Intel Arc Pro A60M vs Lisuan Tech LX PRO Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the core differences in GPU architecture between the Intel Arc Pro A60M and the Lisuan Tech LX PRO?

A: The Intel Arc Pro A60M uses the DG2-256 chip with Intel’s Xe-HPG architecture, part of the Alchemist Pro-Series Mobile generation. The Lisuan Tech LX PRO uses the 7G105 chip with a TrueGPU architecture, belonging to the 7G100 generation. Both are manufactured on a 6 nm process at TSMC.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in memory capacity and bandwidth?

A: The Lisuan Tech LX PRO has 24 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192 bit bus, delivering 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel Arc Pro A60M has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128 bit bus, delivering 256.0 GB/s. The LX PRO offers three times the memory capacity and significantly higher bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has higher compute throughput?

A: The Lisuan Tech LX PRO reaches 24.58 TFLOPS FP32 and 49.15 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1). The Intel Arc Pro A60M reaches 5.325 TFLOPS FP32 and 10.65 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1). The LX PRO delivers roughly 4.6 times the FP32 throughput of the A60M.

Q: What are the power requirements for each GPU?

A: The Intel Arc Pro A60M has a TDP of 95 W and uses an IGP slot width with no power connectors listed. The Lisuan Tech LX PRO has a TDP of 225 W, uses a Dual-slot design, requires a 1x 16-pin power connector, and lists a suggested PSU of 550 W.

Q: What display outputs does each GPU support?

A: The Intel Arc Pro A60M lists display outputs as "Portable Device Dependent," meaning outputs vary by device. The Lisuan Tech LX PRO provides 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

Q: Which GPU supports newer graphics APIs?

A: Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and OpenGL 4.6. The Intel Arc Pro A60M supports Vulkan 1.4, while the Lisuan Tech LX PRO supports Vulkan 1.3. The A60M has a slight edge in Vulkan version support.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Arc Pro A60M and Lisuan Tech LX PRO differ fundamentally in their silicon design. The A60M is built around the DG2-256 chip, which uses Intel’s Xe-HPG architecture and belongs to the Alchemist Pro-Series Mobile generation. The LX PRO uses the 7G105 chip with a TrueGPU architecture from the 7G100 generation. Both are fabricated on TSMC’s 6 nm process, but the A60M has a published transistor count of 11,500 million across a die size of 269 mm², giving a transistor density of 42.8M per mm². The LX PRO does not list transistor count or die size in the database.

The compute architectures diverge significantly. The Intel Arc Pro A60M contains 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 16 RT cores. The Lisuan Tech LX PRO contains 6144 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, with no RT core count listed. This gives the LX PRO three times the shading units, 1.5 times the TMUs, and 1.5 times the ROPs of the A60M. The LX PRO also has higher pixel rate at 192.0 GPixel/s versus 83.20 GPixel/s for the A60M, and higher texture rate at 384.0 GTexel/s versus 166.4 GTexel/s.

Memory architecture presents another major split. The A60M uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128 bit bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The LX PRO uses 24 GB of GDDR6 on a 192 bit bus with 432.0 GB/s bandwidth. The LX PRO’s memory clock runs at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective speed, while the A60M’s memory runs at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective speed. The LX PRO’s larger bus width and higher effective memory speed combine to deliver substantially more memory bandwidth.

Clock behavior also differs. The A60M has explicit base and boost clocks of 900 MHz and 1300 MHz respectively. The LX PRO lists no base or boost clock in the database, making direct clock comparisons impossible. However, the LX PRO’s higher shading unit count and stronger fill rates indicate its architecture prioritizes raw throughput over the A60M’s more conservative mobile-oriented design. The A60M is a 95 W IGP-class part with no power connectors, while the LX PRO is a 225 W Dual-slot card requiring a 1x 16-pin connector and a 550 W suggested PSU. The LX PRO measures 248 mm in length, 118 mm in height, and 48 mm in width.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records no head-to-head benchmark entries between the Intel Arc Pro A60M and the Lisuan Tech LX PRO, and neither GPU has individual benchmark scores listed. The winsA and winsB counters are both zero. This means the comparison must rely entirely on the recorded specification data, which shows a clear hierarchy in compute and memory resources.

The Lisuan Tech LX PRO holds decisive advantages in every measured compute category. Its FP32 throughput of 24.58 TFLOPS is approximately 4.6 times the A60M’s 5.325 TFLOPS. Its FP16 throughput of 49.15 TFLOPS is approximately 4.6 times the A60M’s 10.65 TFLOPS. Pixel rate favors the LX PRO at 192.0 GPixel/s versus 83.20 GPixel/s, a 2.3 times advantage. Texture rate favors the LX PRO at 384.0 GTexel/s versus 166.4 GTexel/s, also a 2.3 times advantage.

Memory resources follow the same pattern. The LX PRO offers 24 GB versus 8 GB, a 3 times capacity advantage. Bandwidth favors the LX PRO at 432.0 GB/s versus 256.0 GB/s, a 1.7 times advantage. The LX PRO’s memory interface width of 192 bit versus 128 bit reinforces its bandwidth lead. Effective memory speed of 18 Gbps versus 16 Gbps adds a further edge.

