Intel Arc A570M vs Lisuan Tech LX PRO Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains a single benchmark result for the Intel Arc A570M, the Geekbench OpenCL score of 58,239. This places it at the 88th percentile of all GPUs in the database. The Lisuan Tech LX PRO has no recorded benchmark scores, and its percentile ranking sits at 50, which reflects the absence of measured performance data rather than a tested result. The Arc A570M's score is effectively tied with several high-end rivals: it trails the AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT by 0.3% (that card averages 58,392), sits 0.3% above the AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM (58,085), and is 0.5% behind the NVIDIA P102-100 (58,528). The largest gap in this group is against the AMD Radeon PRO V710, which leads by 0.7% at 58,657. These margins are all within a single percentage point, indicating that the Arc A570M delivers compute performance on par with desktop GPUs that occupy a much higher power and thermal envelope.

Because the LX PRO has no recorded benchmarks, the head-to-head comparison cannot be expressed through direct scores. The data instead shows a stark contrast in measurement completeness. The Arc A570M has a verified result, while the LX PRO has none. Any analysis of relative performance must therefore rely on architectural specifications, which the database provides in detail. The LX PRO's theoretical FP32 throughput is 24.58 TFLOPS, which is 4.6 times the Arc A570M's 5.325 TFLOPS. Its pixel rate of 192.0 GPixel/s is 2.3 times higher than the Arc A570M's 83.20 GPixel/s, and its texture rate of 384.0 GTexel/s is 2.3 times higher than the Arc A570M's 166.4 GTexel/s. These are raw specification limits, not measured results, but they indicate a substantial gap in processing capability.

The Arc A570M's single benchmark score is remarkably stable against its nearest rivals, all of which are desktop parts with much higher power draws. The RX 6950 XT, for example, is a flagship-class GPU, yet the Arc A570M comes within 0.3% of its OpenCL score. This suggests that the Arc A570M's compute efficiency is unusually high for its class, though the database does not record power efficiency metrics directly. The LX PRO's lack of any benchmark leaves its actual performance unverified, which is a critical limitation when comparing the two.

Where Each One Wins

The Arc A570M wins in the only measured category: benchmark performance. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 58,239 is a confirmed result, and it places at the 88th percentile of all GPUs. The LX PRO has no score, so it cannot claim any verified performance win. However, the LX PRO wins decisively in raw specification categories that are recorded in the database. Its 24 GB of GDDR6 memory is three times the Arc A570M's 8 GB, and its 432.0 GB/s memory bandwidth is nearly double the Arc A570M's 224.0 GB/s. The LX PRO also has triple the shading units (6,144 versus 2,048), 1.5 times the texture mapping units (192 versus 128), and 1.5 times the raster output units (96 versus 64). The LX PRO's FP16 throughput of 49.15 TFLOPS is 4.6 times the Arc A570M's 10.65 TFLOPS, and its FP32 figure is similarly 4.6 times higher.

For workloads that depend on memory capacity, such as large dataset processing or high-resolution texture loading, the LX PRO's 24 GB allocation is a clear advantage. For workloads that depend on compute throughput, the LX PRO's shading unit count and TFLOPS figures point to superior raw capability. The Arc A570M's advantages are more subtle. It uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, while the LX PRO uses x16, but the Arc A570M has a lower thermal design power of 75 W against the LX PRO's 225 W. The Arc A570M supports Vulkan 1.4, while the LX PRO supports Vulkan 1.3. The Arc A570M is also an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with a slot width of IGP, whereas the LX PRO is a dual-slot discrete card.

The use-case split is therefore clear from the data. The Arc A570M is a verified performer with a compact, low-power design that fits into portable devices, as indicated by its display output description of "Portable Device Dependent." The LX PRO is a high-capacity, high-throughput card with 24 GB of memory and a 248 mm length, suited for desktop installations that require large frame buffers and maximum compute density. The absence of LX PRO benchmarks means its actual performance is unproven, but its specifications suggest it is designed for tasks that the Arc A570M cannot handle due to memory and throughput limits.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different manufacturers and use completely different architectures. The Intel Arc A570M is built on the DG2-256 chip with the Xe-HPG architecture, part of the Alchemist generation under the Arc 5 Mobile series. It is fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC, with 11,500 million transistors on a 269 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 42.8 million per square millimeter. The Lisuan Tech LX PRO uses the 7G105 chip with the TrueGPU architecture, part of the 7G100 generation. It is also fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC, but its transistor count and die size are recorded as unknown, so no density figure is available.

The memory subsystems differ significantly. The Arc A570M uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, with memory clocks at 1750 MHz and 14 Gbps effective, producing 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The LX PRO uses 24 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, with memory clocks at 2250 MHz and 18 Gbps effective, producing 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The LX PRO's bus width is 50% wider, and its effective memory speed is 28.6% higher, resulting in 92.9% more bandwidth.

Compute resources are heavily skewed toward the LX PRO. It has 6,144 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The Arc A570M has 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The LX PRO also has 16 ray tracing cores recorded for the Arc A570M, while the LX PRO's ray tracing core count is null, meaning the database does not specify any. Neither part lists tensor cores. The LX PRO's pixel rate of 192.0 GPixel/s and texture rate of 384.0 GTexel/s are both exactly 2.3 times the Arc A570M's corresponding figures.

