Intel Arc A530M vs Lisuan Tech LX MAX Comparison

The Intel Arc A530M and the Lisuan Tech LX MAX occupy very different positions in the database. The Arc A530M is a mobile-class part with a modest 65 W power envelope, while the LX MAX is a dual-slot desktop card with a 225 W power draw. Their recorded specifications reveal two entirely different design philosophies, one aimed at efficiency and portability, the other at raw compute throughput.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc A530M wins in the benchmark data that exists. Its Geekbench OpenCL score is 49,735 and its Geekbench Vulkan score is 43,492. These results place it at the 85th percentile of all GPUs in the database, an indication that it outperforms the large majority of recorded graphics processors. Its average benchmark score of 46,614 slots it directly alongside established mid-range parts. The nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon RX 5600M with an average score of 46,601, the AMD Radeon RX 6550M at 46,702, the NVIDIA RTX A2000 at 46,043, and the NVIDIA RTX 5880 Ada Generation at 45,972. The Arc A530M sits within 0.2 percent of the RX 6550M and 1.2 percent ahead of the RTX A2000. This is a competitive position for a mobile GPU.

The Lisuan Tech LX MAX has no benchmark scores in the database. Its average benchmark score is recorded as zero and it has no nearest rivals. The percentile ranking is 50, which is the median position, but with no actual test results this ranking carries little analytical weight. Where the LX MAX wins is in theoretical hardware specifications. Its shading unit count of 6,144 is four times that of the Arc A530M. Its texture mapping units number 192 versus 96, and its render output units number 96 versus 48. The LX MAX also fields a larger memory configuration with 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192 bit bus, compared to the Arc A530M's 8 GB on a 128 bit bus. These figures suggest a card designed for high throughput in compute-heavy workloads, even though no measured results confirm this in the database.

The Arc A530M wins in the practical category of tested performance and software ecosystem compatibility. The LX MAX wins in the theoretical category of hardware resources and memory capacity.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural lineages. The Intel Arc A530M uses the DG2-256 chip built on the Xe-HPG architecture, belonging to the Alchemist generation under the Arc 5 Mobile family. It is fabricated by TSMC on a 6 nm process. The chip contains 11,500 million transistors on a die size of 269 mm², giving a transistor density of 42.8 million per square millimeter. This is a dense, power-efficient design that fits within a 65 W power envelope.

The Lisuan Tech LX MAX uses a chip designated 7G106 under the TrueGPU architecture, belonging to the 7G100 generation. It is also fabricated by TSMC on a 6 nm process. However, the database lists its transistor count and die size as unknown, so no direct comparison of transistor density is possible. The LX MAX consumes 225 W, a substantial increase over the Arc A530M, and requires a 550 W suggested power supply. Its power delivery uses a single 16-pin connector.

The memory subsystems differ significantly. The Arc A530M uses 8 GB of GDDR6 with a 128 bit bus, delivering 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Its memory clock is 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective data rate. The LX MAX uses 12 GB of GDDR6 with a 192 bit bus, delivering 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Its memory clock is 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective data rate. The LX MAX has roughly 93 percent more memory bandwidth, a decisive advantage for workloads that saturate the memory interface.

Compute resources also diverge sharply. The Arc A530M has 1,536 shading units, 96 texture mapping units, 48 render output units, and 12 ray tracing cores. Its pixel rate is 62.40 GPixel/s and its texture rate is 124.8 GTexel/s. Floating point performance is recorded at 3.994 TFLOPS for FP32 and 7.987 TFLOPS for FP16 at a 2:1 ratio. The LX MAX has 6,144 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, and 96 render output units. It does not list ray tracing cores. Its pixel rate is 192.0 GPixel/s and its texture rate is 384.0 GTexel/s. Floating point performance is 24.58 TFLOPS for FP32 and 49.15 TFLOPS for FP16 at a 2:1 ratio. The LX MAX theoretically delivers over six times the FP32 throughput of the Arc A530M.

Clock speeds tell a different story. The Arc A530M has a base clock of 900 MHz and a boost clock of 1300 MHz. The LX MAX has no base or boost clock listed in the database. This is a notable gap in the recorded data, as clock speed is fundamental to understanding real-world performance. The LX MAX's high theoretical throughput is calculated from its shading unit count and unspecified clock behavior, so its actual sustained performance cannot be verified from the available information.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Arc A530M has an average benchmark score of 46,614. The Lisuan Tech LX MAX has an average benchmark score of 0, as no benchmark results are recorded for it in the database.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two?

A: The Arc A530M delivers 224.0 GB/s over a 128 bit bus, while the LX MAX delivers 432.0 GB/s over a 192 bit bus. The LX MAX provides nearly double the bandwidth.

Q: How do their shading unit counts compare?

A: The Arc A530M has 1,536 shading units. The LX MAX has 6,144 shading units, which is four times as many.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same API levels?

A: Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and OpenGL 4.6. The Arc A530M supports Vulkan 1.4, while the LX MAX supports Vulkan 1.3.

Q: What is the power consumption of each card?

A: The Arc A530M has a TDP of 65 W and uses an IGP slot width. The LX MAX has a TDP of 225 W, uses a dual-slot design, and requires a 550 W suggested power supply.

Q: Which GPU has ray tracing cores?

A: The Arc A530M includes 12 ray tracing cores. The LX MAX does not list any ray tracing cores in its specifications.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every measurable specification. The Arc A530M uses the DG2-256 chip, while the LX MAX uses the 7G106 chip. The Arc A530M is based on Xe-HPG architecture, the LX MAX on TrueGPU. The Arc A530M belongs to the Alchemist generation, the LX MAX to the 7G100 generation.

