Intel Arc A580 vs Lisuan Tech LX ULTRA Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the Intel Arc A580 and the Lisuan Tech LX ULTRA. The Arc A580 has recorded scores across three tests, while the LX ULTRA has no benchmark entries at all. This absence of comparative data forces an analysis based on the recorded specifications and the A580's position within the broader GPU landscape.

The Intel Arc A580 delivers a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2229. In Geekbench, it records 91657 in OpenCL and 79381 in Vulkan. These three results combine for an average benchmark score of 57756, placing the A580 in the 87th percentile among all GPUs tracked by the database. The nearest rivals in the recorded data include the AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM (average score 58085, a 0.6% delta), the Intel Arc A570M (58239, a 0.8% delta), and the AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT (58392, a 1.1% delta). The only rival with a positive delta is the AMD Radeon RX 9070 GRE (57367, 0.7% ahead of the A580).

The Lisuan Tech LX ULTRA has zero recorded benchmarks, an average score of 0, and a 50th percentile ranking. With no rivals listed and no tests run, the database cannot establish any direct performance relationship between these two cards. The LX ULTRA's percentile of 50 is a default placeholder, not a measured result. Any comparison between the two must therefore rely entirely on architectural and specification differences, which are substantial.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Arc A580 uses the DG2-512 chip built on the Xe-HPG architecture, belonging to the Alchemist generation within the Arc 5 series. It is fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC, containing 21,700 million transistors on a 406 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 53.4 million per square millimeter. The Lisuan Tech LX ULTRA 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 the database lists its transistor count and die size as unknown.

The A580 has a base clock of 1700 MHz and a boost clock of 2000 MHz. Its memory runs at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective speed. The LX ULTRA has no recorded base or boost clock, but its memory operates at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective speed. Memory capacity differs sharply: the A580 offers 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, producing 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The LX ULTRA provides 24 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, yielding 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Despite the larger capacity, the LX ULTRA's narrower bus reduces its raw bandwidth by 80.0 GB/s compared to the A580.

Shader resources also diverge. The A580 contains 3072 shading units, while the LX ULTRA has 6144, exactly double. Both cards feature 192 texture mapping units and 96 raster operations units, resulting in identical pixel rates of 192.0 GPixel/s and texture rates of 384.0 GTexel/s. The LX ULTRA doubles the FP32 throughput to 24.58 TFLOPS versus the A580's 12.29 TFLOPS, and doubles FP16 performance to 49.15 TFLOPS versus 24.58 TFLOPS. The A580 includes 24 ray tracing cores, while the LX ULTRA lists no RT core count. Neither card lists tensor cores.

The power envelopes differ: the A580 has a TDP of 175 W with a suggested 450 W power supply and dual 2x 8-pin connectors, while the LX ULTRA draws 225 W with a suggested 550 W power supply and a single 16-pin connector. Both cards are dual-slot designs using PCIe 4.0 x16 interfaces. Display outputs contrast as well: the A580 provides 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 2.0, while the LX ULTRA offers 4x DisplayPort 1.4a. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and OpenGL 4.6, but the A580 lists Vulkan 1.4 while the LX ULTRA lists Vulkan 1.3. The LX ULTRA measures 268 mm in length, 112 mm in height, and 40 mm in width; the A580 has no recorded dimensions.

Where Each One Wins

Based strictly on the recorded data, the Intel Arc A580 holds the advantage in any scenario requiring established benchmark presence. It has three measured scores, a 87th percentile ranking, and an average benchmark score of 57756. Its nearest rivals cluster within a 1.1% range, indicating consistent performance near the top of the database. The A580 also wins on memory bandwidth at 512.0 GB/s and supports the newer Vulkan 1.4 API alongside DisplayPort 2.0 outputs. Its 8 GB memory capacity may constrain workloads with very large data sets, but the higher bandwidth favors high-resolution texture streaming.

The Lisuan Tech LX ULTRA wins on raw compute specifications. Its 6144 shading units and 24.58 TFLOPS FP32 throughput represent double the A580's compute resources. The 24 GB memory capacity is three times larger, which suits workloads that exceed 8 GB of VRAM, such as large language model inference or massive texture caches. The LX ULTRA's 18 Gbps effective memory clock is faster than the A580's 16 Gbps, though the narrower bus reduces overall bandwidth. Its 225 W TDP suggests higher sustained power delivery, and the 16-pin connector indicates a modern power interface.

