Intel Arc Pro A60M vs Lisuan Tech LX MAX Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc Pro A60M and Lisuan Tech LX MAX occupy different corners of the GPU landscape, and the split is defined by their physical design and compute resources. The Arc Pro A60M is an integrated graphics package (IGP slot width) with a 95 W power target, built for mobile professional workstations. The LX MAX is a dual-slot, 225 W desktop card with a 1x 16-pin power connector and a suggested 550 W power supply, clearly aimed at stationary high-performance systems. The data indicates the LX MAX wins decisively in raw throughput categories: it has triple the shading units (6144 versus 2048), 50% more texture mapping units (192 versus 128), and 50% more render output units (96 versus 64). Its pixel rate of 192.0 GPixel/s is 2.3 times the Arc Pro's 83.20 GPixel/s, and its texture rate of 384.0 GTexel/s is 2.3 times the 166.4 GTexel/s of the Intel part. The LX MAX also carries 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, delivering 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which is 1.7 times the 256.0 GB/s of the Arc Pro A60M. For any workload that scales with shading units, memory capacity, or memory bandwidth, the LX MAX is the clear winner.

The Arc Pro A60M does hold advantages in a few specific areas. It supports Vulkan 1.4, while the LX MAX lists Vulkan 1.3. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and OpenGL 4.6, so API-level parity is mostly maintained. The Arc Pro is also a smaller footprint solution, being an IGP rather than a dual-slot card, which makes it suitable for compact systems where the LX MAX's 248 mm length, 118 mm height, and 48 mm width would not fit. The Arc Pro's 6 nm TSMC process node matches the LX MAX's process node, but the Intel chip uses an 11,500 million transistor count on a 269 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 42.8M per mm², whereas the LX MAX's transistor count and die size are unknown. The use-case split is therefore straightforward: the LX MAX dominates in compute-heavy and memory-intensive tasks, while the Arc Pro A60M fits into low-power, space-constrained designs.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from completely different architectural lineages. The Arc Pro A60M uses Intel's Xe-HPG architecture on the DG2-256 chip, belonging to the Alchemist generation in the Pro-Series Mobile line. The LX MAX uses an architecture called TrueGPU on the 7G106 chip, from the 7G100 generation. The process node is identical: both are fabricated on 6 nm by TSMC. The Intel part has a known die size of 269 mm² with 11,500 million transistors, while the LX MAX's die size and transistor count are not recorded in the database, which limits direct density comparisons.

Clock behavior differs notably. The Arc Pro A60M has specified base and boost clocks of 900 MHz and 1300 MHz respectively, while the LX MAX has no recorded base or boost clocks. Memory clocks also differ: the Arc Pro runs at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective, while the LX MAX runs at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective. The memory subsystems diverge in width and capacity: the Arc Pro has 8 GB on a 128-bit bus, the LX MAX has 12 GB on a 192-bit bus. This explains the bandwidth gap, 256.0 GB/s versus 432.0 GB/s.

Compute resources are the largest architectural differentiator. The Arc Pro A60M has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 16 ray tracing cores. The LX MAX has 6144 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, with no ray tracing cores listed. The LX MAX's FP32 throughput is 24.58 TFLOPS, more than 4.6 times the Arc Pro's 5.325 TFLOPS. FP16 performance scales similarly: 49.15 TFLOPS versus 10.65 TFLOPS, both at a 2:1 ratio. The LX MAX also has a higher pixel rate (192.0 GPixel/s versus 83.20 GPixel/s) and texture rate (384.0 GTexel/s versus 166.4 GTexel/s). Neither GPU lists tensor cores, so AI acceleration hardware is not documented for either.

Power and physical design separate them further. The Arc Pro A60M has a 95 W TDP and an IGP slot width, meaning it is designed to be integrated into a motherboard or mobile platform. The LX MAX has a 225 W TDP, a dual-slot width, a 1x 16-pin power connector, and a suggested 550 W power supply. Display outputs also differ: the Arc Pro's outputs are described as "Portable Device Dependent," while the LX MAX offers 4x DisplayPort 1.4a. The LX MAX's dimensions are recorded as 248 mm length, 118 mm height, and 48 mm width, while the Arc Pro has no recorded dimensions due to its integrated nature. The LX MAX was released later, with a release date of 2026-03-16, while the Arc Pro A60M was released on 2023-06-05. Both are listed as Active in production status.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records no direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons between the Intel Arc Pro A60M and the Lisuan Tech LX MAX. The winsA and winsB fields are both zero, and the headToHeadBenchmarks array is empty. However, the recorded specifications allow for a comparative analysis of theoretical performance ceilings.

The most significant gap appears in FP32 compute. The LX MAX delivers 24.58 TFLOPS, which is 4.6 times the Arc Pro's 5.325 TFLOPS. That delta suggests the LX MAX is in a different performance class for general compute workloads such as rendering, simulations, or data processing. FP16 follows the same pattern: 49.15 TFLOPS versus 10.65 TFLOPS, again a 4.6x ratio. Pixel throughput shows a 2.3x advantage for the LX MAX (192.0 GPixel/s versus 83.20 GPixel/s), and texture throughput also shows a 2.3x advantage (384.0 GTexel/s versus 166.4 GTexel/s).

