Intel Arc Pro B60 Dual vs Lisuan Tech LX MAX Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data splits these two accelerators cleanly by workload type, even though both sit at the 50th percentile against all GPUs in the database. The Intel Arc Pro B60 Dual is the choice for memory-heavy and interface-heavy scenarios, while the Lisuan Tech LX MAX leads in raw compute throughput and texture processing.

The Intel part wins on memory capacity, offering 24 GB versus 12 GB, and on memory bandwidth, delivering 456.0 GB/s against 432.0 GB/s. That 24 GB capacity advantage is decisive for datasets that exceed 12 GB, and the bandwidth edge of roughly 5.6% supports sustained transfers. The Intel card also uses PCIe 5.0 x8, doubling the per-lane bandwidth of the Lisuan's PCIe 4.0 x16 link in most practical configurations, and it carries newer display outputs with four mini-DisplayPort 2.1 connectors versus four DisplayPort 1.4a.

The Lisuan Tech LX MAX wins on compute density. Its FP32 throughput of 24.58 TFLOPS exactly doubles the Intel card's 12.29 TFLOPS, and its FP16 figure of 49.15 TFLOPS doubles the Intel's 24.58 TFLOPS. It also has more shading units (6144 versus 2560), more texture mapping units (192 versus 160), and more raster output units (96 versus 80). The pixel rate and texture rate are identical at 192.0 GPixel/s and 384.0 GTexel/s respectively, meaning the Lisuan achieves those rates with fewer resources working harder, while the Intel card matches them with a smaller shader array.

The Lisuan also wins on power efficiency in the data. Its 225 W TDP with 24.58 TFLOPS FP32 yields a higher compute-per-watt figure than the Intel card's 400 W TDP with 12.29 TFLOPS. The suggested PSU reflects this: 550 W for the Lisuan, 800 W for the Intel. The Lisuan is also physically shorter at 248 mm versus 300 mm, and narrower at 48 mm versus 40 mm in width, though taller at 118 mm versus 110 mm.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different architectural lineages entirely. The Intel Arc Pro B60 Dual uses the BMG-G21 chip built on the Xe2-HPG architecture, part of the Battlemage Pro Series generation. It is fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC, with 19,600 million transistors on a 272 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 72.1 million per square millimeter. The Lisuan Tech LX MAX uses the 7G106 chip on a "TrueGPU" architecture from the 7G100 generation, built on a 6 nm TSMC process. Its transistor count and die size are not recorded in the database.

The Intel chip carries 20 dedicated ray tracing cores, a feature the Lisuan does not list at all. The Intel part also has a higher Vulkan API level, supporting Vulkan 1.4, while the Lisuan supports Vulkan 1.3. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and OpenGL 4.6.

The Lisuan's architecture appears oriented toward raw shader throughput. Its 6144 shading units are 2.4 times the Intel's 2560, yet its pixel rate and texture rate match exactly. That discrepancy suggests the Lisuan's "TrueGPU" design allocates more of its silicon to general compute rather than fixed-function output stages. The Intel Xe2-HPG architecture, by contrast, balances its smaller shader array with dedicated ray tracing hardware and a higher memory clock of 2375 MHz versus 2250 MHz.

Both cards use GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, but the Intel memory runs at 19 Gbps effective versus 18 Gbps effective for the Lisuan. Both use a dual-slot cooler and a single 16-pin power connector.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records no direct head-to-head benchmark runs between these two cards, and neither has an average benchmark score entered. The wins are therefore derived from the specification-level data, which provides clear numerical deltas.

The largest single numeric advantage belongs to the Lisuan in FP32 compute. Its 24.58 TFLOPS is exactly double the Intel's 12.29 TFLOPS. The same doubling appears in FP16: 49.15 TFLOPS versus 24.58 TFLOPS. These are 100% deltas, the biggest gaps in the comparison.

The Intel card counters with memory capacity. Its 24 GB is double the Lisuan's 12 GB, another 100% delta. Bandwidth favors the Intel by a smaller margin: 456.0 GB/s versus 432.0 GB/s, a 5.6% advantage. Memory clock favors Intel similarly: 2375 MHz versus 2250 MHz, also 5.6%.

Shader resources favor the Lisuan substantially. Its 6144 shading units are 140% more than the Intel's 2560. Texture mapping units favor the Lisuan by 20% (192 versus 160), and raster output units by 20% (96 versus 80). Despite these resource advantages, the pixel rate and texture rate are identical, indicating the Intel's architecture extracts equal output per clock from fewer units.

Power consumption shows a 43.75% reduction for the Lisuan (225 W versus 400 W), and the suggested PSU drops from 800 W to 550 W, a 31.25% reduction. The Lisuan also uses an older PCIe generation but a wider link: PCIe 4.0 x16 versus PCIe 5.0 x8. The Intel card is 52 mm longer but 8 mm thinner.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ on nearly every measurable field except the ones listed below.