The feature sets show other differences. The Arc A570M supports Vulkan 1.4, while the LX PRO supports Vulkan 1.3. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and OpenGL 4.6. The LX PRO has a 16-pin power connector and a suggested power supply of 550 W, while the Arc A570M has no power connector listed and no suggested PSU, consistent with its IGP form factor. The LX PRO is a dual-slot card measuring 248 mm in length, 118 mm in height, and 48 mm in width, whereas the Arc A570M has no recorded dimensions and is classified as IGP.

The release dates differ by roughly two and a half years: the Arc A570M launched on 2023-07-31, and the LX PRO launched on 2026-03-16. Both are listed as Active in production status. The LX PRO's manufacturer is recorded as Unknown, while Intel is confirmed for the Arc A570M. These architectural differences explain the specification gaps: the LX PRO is a newer, larger, higher-power design with a wider memory bus and more compute units, while the Arc A570M is a compact mobile part with a verified benchmark score.

The Verdict

The data supports two different conclusions depending on what is being prioritized. For measured performance, the Intel Arc A570M is the only part with a recorded score. Its Geekbench OpenCL result of 58,239 places it at the 88th percentile, and it trades within 0.7% of desktop GPUs like the RX 6950 XT, RX 5600 OEM, P102-100, and Radeon PRO V710. No benchmark result exists for the Lisuan Tech LX PRO, so it cannot be recommended on the basis of tested performance. The database records zero wins for each part in head-to-head benchmarks, because no head-to-head tests are listed.

For raw specifications, the LX PRO is categorically superior in every recorded compute and memory metric. Its 24 GB memory capacity, 432.0 GB/s bandwidth, 24.58 TFLOPS FP32, 6,144 shading units, and 192.0 GPixel/s pixel rate are all multiples of the Arc A570M's figures. The LX PRO's 225 W TDP and dual-slot cooler indicate it is designed for sustained high-load desktop use, while the Arc A570M's 75 W TDP and IGP form factor suit mobile or low-power embedded applications.

The verdict is straightforward: the Arc A570M is the only part with verified performance, and it performs at a level comparable to high-end desktop GPUs from the same era. The LX PRO is a specification leader with no measured results, so its real-world performance remains unknown. Users who require confirmed benchmark data should look to the Arc A570M. Users who require large memory capacity and maximum theoretical throughput, and who can tolerate a 225 W power draw and a 248 mm card length, may consider the LX PRO, but the database cannot confirm how its specifications translate into actual performance.

FAQ

Q: What is the Geekbench OpenCL score of the Intel Arc A570M?

A: The Intel Arc A570M has a Geekbench OpenCL score of 58,239, placing it at the 88th percentile of all GPUs in the database.

Q: Does the Lisuan Tech LX PRO have any benchmark results?

A: No. The database lists no benchmark scores for the LX PRO, and its average benchmark score is 0, with a percentile ranking of 50.

Q: How does the Arc A570M compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Arc A570M trails the AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT by 0.3%, leads the AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM by 0.3%, trails the NVIDIA P102-100 by 0.5%, and trails the AMD Radeon PRO V710 by 0.7%.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference between the two GPUs?

A: The Lisuan Tech LX PRO has 24 GB of GDDR6 memory, while the Intel Arc A570M has 8 GB of GDDR6. The LX PRO's capacity is three times larger.

Q: Which GPU has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The Lisuan Tech LX PRO has 432.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the Intel Arc A570M has 224.0 GB/s. The LX PRO's bandwidth is 92.9% higher.

Q: What are the thermal design power ratings?

A: The Intel Arc A570M has a TDP of 75 W, while the Lisuan Tech LX PRO has a TDP of 225 W. The LX PRO also lists a suggested power supply of 550 W.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Arc A570M | Lisuan Tech LX PRO |

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

| Manufacturer | Intel | Unknown |

| Chip | DG2-256 | 7G105 |

| Architecture | Xe-HPG | TrueGPU |

| Generation | Alchemist (Arc 5 Mobile) | 7G100 |

| Process Node | 6 nm | 6 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | TSMC |

| Transistors | 11,500 million | Unknown |

| Die Size | 269 mm² | Unknown |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 24 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory Clock | 1750 MHz, 14 Gbps effective | 2250 MHz, 18 Gbps effective |

| Memory Bandwidth | 224.0 GB/s | 432.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2048 | 6144 |

| TMUs | 128 | 192 |

| ROPs | 64 | 96 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 16 | Null |

| Pixel Rate | 83.20 GPixel/s | 192.0 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 166.4 GTexel/s | 384.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 5.325 TFLOPS | 24.58 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 10.65 TFLOPS (2:1) | 49.15 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 75 W | 225 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | Null | 1x 16-pin |

| Suggested PSU | Null | 550 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 4x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | 1.3 |

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

| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |

| Dimensions (LxHxW) | Null | 248 mm x 118 mm x 48 mm |

| Release Date | 2023-07-31 | 2026-03-16 |

| Production Status | Active | Active |