Intel Arc Pro B60 vs Lisuan Tech LX PRO Comparison

Intel Arc Pro B60 and Lisuan Tech LX PRO are both active, dual-slot professional graphics cards with 24 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, but they diverge sharply in architecture, compute resources, and measured performance. The Arc Pro B60 has a full set of benchmark results, while the LX PRO has none recorded, so head-to-head comparisons rely on the Arc Pro B60’s nearest rivals and the LX PRO’s raw specifications. The data shows the Arc Pro B60 sits near the 20th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 3182, while the LX PRO holds a 50th percentile ranking despite having no benchmark scores, indicating its position comes from specification-based estimation rather than direct testing.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the Intel Arc Pro B60 and the Lisuan Tech LX PRO. The headToHeadBenchmarks field is empty, and the winsA and winsB counters are both zero. Consequently, any comparative performance analysis must be inferred from the Arc Pro B60’s individual benchmark scores and its nearest rival data, along with the LX PRO’s specification sheet.

The Arc Pro B60’s recorded benchmarks show a wide spread across tests. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, it scores 2646. PassMark results include a G3D score of 14580, a GPU compute score of 7029, a G2D score of 763, a DirectX 9 score of 179, a DirectX 11 score of 122, a DirectX 12 score of 76, and a DirectX 10 score of 61. These numbers indicate the card is substantially stronger in compute and modern 3D workloads than in legacy DirectX rasterization, which is typical for an architecture built around newer feature sets.

The nearest rivals for the Arc Pro B60 provide context. The NVIDIA Quadro P1000 has an average score of 3163, which is 0.6% higher than the Arc Pro B60’s 3182. That puts the Intel card marginally ahead. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 640 averages 3210, which is 0.9% higher than the Arc Pro B60, meaning the GT 640 edges out the Arc Pro B60 by a tiny margin. The NVIDIA GeForce 920M averages 3287, which is 3.2% higher, giving the 920M a more noticeable lead. Conversely, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER averages 3075, which is 3.5% lower than the Arc Pro B60, so the Intel card beats that particular RTX model in average benchmark score.

The LX PRO has no benchmark scores, no average score, and no nearest rivals. Its percentileVsAllGpus of 50 is higher than the Arc Pro B60’s 20, but without measured results, that percentile cannot be validated against actual tests. The data suggests the LX PRO is positioned as a mid-tier GPU by the database’s estimation, while the Arc Pro B60 is placed in the lower quintile based on real measurements.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Arc Pro B60 uses the BMG-G21 chip built on the Xe2-HPG architecture, belonging to 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 mm². The LX PRO uses a 7G105 chip based on the TrueGPU architecture, from the 7G100 generation. It is fabricated on a 6 nm process, also at TSMC, but its transistor count and die size are listed as unknown, so no density figure exists.

Compute resources differ substantially. The Arc Pro B60 has 2560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, and 80 raster operation pipelines, plus 20 ray tracing cores. The LX PRO has 6144 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, but its ray tracing core count is null. That means the LX PRO has 2.4 times the shading units, 20% more TMUs, and 20% more ROPs than the Arc Pro B60, but it lacks a listed ray tracing core count entirely. The Arc Pro B60’s ray tracing hardware is explicit, while the LX PRO’s ray tracing capabilities are unquantified in the data.

Clock speeds also diverge. The Arc Pro B60 has a base clock of 2000 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz. The LX PRO has no base or boost clock listed. Memory clocks are closer: the Arc Pro B60 runs its memory at 2375 MHz, which is 19 Gbps effective, while the LX PRO runs at 2250 MHz, which is 18 Gbps effective.

The floating-point throughput reveals a major gulf. The Arc Pro B60 delivers 12.29 TFLOPS FP32 and 24.58 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1 ratio). The LX PRO delivers 24.58 TFLOPS FP32 and 49.15 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1 ratio). That is exactly double the FP32 and FP16 performance on paper. The pixel rate and texture rate, however, are identical: both cards produce 192.0 GPixel/s and 384.0 GTexel/s. This is a notable combination: the LX PRO has far more shading units and double the FP32 throughput, yet the same pixel and texture fill rates, which suggests the Arc Pro B60’s higher clocks compensate partially, or the LX PRO’s ROP and TMU counts are not fully utilized at its unspecified clock speeds.

API support is similar but not identical. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and OpenGL 4.6. The Arc Pro B60 supports Vulkan 1.4, while the LX PRO supports Vulkan 1.3. The bus interface differs: the Arc Pro B60 uses PCIe 5.0 x8, while the LX PRO uses PCIe 4.0 x16. The Arc Pro B60 has 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, while the LX PRO has 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the recorded data, the Intel Arc Pro B60 wins in measured benchmark performance. Its average benchmark score of 3182 places it slightly above the NVIDIA Quadro P1000 by 0.6% and above the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER by 3.5%. It loses to the NVIDIA GeForce GT 640 by 0.9% and to the NVIDIA GeForce 920M by 3.2%, but those margins are small. The Arc Pro B60’s percentile of 20 indicates it is in the lower end of all GPUs, yet it still outperforms several dedicated workstation and consumer models in the database’s nearest rival list.