Memory bandwidth is another clear divider. The LX MAX's 432.0 GB/s is 1.7 times the Arc Pro's 256.0 GB/s. With 12 GB versus 8 GB of VRAM, the LX MAX also holds a 50% capacity advantage. These numbers point to the LX MAX being substantially faster in any memory-bound scenario, such as high-resolution textures or large dataset processing.

The Arc Pro A60M does have the advantage of a more recent Vulkan implementation. It supports Vulkan 1.4, whereas the LX MAX supports Vulkan 1.3. For applications that leverage the newest Vulkan features, the Intel part has a software-level edge. Both GPUs support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and OpenGL 4.6, so those API paths are functionally equivalent.

Ray tracing is another differentiator, but the data is incomplete. The Arc Pro A60M lists 16 ray tracing cores, while the LX MAX has no ray tracing core count recorded. This does not necessarily mean the LX MAX lacks ray tracing hardware, but the database does not confirm its presence. The Arc Pro's ray tracing cores are part of its 2048 shading unit configuration, and the 16 cores represent a dedicated hardware block. Without a comparable number for the LX MAX, the relative ray tracing performance cannot be quantified.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the recorded data, the Lisuan Tech LX MAX is the superior choice for raw performance. Its FP32 throughput of 24.58 TFLOPS dwarfs the Arc Pro A60M's 5.325 TFLOPS. Its memory bandwidth of 432.0 GB/s, memory capacity of 12 GB, and higher pixel and texture rates all point to a GPU that will handle demanding workloads with far more headroom. The LX MAX is the only one of the two with a dual-slot cooling solution and a 16-pin power connector, indicating it is designed for sustained, high-power operation in a desktop chassis.

The Intel Arc Pro A60M is the appropriate choice when power consumption and physical footprint are the primary constraints. Its 95 W TDP is less than half of the LX MAX's 225 W TDP, and its IGP form factor means it can be integrated into systems where a 248 mm long, dual-slot card cannot fit. The Arc Pro also supports Vulkan 1.4, which is a newer API version than the LX MAX's Vulkan 1.3, giving it a potential software advantage in Vulkan-based applications. The Arc Pro's 16 ray tracing cores provide dedicated hardware for ray-traced workloads, something the LX MAX does not list.

The data does not support a single universal winner. For a mobile workstation or a compact system where power draw is limited, the Arc Pro A60M is the only viable option among the two. For a desktop workstation or a high-performance computing setup where space and power are available, the LX MAX's compute and memory advantages are decisive. The 4.6x FP32 delta and the 1.7x bandwidth delta are large enough that no software optimization on the Arc Pro could realistically close the gap.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The Lisuan Tech LX MAX has a FP32 throughput of 24.58 TFLOPS, which is 4.6 times the 5.325 TFLOPS of the Intel Arc Pro A60M.

Q: How much memory does each GPU have and what is the bandwidth?

A: The Arc Pro A60M has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The LX MAX has 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus with 432.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The Arc Pro A60M has a 95 W TDP and is an IGP with no power connector listed. The LX MAX has a 225 W TDP, uses a 1x 16-pin power connector, and has a suggested power supply of 550 W.

Q: Which GPU supports a newer Vulkan version?

A: The Intel Arc Pro A60M supports Vulkan 1.4, while the Lisuan Tech LX MAX supports Vulkan 1.3. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and OpenGL 4.6.

Q: Does either GPU have ray tracing cores?

A: The Intel Arc Pro A60M lists 16 ray tracing cores. The Lisuan Tech LX MAX does not have a ray tracing core count recorded in the database.

Q: What are the physical dimensions of the LX MAX?

A: The Lisuan Tech LX MAX is 248 mm long, 118 mm high, and 48 mm wide, occupying a dual-slot width. The Arc Pro A60M is an IGP with no recorded dimensions.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Arc Pro A60M | Lisuan Tech LX MAX |

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

| Architecture | Xe-HPG | TrueGPU |

| Chip | DG2-256 | 7G106 |

| Generation | Alchemist (Pro-Series Mobile) | 7G100 |

| Process Node | 6 nm | 6 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | TSMC |

| Transistors | 11,500 million | unknown |

| Die Size | 269 mm² | unknown |

| Transistor Density | 42.8M / mm² | null |

| Base Clock | 900 MHz | null |

| Boost Clock | 1300 MHz | null |

| Memory Clock | 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) | 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 12 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 256.0 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 | 95 W | 225 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Dual-slot |

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

| Suggested PSU | null | 550 W |

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

| Vulkan Version | 1.4 | 1.3 |

| Release Date | 2023-06-05 | 2026-03-16 |

| Dimensions | null | 248 mm x 118 mm x 48 mm |