Intel Arc A380E x2 vs Lisuan Tech LX MAX Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark entries for the Intel Arc A380E x2 versus the Lisuan Tech LX MAX. Neither part has recorded benchmark scores, average scores, or percentile rankings beyond the shared 50th percentile against all GPUs. The head-to-head table is empty, and the win counters for both sides sit at zero.

This absence of measured data is itself informative. The Intel Arc A380E x2 carries an end-of-life production status with a release date in early 2024, while the Lisuan Tech LX MAX is listed as active with a release date two years later. The LX MAX is a newer product, and its benchmark profile has not yet been populated. The A380E x2, despite being older, also lacks any recorded scores in the database. Neither card can claim a measured performance advantage from direct comparison data.

What can be compared is the theoretical compute output derived from the listed specifications. The Lisuan Tech LX MAX delivers 24.58 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, which is exactly six times the 4.096 TFLOPS of the Intel Arc A380E x2. The FP16 figures follow the same ratio: 49.15 TFLOPS versus 8.192 TFLOPS, with both parts using a 2:1 ratio for FP16 relative to FP32. Pixel throughput shows a threefold gap, with the LX MAX at 192.0 GPixel/s against 64.00 GPixel/s for the A380E x2. Texture rate follows the identical three-to-one pattern: 384.0 GTexel/s versus 128.0 GTexel/s.

The memory subsystem mirrors these disparities. The LX MAX has 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, producing 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The A380E x2 has 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus, yielding 186.0 GB/s. That is double the capacity and roughly 2.32 times the bandwidth for the LX MAX. The memory clock also differs: the LX MAX runs at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective, while the A380E x2 runs at 1937 MHz with 15.5 Gbps effective.

Shader resources strongly favor the LX MAX. It lists 6144 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, and 96 render output units. The A380E x2 lists 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The LX MAX has exactly six times the shading units, three times the TMUs, and three times the ROPs. The A380E x2 does include 8 ray tracing cores, while the LX MAX lists no RT core count in the database.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split based on measured and specified capability. The Lisuan Tech LX MAX is the stronger part on every computed metric recorded in the database: FP32 throughput, FP16 throughput, pixel rate, texture rate, memory capacity, memory bandwidth, shading units, TMUs, and ROPs. Its 24.58 TFLOPS FP32 output is six times that of the Intel Arc A380E x2, and its 432.0 GB/s memory bandwidth is more than double. For workloads that scale with raw compute or memory throughput, the LX MAX is the obvious selection.

The Intel Arc A380E x2 has its own advantages. It is a single-slot card at 20 mm width, compared to the dual-slot 48 mm width of the LX MAX. It uses a single 6-pin power connector and carries a 130 W TDP, against the LX MAX's single 16-pin connector and 225 W TDP. The suggested power supply is 300 W for the A380E x2 and 550 W for the LX MAX. The A380E x2 also offers 8x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs, while the LX MAX offers 4x DisplayPort 1.4a. The A380E x2 supports Vulkan 1.4, one revision ahead of the LX MAX's Vulkan 1.3. Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and OpenGL 4.6.

The A380E x2 is the more compact, lower-power option with a newer display output standard and more output ports. The LX MAX is the compute-dominant option with a larger memory pool and higher throughput across every rate metric. A system constrained by slot space, power draw, or display connectivity would favor the Intel part. A system needing maximum compute, memory capacity, or memory bandwidth would favor the Lisuan part. The production status reinforces this: the A380E x2 is end-of-life, while the LX MAX is active and currently available in the market.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from entirely different architectural lineages. The Intel Arc A380E x2 uses the DG2-128 chip built on the Xe-HPG architecture, part of the Alchemist generation within the Arc 3 product family. The Lisuan Tech LX MAX uses the 7G106 chip built on an architecture labeled TrueGPU, belonging to the 7G100 generation. No codenames are recorded for either part.

Both chips are fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC. The Intel chip contains 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 45.9M per mm². The Lisuan chip has unknown transistor count, unknown die size, and no density figure in the database. This makes a direct comparison of manufacturing efficiency impossible from the recorded data.

The compute architectures differ in ray tracing support. The Intel part explicitly lists 8 ray tracing cores, while the LX MAX has no RT core count recorded. Neither part lists tensor cores. The API support is nearly identical: both offer DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and OpenGL 4.6, but the Intel part supports Vulkan 1.4 while the Lisuan part supports Vulkan 1.3.

The memory architecture also differs. The Intel part uses a 96-bit memory bus with 6 GB of GDDR6, while the Lisuan part uses a 192-bit bus with 12 GB of GDDR6. The effective memory speed is 15.5 Gbps for the Intel part and 18 Gbps for the Lisuan part. These differences contribute to the bandwidth gap: 186.0 GB/s versus 432.0 GB/s.