The Lisuan Tech LX PRO wins in raw specification counts. It has 6144 shading units versus 2560, 192 TMUs versus 160, 96 ROPs versus 80, and double the FP32 and FP16 TFLOPS. Its memory bandwidth is slightly lower at 432.0 GB/s versus 456.0 GB/s, a 5.3% deficit. The LX PRO also has a higher TDP at 225 W versus 200 W, and a larger physical footprint: 248 mm length versus 167 mm, 118 mm height versus 69 mm, and 48 mm width versus 40 mm.

For workloads that depend heavily on shading unit count and raw FP32 throughput, such as compute-heavy rendering or simulation tasks, the LX PRO’s specifications suggest it could deliver higher performance. However, the database has no benchmark scores to confirm this. The Arc Pro B60, in contrast, has verified results showing it handles DirectX 12 and GPU compute workloads with scores of 76 and 7029 respectively, while its DirectX 9 score of 179 shows legacy compatibility.

The Arc Pro B60 wins on connectivity standards: PCIe 5.0 x8 offers higher per-lane bandwidth than PCIe 4.0 x16, and DisplayPort 2.1 supports newer display features compared to DisplayPort 1.4a. The LX PRO wins on memory capacity parity, matching 24 GB GDDR6, and on shading resources.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every major specification except memory size, memory type, memory bus width, pixel rate, texture rate, TDP, slot width, and suggested PSU. Both have 24 GB GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, both produce 192.0 GPixel/s and 384.0 GTexel/s, both are dual-slot, and both have a 550 W suggested PSU.

Process node: the Arc Pro B60 uses 5 nm, the LX PRO uses 6 nm. Transistors: 19,600 million for the Arc Pro B60, unknown for the LX PRO. Die size: 272 mm² for the Arc Pro B60, unknown for the LX PRO. Transistor density: 72.1M per mm² for the Arc Pro B60, null for the LX PRO.

Base and boost clocks: the Arc Pro B60 has 2000 MHz base and 2400 MHz boost; the LX PRO has neither listed. Memory clock: 2375 MHz (19 Gbps effective) for the Arc Pro B60, 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) for the LX PRO. Memory bandwidth: 456.0 GB/s versus 432.0 GB/s.

Shading units: 2560 versus 6144. TMUs: 160 versus 192. ROPs: 80 versus 96. Ray tracing cores: 20 for the Arc Pro B60, null for the LX PRO. FP32: 12.29 TFLOPS versus 24.58 TFLOPS. FP16: 24.58 TFLOPS versus 49.15 TFLOPS.

TDP: 200 W versus 225 W. Power connectors: 1x 8-pin for the Arc Pro B60, 1x 16-pin for the LX PRO. Bus interface: PCIe 5.0 x8 versus PCIe 4.0 x16. Display outputs: 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.1 versus 4x DisplayPort 1.4a.

Vulkan support: 1.4 for the Arc Pro B60, 1.3 for the LX PRO. DirectX and OpenGL are identical. Dimensions: the Arc Pro B60 is 167 mm long, 69 mm high, 40 mm wide; the LX PRO is 248 mm long, 118 mm high, 48 mm wide.

Release dates: the Arc Pro B60 released on 2025-09-04, the LX PRO on 2026-03-16. The Arc Pro B60 has a launch MSRP of 499 USD, while the LX PRO has no launch MSRP listed. The Arc Pro B60’s architecture is Xe2-HPG with a Battlemage generation, while the LX PRO uses TrueGPU with a 7G100 generation.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B60 has an average benchmark score of 3182. The Lisuan Tech LX PRO has an average benchmark score of 0 because no benchmark results are recorded for it.

Q: How does the Intel Arc Pro B60 compare to its nearest rival, the NVIDIA Quadro P1000?

A: The Arc Pro B60’s average score of 3182 is 0.6% higher than the Quadro P1000’s average score of 3163.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth between the two cards?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B60 has a memory bandwidth of 456.0 GB/s, while the Lisuan Tech LX PRO has 432.0 GB/s. The Arc Pro B60 is higher by 24.0 GB/s.

Q: How many shading units does each card have?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B60 has 2560 shading units. The Lisuan Tech LX PRO has 6144 shading units, which is 3584 more.

Q: Do both cards support the same DirectX version?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). They also both support OpenGL 4.6, but the Arc Pro B60 supports Vulkan 1.4 while the LX PRO supports Vulkan 1.3.

Q: What is the percentile ranking for each card?

A: The Intel Arc Pro B60 is at the 20th percentile of all GPUs. The Lisuan Tech LX PRO is at the 50th percentile, but this is based on no benchmark scores, only an estimated position.

The database shows a clear split: the Arc Pro B60 has verified performance data and a modest but real benchmark footprint, while the LX PRO offers a specification sheet with substantially higher compute counts but no measured results. The Arc Pro B60’s nearest rivals include the Quadro P1000, GT 640, GeForce 920M, and RTX 5080 SUPER, with deltas ranging from 3.5% ahead to 3.2% behind. The LX PRO’s 50th percentile suggests the database places it as a mid-range performer, but that ranking is not supported by any recorded test. For a buyer or analyst relying on measured outcomes, the Arc Pro B60 is the only one of the two with data to evaluate. For a workload that can use 6144 shading units and 24.58 TFLOPS FP32, the LX PRO’s specifications indicate potential, yet the absence of benchmarks leaves that potential unverified.