Process node is identical at 6 nm from TSMC. Transistor count differs: the Arc A530M has 11,500 million transistors, while the LX MAX has an unknown count. Die size also differs: 269 mm² for the Arc A530M versus unknown for the LX MAX. Transistor density is 42.8M per mm² for the Arc A530M, with no figure for the LX MAX.

Clock specifications show the Arc A530M with a 900 MHz base and 1300 MHz boost. The LX MAX has no base or boost clock recorded. Memory clock differs: 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective for the Arc A530M, 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective for the LX MAX.

Memory configuration differs in size, type, and bus width. The Arc A530M has 8 GB GDDR6 on a 128 bit bus. The LX MAX has 12 GB GDDR6 on a 192 bit bus. Bandwidth is 224.0 GB/s versus 432.0 GB/s.

Compute resources differ across the board. Shading units are 1,536 versus 6,144. Texture mapping units are 96 versus 192. Render output units are 48 versus 96. The Arc A530M has 12 ray tracing cores, the LX MAX has none. Pixel rates are 62.40 GPixel/s versus 192.0 GPixel/s. Texture rates are 124.8 GTexel/s versus 384.0 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput is 3.994 TFLOPS versus 24.58 TFLOPS. FP16 throughput is 7.987 TFLOPS versus 49.15 TFLOPS.

Power characteristics differ greatly. The Arc A530M has a 65 W TDP and an IGP slot width. The LX MAX has a 225 W TDP and a dual-slot width. The LX MAX uses a single 16-pin power connector and suggests a 550 W power supply. The Arc A530M lists no power connector or suggested power supply. The bus interface differs: PCIe 4.0 x8 for the Arc A530M, PCIe 4.0 x16 for the LX MAX. Display outputs are listed as portable device dependent for the Arc A530M, while the LX MAX has 4x DisplayPort 1.4a.

Physical dimensions are recorded only for the LX MAX: 248 mm in length, 118 mm in height, and 48 mm in width. The Arc A530M has no dimensions listed. The Arc A530M supports Vulkan 1.4, the LX MAX supports Vulkan 1.3. The Arc A530M's release date is recorded as 2023-07-31, while the LX MAX's release date is 2026-03-16.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the Intel Arc A530M and the Lisuan Tech LX MAX. The head-to-head benchmark list is empty, and neither card records any wins in this pairing. This absence of direct comparison data means the analysis must rely on the separately recorded benchmark scores and the full specification lists.

The Arc A530M's recorded performance places it in a clear competitive band. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 49,735 and Geekbench Vulkan score of 43,492 combine to an average of 46,614. This average sits within 0.2 percent of the AMD Radeon RX 6550M score of 46,702. It is 1.2 percent ahead of the NVIDIA RTX A2000 score of 46,043 and 1.4 percent ahead of the NVIDIA RTX 5880 Ada Generation score of 45,972. The AMD Radeon RX 5600M scores 46,601, essentially identical to the Arc A530M. These margins are small, but they place the Arc A530M in the upper-middle tier of the database.

The LX MAX has no comparable numbers. Its average benchmark score of 0 and its empty nearest rivals list mean no measured performance data exists to set against the Arc A530M. The database records its percentile as 50, but this is a default position given the absence of test results, not a reflection of actual measured performance.

The specification gap between the two is large. The LX MAX's theoretical FP32 throughput of 24.58 TFLOPS is more than six times the Arc A530M's 3.994 TFLOPS. The LX MAX's texture rate of 384.0 GTexel/s is more than three times the Arc A530M's 124.8 GTexel/s. The LX MAX's pixel rate of 192.0 GPixel/s is again more than three times the Arc A530M's 62.40 GPixel/s. Memory bandwidth favors the LX MAX at 432.0 GB/s versus 224.0 GB/s.

These theoretical advantages should translate to large performance differences in compute-heavy workloads, assuming the LX MAX's clocks allow the hardware to reach its calculated rates. The lack of recorded clock speeds for the LX MAX introduces uncertainty. A GPU's real performance depends on its ability to sustain boost frequencies under load, and without those numbers the theoretical figures remain unverified.

The Arc A530M, by contrast, has confirmed benchmark results that place it alongside established competitors. It also has a much lower power draw of 65 W versus 225 W, which suggests it can deliver its measured performance within a tight thermal budget suitable for portable devices.

The Verdict

The data presents a split decision. For users who rely on measured benchmark results, the Intel Arc A530M is the only card with verified performance. Its scores of 49,735 in Geekbench OpenCL and 43,492 in Geekbench Vulkan place it in the 85th percentile of all recorded GPUs. Its average score of 46,614 matches or slightly exceeds several known competitors. Its 65 W power envelope and IGP slot width make it suitable for compact systems.

For users who prioritize raw hardware resources, the Lisuan Tech LX MAX offers a dramatically larger specification sheet. Its 6,144 shading units, 12 GB of memory, 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth, and 24.58 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput are all far beyond the Arc A530M's figures. The LX MAX also uses a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface and provides four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, indicating a desktop-oriented design.

The LX MAX's lack of recorded benchmark scores is the critical gap. The database shows no measured performance for this card, no nearest rivals, and no head-to-head results. Its percentile of 50 is a placeholder, not a measurement. The theoretical specifications suggest a powerful card, but the absence of test data prevents confirmation.

The Arc A530M carries ray tracing cores, which the LX MAX does not list at all. The Arc A530M also supports Vulkan 1.4, a newer version than the LX MAX's Vulkan 1.3. These software feature differences matter for applications that rely on the latest graphics APIs.

The choice depends on whether verified performance or theoretical capacity is the priority. The Arc A530M delivers confirmed results with lower power consumption. The LX MAX offers a larger memory pool, wider bus, and substantially higher compute figures, but no measured proof of its capabilities exists in the database.