The A580's ray tracing cores give it an edge in ray-traced rendering, a feature the LX ULTRA does not list. The LX ULTRA's missing RT core count and Vulkan 1.3 support (one revision behind) suggest a compute-focused design rather than a gaming-oriented one. The A580's release date of 2023-10-09 places it earlier in the database timeline, while the LX ULTRA's release date of 2026-03-16 is a future entry with no predecessor or successor listed.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The Lisuan Tech LX ULTRA has 6144 shading units, exactly double the Intel Arc A580's 3072.

Q: How much memory does each card provide?

A: The Intel Arc A580 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, while the Lisuan Tech LX ULTRA has 24 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The A580 delivers 512.0 GB/s, while the LX ULTRA delivers 432.0 GB/s. Despite the LX ULTRA's larger capacity and faster 18 Gbps effective memory clock, its narrower 192-bit bus results in 80.0 GB/s less bandwidth.

Q: Does the LX ULTRA have ray tracing cores?

A: The database lists no ray tracing core count for the LX ULTRA. The A580 includes 24 RT cores.

Q: Which card has a higher FP32 throughput?

A: The LX ULTRA reaches 24.58 TFLOPS, double the A580's 12.29 TFLOPS.

Q: What API versions does each support?

A: Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and OpenGL 4.6. The A580 supports Vulkan 1.4, while the LX ULTRA supports Vulkan 1.3.

The Verdict

The recorded data presents a clear split between measured performance and theoretical specifications. The Intel Arc A580 is the only card with actual benchmark results, placing it in the 87th percentile with an average score of 57756. Its nearest rivals, including the AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM and RX 6950 XT, sit within 1.1% of its average, indicating that the A580 competes closely with established mid-range and high-end discrete GPUs.

The Lisuan Tech LX ULTRA cannot be evaluated on performance because no benchmarks exist in the database. Its 50th percentile ranking is a placeholder, not a measurement. What the specifications show is a compute-heavy design: 6144 shading units, 24.58 TFLOPS FP32, 24 GB VRAM, and 49.15 TFLOPS FP16. These figures suggest the LX ULTRA targets workloads that need large memory pools and raw parallel compute, such as data processing or AI inference, rather than gaming, where the A580's ray tracing cores and higher bandwidth may matter more.

For users seeking a card with verified performance, the A580 is the only choice supported by benchmark evidence. For users prioritizing memory capacity and compute throughput, the LX ULTRA's specifications offer advantages, but the absence of measured scores leaves its real-world behavior unknown. The data does not resolve which card is faster; it only confirms which one has been tested.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the Intel Arc A580 and the Lisuan Tech LX ULTRA:

• Chip: DG2-512 vs 7G105
• Architecture: Xe-HPG vs TrueGPU
• Generation: Alchemist (Arc 5) vs 7G100
• Transistors: 21,700 million vs unknown
• Die Size: 406 mm² vs unknown
• Transistor Density: 53.4M / mm² vs null
• Base Clock: 1700 MHz vs null
• Boost Clock: 2000 MHz vs null
• Memory Clock: 2000 MHz, 16 Gbps effective vs 2250 MHz, 18 Gbps effective
• Memory Size: 8 GB vs 24 GB
• Memory Bus Width: 256 bit vs 192 bit
• Memory Bandwidth: 512.0 GB/s vs 432.0 GB/s
• Shading Units: 3072 vs 6144
• RT Cores: 24 vs null
• FP32: 12.29 TFLOPS vs 24.58 TFLOPS
• FP16: 24.58 TFLOPS (2:1) vs 49.15 TFLOPS (2:1)
• TDP: 175 W vs 225 W
• Power Connectors: 2x 8-pin vs 1x 16-pin
• Suggested PSU: 450 W vs 550 W
• Display Outputs: 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0 vs 4x DisplayPort 1.4a
• Vulkan Version: 1.4 vs 1.3
• Dimensions: null vs 268 mm length, 112 mm height, 40 mm width
• Release Date: 2023-10-09 vs 2026-03-16
• Predecessor: Xe Graphics vs null
• Successor: Battlemage vs null
• Benchmark Scores: 2229 (Steel Nomad), 91657 (OpenCL), 79381 (Vulkan) vs none
• Average Benchmark Score: 57756 vs 0
• Percentile vs All GPUs: 87 vs 50
• Nearest Rivals: 4 entries vs none

Fields that match include process node (6 nm), foundry (TSMC), memory type (GDDR6), TMUs (192), ROPs (96), pixel rate (192.0 GPixel/s), texture rate (384.0 GTexel/s), slot width (Dual-slot), bus interface (PCIe 4.0 x16), DirectX version (12 Ultimate 12_2), OpenGL version (4.6), and production status (Active).