX ULTRA records no ray tracing core count. Neither product lists tensor cores.

Clock behavior differs as well. The Arc A380E locks base and boost at 2000 MHz, whereas the LX ULTRA has no recorded base or boost clock. Memory clocks are 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective) for the Arc A380E and 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) for the LX ULTRA.

Power and physical dimensions diverge completely. The Arc A380E is single-slot, 75 W, with no power connectors, 254 mm long, 127 mm high, 20 mm wide. The LX ULTRA is dual-slot, 225 W, with one 16-pin connector, 268 mm long, 112 mm high, 40 mm wide. The suggested PSU is 250 W versus 550 W. The bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x8 versus x16. Display outputs are 4x DisplayPort 2.0 versus 4x DisplayPort 1.4a.

Production status and release timing also differ. The Arc A380E is end-of-life, released in 2024-03-31, with a predecessor of Xe Graphics and a successor of Battlemage. The LX ULTRA is active, released in 2026-03-16, with no predecessor or successor listed. The Arc A380E has no launch MSRP recorded, and neither does the LX ULTRA.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split is fundamental. Intel's Xe-HPG architecture in the Alchemist generation targets a broad mainstream segment with a 6 nm TSMC process. The DG2-128 chip packs 7,200 million transistors into 157 mm², yielding a transistor density of 45.9M / mm². The Xe-HPG design includes dedicated ray tracing units, recorded here as 8 RT cores, and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The Lisuan Tech TrueGPU architecture on the 7G105 chip is fundamentally different in scale. It uses six times the shading units (6144 vs 1024) and three times the texture units (192 vs 64) and ROPs (96 vs 32). The architecture records no ray tracing cores, suggesting a different approach to graphics pipeline acceleration. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate and OpenGL 4.6, but only Vulkan 1.3, one version behind the Arc A380E.

The LX ULTRA's 24 GB memory capacity and 192-bit bus indicate an architecture designed for large memory footprints, likely targeting compute or AI workloads that exceed the 6 GB capacity of the Arc A380E. The 432.0 GB/s bandwidth reinforces this interpretation. The Arc A380E's smaller 96-bit bus and 186.0 GB/s bandwidth align with a more modest mainstream profile.

Neither product lists tensor cores, so any AI acceleration claims cannot be verified from the recorded data. The LX ULTRA's lack of RT core data means ray tracing performance cannot be compared directly; the Arc A380E explicitly includes 8 RT cores.

The process node is identical (6 nm TSMC), but the LX ULTRA's unknown transistor count and die size prevent density comparisons. The LX ULTRA's 24.58 TFLOPS FP32 output from 6144 shading units implies a very high per-unit efficiency, but without clock data, the architecture cannot be fully characterized.

The Verdict

The data directs different users to different products. The Lisuan Tech LX ULTRA is the clear choice for anyone requiring maximum compute throughput, large memory capacity, or high bandwidth. Its 24.58 TFLOPS FP32, 49.15 TFLOPS FP16, and 432.0 GB/s bandwidth dwarf the Arc A380E's 4.096 TFLOPS, 8.192 TFLOPS, and 186.0 GB/s. The 24 GB memory capacity supports workloads that would exhaust the Arc A380E's 6 GB. The active production status and PCIe 4.0 x16 interface also favor longevity and host connectivity.

The Intel Arc A380E fits a different profile. Its 75 W TDP and single-slot design make it suitable for low-power or space-constrained systems where the LX ULTRA's 225 W and dual-slot footprint would not fit. The lack of power connectors simplifies installation, and the DisplayPort 2.0 outputs provide a newer display standard. The Vulkan 1.4 support is also ahead of the LX ULTRA's Vulkan 1.3. The end-of-life status and PCIe 4.0 x8 interface limit future expansion.

The benchmark database shows no measured performance data for either card, so verdicts rest on specification analysis. The LX ULTRA wins every raw performance metric by factors of 2.32x to 6x. The Arc A380E wins every power and physical metric by factors of 3x or more. Users prioritizing frame rates, rendering throughput, or memory-bound compute should select the LX ULTRA. Users prioritizing power draw, cooling simplicity, or physical footprint should select the Arc A380E. The two products do not compete in the same performance tier; they serve opposite ends of the GPU spectrum.