Process node: Intel uses 5 nm, Lisuan uses 6 nm. Both are TSMC.

Transistors: Intel records 19,600 million; Lisuan's count is unknown. Die size: Intel at 272 mm², Lisuan unknown. Transistor density: Intel at 72.1M per mm², Lisuan not recorded.

Core clocks: Intel has a 2000 MHz base and 2400 MHz boost. The Lisuan lists no base or boost clock. Memory clock: Intel at 2375 MHz (19 Gbps effective), Lisuan at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective).

Memory capacity: Intel 24 GB, Lisuan 12 GB. Both GDDR6, both 192-bit bus. Bandwidth: Intel 456.0 GB/s, Lisuan 432.0 GB/s.

Shader resources: Intel has 2560 shading units, 160 TMUs, 80 ROPs, and 20 RT cores. Lisuan has 6144 shading units, 192 TMUs, 96 ROPs, and no RT cores listed.

Compute rates: Intel FP32 at 12.29 TFLOPS, FP16 at 24.58 TFLOPS. Lisuan FP32 at 24.58 TFLOPS, FP16 at 49.15 TFLOPS. Both have identical pixel rate (192.0 GPixel/s) and texture rate (384.0 GTexel/s).

Power: Intel TDP 400 W, Lisuan 225 W. Intel suggested PSU 800 W, Lisuan 550 W. Both dual-slot, both use 1x 16-pin power.

Bus interface: Intel PCIe 5.0 x8, Lisuan PCIe 4.0 x16.

Display outputs: Intel 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.1, Lisuan 4x DisplayPort 1.4a.

API support: Both DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and OpenGL 4.6. Vulkan differs: Intel 1.4, Lisuan 1.3.

Dimensions: Intel 300 mm x 110 mm x 40 mm. Lisuan 248 mm x 118 mm x 48 mm.

Release dates: Intel 2025-09-04, Lisuan 2026-03-16. Both production status Active.

Launch MSRP: Intel at 1,199 USD. Lisuan has no recorded launch MSRP.

FAQ

Q: Which card has more memory?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B60 Dual has 24 GB of GDDR6, exactly double the Lisuan Tech LX MAX's 12 GB. Both use a 192-bit memory bus.

Q: Which card has higher FP32 compute?

A: The Lisuan Tech LX MAX delivers 24.58 TFLOPS FP32, exactly double the Intel Arc Pro B60 Dual's 12.29 TFLOPS. The FP16 figures follow the same doubling: 49.15 TFLOPS versus 24.58 TFLOPS.

Q: Do both cards support the same DirectX version?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and OpenGL 4.6. They differ on Vulkan, with the Intel card supporting Vulkan 1.4 and the Lisuan supporting Vulkan 1.3.

Q: Which card requires a more powerful power supply?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B60 Dual has a 400 W TDP and suggests an 800 W PSU. The Lisuan Tech LX MAX has a 225 W TDP and suggests a 550 W PSU.

Q: Does the Lisuan Tech LX MAX have ray tracing cores?

A: The database lists no ray tracing cores for the Lisuan Tech LX MAX. The Intel Arc Pro B60 Dual includes 20 dedicated ray tracing cores.

Q: What are the physical size differences?

A: The Intel card is longer at 300 mm versus 248 mm, shorter in height at 110 mm versus 118 mm, and thinner at 40 mm versus 48 mm. Both are dual-slot cards.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split based on workload priorities. For applications that load large datasets into video memory, the Intel Arc Pro B60 Dual is the only choice between these two. Its 24 GB capacity is double the Lisuan's 12 GB, and its 456.0 GB/s bandwidth is higher. The Intel card also brings PCIe 5.0 x8, newer DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, Vulkan 1.4 support, and dedicated ray tracing hardware. These features come at a cost in power: 400 W TDP and an 800 W suggested PSU, plus a longer 300 mm physical footprint.

For compute-bound workloads that stress shader throughput, the Lisuan Tech LX MAX dominates the recorded specifications. Its FP32 rate of 24.58 TFLOPS equals the Intel card's FP16 rate, and its shading unit count of 6144 is more than double the Intel's 2560. It achieves identical pixel and texture rates as the Intel card while consuming 225 W, a 43.75% reduction in TDP. The Lisuan also fits in shorter chassis at 248 mm and requires only a 550 W PSU.

The identical pixel rate and texture rate across both cards indicate that output-stage performance will not differentiate them. The differences lie in memory capacity, compute throughput, API level, and power draw. The Intel card's launch MSRP is recorded at 1,199 USD, while the Lisuan has no MSRP in the database. The Intel card released on 2025-09-04, and the Lisuan on 2026-03-16, both currently marked as Active in production.