The Intel Arc Pro A60M counters with a lower TDP of 95 W versus 225 W, making it far more power-efficient on paper per watt of board power. It also supports Vulkan 1.4 versus the LX PRO’s Vulkan 1.3. The A60M has 16 RT cores while the LX PRO lists none, giving the Intel part a dedicated ray tracing hardware advantage. However, the A60M’s smaller shading unit count and lower clock headroom limit its overall compute ceiling compared to the LX PRO.

The physical design difference is stark: the A60M is an IGP mobile-class implementation with no power connectors, while the LX PRO is a Dual-slot add-in card with a 1x 16-pin connector. These form factors align with their intended deployment scenarios, but the LX PRO’s specification sheet indicates a much higher performance envelope.

The Verdict

The data shows a clear split between these two GPUs. The Lisuan Tech LX PRO is the stronger performer in raw compute, memory capacity, memory bandwidth, pixel throughput, and texture throughput. Its 24.58 TFLOPS FP32 figure, 24 GB memory capacity, and 432.0 GB/s bandwidth place it in a different performance class than the Intel Arc Pro A60M. Any workload that stresses FP32 compute, large datasets, or high-resolution textures will favor the LX PRO by a wide margin.

The Intel Arc Pro A60M is the more power-conscious option. Its 95 W TDP, IGP form factor, and lack of external power connectors make it suitable for systems where space and power draw are constrained. It also provides dedicated RT cores, which the LX PRO does not list, and a newer Vulkan version at 1.4 versus 1.3. For users prioritizing ray tracing capability or low power consumption, the A60M has a place.

The LX PRO’s 550 W suggested PSU and 225 W TDP indicate it requires a serious power delivery system. The A60M’s 95 W TDP and connector-free design suggest it can fit into compact or integrated systems. The choice depends on whether the workload demands the LX PRO’s massive compute and memory resources or the A60M’s efficiency and RT hardware.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ on nearly every specification field recorded in the database. The chip identifiers are distinct: DG2-256 for the A60M and 7G105 for the LX PRO. Architecture names differ: Xe-HPG versus TrueGPU. Generations differ: Alchemist Pro-Series Mobile versus 7G100. The process node is identical at 6 nm from TSMC, but the A60M lists 11,500 million transistors on a 269 mm² die with 42.8M per mm² density, while the LX PRO lists none of these figures.

Clock specifications differ: the A60M has a 900 MHz base and 1300 MHz boost, while the LX PRO has neither. Memory clocks differ: 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective for the A60M versus 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective for the LX PRO. Memory capacity differs at 8 GB versus 24 GB. Bus width differs at 128 bit versus 192 bit. Bandwidth differs at 256.0 GB/s versus 432.0 GB/s.

Shader resources differ sharply: 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 16 RT cores for the A60M versus 6144 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs with no RT cores for the LX PRO. Pixel rate differs at 83.20 GPixel/s versus 192.0 GPixel/s. Texture rate differs at 166.4 GTexel/s versus 384.0 GTexel/s. FP32 differs at 5.325 TFLOPS versus 24.58 TFLOPS. FP16 differs at 10.65 TFLOPS versus 49.15 TFLOPS.

Power and physical specs differ: 95 W TDP versus 225 W, IGP slot width versus Dual-slot, no power connectors versus 1x 16-pin, no suggested PSU versus 550 W. Display outputs differ: Portable Device Dependent versus 4x DisplayPort 1.4a. Vulkan support differs at 1.4 versus 1.3. Release dates differ: 2023-06-05 for the A60M versus 2026-03-16 for the LX PRO. Both have a production status of Active and no launch MSRP recorded.

Where Each One Wins

The Lisuan Tech LX PRO wins in all compute-intensive scenarios. Its 6144 shading units and 24.58 TFLOPS FP32 output make it the choice for heavy parallel workloads such as rendering, simulation, and large-scale data processing. The 24 GB memory capacity and 432.0 GB/s bandwidth support large textures, high-resolution datasets, and multi-GPU memory pressure scenarios. The 192.0 GPixel/s pixel rate and 384.0 GTexel/s texture rate handle high-resolution display output and texture-heavy rendering pipelines. The LX PRO’s 225 W TDP and Dual-slot design indicate it is meant for desktop workstations with adequate power delivery.

The Intel Arc Pro A60M wins in power-constrained and ray tracing scenarios. Its 95 W TDP and IGP form factor allow integration into laptops and compact systems without external power connectors. The 16 RT cores provide dedicated ray tracing hardware, a feature the LX PRO does not list. Vulkan 1.4 support gives the A60M a newer API version for applications that use it. The A60M’s 900 MHz base and 1300 MHz boost clocks offer predictable performance scaling within its power envelope.

The data does not record any benchmark wins for either GPU, so the use-case split derives entirely from specification analysis. The LX PRO dominates raw throughput categories by factors of 4.6 in FP32, 4.6 in FP16, 2.3 in pixel rate, and 2.3 in texture rate. The A60M dominates efficiency and RT-specific features. Workloads that fit within the A60M’s 8 GB memory and 256.0 GB/s bandwidth may still benefit from its RT cores and lower power draw. Workloads that exceed those limits will require the LX PRO’s 24 GB capacity and 432.0 GB/s bandwidth.