The Intel part has a predecessor listed as Xe Graphics and a successor listed as Battlemage, placing it within a known product roadmap. The Lisuan part has no predecessor or successor recorded, which is consistent with a newer, less-documented entry in the database.

Specification Differences

The specification table shows differences in nearly every measurable category. Clock speeds: the Intel part has a base and boost clock of 2000 MHz, while the Lisuan part has no base or boost clock listed. Memory clock: 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective) for the Intel part versus 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) for the Lisuan part.

Memory: 6 GB GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus for the Intel part versus 12 GB GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus for the Lisuan part. Bandwidth: 186.0 GB/s versus 432.0 GB/s.

Compute units: 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs for the Intel part versus 6144 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs for the Lisuan part. The Intel part has 8 ray tracing cores; the Lisuan part has none listed.

Throughput rates: 64.00 GPixel/s and 128.0 GTexel/s for the Intel part versus 192.0 GPixel/s and 384.0 GTexel/s for the Lisuan part. FP32: 4.096 TFLOPS versus 24.58 TFLOPS. FP16: 8.192 TFLOPS versus 49.15 TFLOPS, both at a 2:1 ratio.

Power and physical: 130 W TDP, single-slot, 1x 6-pin connector, 300 W suggested PSU, 265 mm length, 127 mm height, 20 mm width for the Intel part. The Lisuan part has 225 W TDP, dual-slot, 1x 16-pin connector, 550 W suggested PSU, 248 mm length, 118 mm height, 48 mm width.

Interfaces and outputs: PCIe 4.0 x8 for the Intel part versus PCIe 4.0 x16 for the Lisuan part. The Intel part has 8x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs; the Lisuan part has 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

Production and release: the Intel part is end-of-life with a release date of 2024-03-31 and a successor in Battlemage. The Lisuan part is active with a release date of 2026-03-16 and no successor listed. Neither part has a launch MSRP recorded in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 performance?

A: The Lisuan Tech LX MAX delivers 24.58 TFLOPS, exactly six times the 4.096 TFLOPS of the Intel Arc A380E x2.

Q: How much memory does each card have?

A: The Intel Arc A380E x2 has 6 GB of GDDR6, while the Lisuan Tech LX MAX has 12 GB of GDDR6.

Q: What are the memory bandwidth figures?

A: The Intel Arc A380E x2 reaches 186.0 GB/s on a 96-bit bus. The Lisuan Tech LX MAX reaches 432.0 GB/s on a 192-bit bus.

Q: Which card requires less power?

A: The Intel Arc A380E x2 has a 130 W TDP with a 300 W suggested power supply. The Lisuan Tech LX MAX has a 225 W TDP with a 550 W suggested power supply.

Q: Do both cards support the same APIs?

A: Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and OpenGL 4.6. The Intel Arc A380E x2 supports Vulkan 1.4, while the Lisuan Tech LX MAX supports Vulkan 1.3.

Q: What display outputs are available?

A: The Intel Arc A380E x2 has 8x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs. The Lisuan Tech LX MAX has 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

Q: Which card is currently in production?

A: The Lisuan Tech LX MAX has an active production status. The Intel Arc A380E x2 is listed as end-of-life.

Where Each One Wins

The Lisuan Tech LX MAX wins on every raw compute metric in the database. Its FP32 output of 24.58 TFLOPS dwarfs the 4.096 TFLOPS of the Intel part. Its FP16 output of 49.15 TFLOPS similarly dominates the 8.192 TFLOPS of the Intel part. Pixel rate, texture rate, shading units, TMUs, and ROPs all favor the LX MAX by factors of three to six. The 12 GB memory capacity and 432.0 GB/s bandwidth make it the stronger choice for memory-heavy workloads. The PCIe 4.0 x16 interface provides double the lane width of the Intel part's PCIe 4.0 x8. The LX MAX is also the active product, suggesting ongoing availability.

The Intel Arc A380E x2 wins on physical and power characteristics. Its 130 W TDP is nearly half the 225 W of the LX MAX, and its 300 W suggested power supply is well below the 550 W requirement of the LX MAX. The single-slot design at 20 mm width fits in tighter chassis than the dual-slot 48 mm LX MAX. The 8x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs exceed the 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs of the LX MAX, and the newer DisplayPort 2.0 standard supports higher display bandwidth. The Vulkan 1.4 support is one revision ahead of the LX MAX's Vulkan 1.3. The Intel part also includes 8 ray tracing cores, a feature the LX MAX does not list.

The database shows no measured benchmark results for either GPU, so these conclusions rest entirely on the recorded specifications. The Intel Arc A380E x2 suits constrained environments with modest power budgets and high display-output requirements. The Lisuan Tech LX MAX suits compute-focused systems where raw throughput, memory capacity, and memory bandwidth take priority over power draw and physical footprint.