Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 vs Lisuan Tech LX PRO Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the two accelerators compared in this analysis?

A: The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100, based on the Ponte Vecchio chip and Generation 12.5 architecture, and the Lisuan Tech LX PRO, based on the 7G105 chip and TrueGPU architecture.

Q: Which product has a larger memory capacity and wider bus?

A: The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 carries 48 GB of HBM2e memory on an 8192-bit bus, delivering 1.23 TB/s of bandwidth. The Lisuan Tech LX PRO carries 24 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, delivering 432.0 GB/s.

Q: How do the raw FP32 compute figures compare between the two?

A: The Lisuan Tech LX PRO reaches 24.58 TFLOPS FP32, while the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 reaches 22.22 TFLOPS FP32. The LX PRO leads by roughly 10.6% in this metric.

Q: Which card supports a newer PCIe interface?

A: The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the Lisuan Tech LX PRO uses PCIe 4.0 x16.

Q: Do both cards have display outputs?

A: No. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 has no display outputs, while the Lisuan Tech LX PRO includes 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

Q: What is the power draw difference between the two accelerators?

A: The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 has a TDP of 300 W, while the Lisuan Tech LX PRO has a TDP of 225 W. The suggested PSU ratings are 700 W and 550 W, respectively.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 is built on Intel's Ponte Vecchio chip, fabricated on a 10 nm process at Intel's own foundry. The die measures 1280 mm² and packs 100,000 million transistors, yielding a transistor density of 78.1M / mm². This is a massive, high-bandwidth design aimed at data center compute. The LX PRO, in contrast, uses the 7G105 chip on a 6 nm process from TSMC, with transistor count and die size listed as unknown in the database, so no density comparison can be made.

Memory architecture separates the two clearly. The Intel Max 1100 uses HBM2e with 48 GB capacity and an 8192-bit bus, resulting in 1.23 TB/s of bandwidth. The Lisuan Tech LX PRO uses GDDR6 with 24 GB capacity on a 192-bit bus, achieving 432.0 GB/s. That is a 2.85x bandwidth advantage for the Intel part, but at the cost of a much larger and more complex memory subsystem.

The compute layouts differ substantially. The Intel Max 1100 has 7168 shading units, 448 TMUs, no ROPs, and 56 ray tracing cores. Its pixel rate is 0 MPixel/s, which is consistent with a card that has no display outputs and no rasterization pipeline. The LX PRO has 6144 shading units, 192 TMUs, 96 ROPs, and no dedicated ray tracing cores. It delivers 192.0 GPixel/s pixel rate, indicating a full graphics pipeline. The Intel part also lacks a listed Vulkan version, while the LX PRO supports Vulkan 1.3 and DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), versus DirectX 12 (12_1) for the Intel card.

Clock behavior also differs. The Intel Max 1100 has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 1550 MHz, with memory running at 600 MHz (1200 Mbps effective). The LX PRO has no base or boost clock listed for the core, but its memory runs at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective). The LX PRO's FP16 throughput is 49.15 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, double its FP32 rate, while the Intel Max 1100 lists FP16 at 22.22 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, identical to its FP32.

The physical specifications diverge too. The Intel Max 1100 is 267 mm (10.5 inches) long, dual-slot, uses a 1x 12-pin power connector, and has no display outputs. The LX PRO is 248 mm (9.8 inches) long, 118 mm (4.6 inches) high, 48 mm (1.9 inches) wide, dual-slot, uses a 1x 16-pin power connector, and includes 4x DisplayPort 1.4a. The Intel card is PCIe 5.0 x16; the LX PRO is PCIe 4.0 x16.

The Intel Max 1100 was released on 2023-01-09 and has a successor listed as H3C Graphics. The LX PRO was released on 2026-03-16 and has no successor recorded. Both are marked Active in production, and both sit at the 50th percentile among all GPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of zero.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded head-to-head benchmark results for these two accelerators, and neither product has individual benchmark scores in the measurement set. The wins count for each side is zero. Consequently, any direct performance comparison must rely on the specification-level figures recorded in the database.

In raw FP32 compute, the Lisuan Tech LX PRO holds the advantage. At 24.58 TFLOPS, it is 2.36 TFLOPS ahead of the Intel Max 1100's 22.22 TFLOPS, a lead of roughly 10.6%. This is a meaningful gap for compute workloads that scale with FP32 throughput. The LX PRO also delivers a much higher FP16 rate at 49.15 TFLOPS versus 22.22 TFLOPS for the Intel part, more than double. That said, the FP16 ratio differs: the LX PRO uses a 2:1 ratio (two FP16 operations per FP32), while the Intel part uses a 1:1 ratio, so the FP16 advantage reflects architectural throughput rather than a direct per-clock comparison.

Texture rate favors the Intel Max 1100. The Intel part reaches 694.4 GTexel/s, while the LX PRO reaches 384.0 GTexel/s. That is an 80.8% advantage for Intel, driven by its 448 TMUs versus 192 TMUs. The Intel card's higher TMU count and higher boost clock of 1550 MHz contribute to this margin. The LX PRO counters in pixel rate, however, with 192.0 GPixel/s versus 0 MPixel/s for the Intel card, since the latter has no ROPs and no display pipeline.

Memory bandwidth is a decisive win for the Intel Max 1100. At 1.23 TB/s versus 432.0 GB/s, the Intel part offers roughly 2.85x the bandwidth. This matters for large datasets, model weights, and memory-bound kernels. The LX PRO's 192-bit bus and GDDR6 memory cannot match the HBM2e implementation on the Intel part.

The two cards also differ in power efficiency. The LX PRO draws 225 W TDP versus 300 W for the Intel Max 1100. Per watt, the LX PRO's FP32 output is roughly 109.2 GFLOPS/W, while the Intel part delivers about 74.1 GFLOPS/W. The LX PRO also requires a 550 W suggested PSU versus 700 W for the Intel card, indicating lower system-level power demands.

Interface generation favors the Intel Max 1100 with PCIe 5.0 x16 versus PCIe 4.0 x16 on the LX PRO. This provides double the theoretical link bandwidth for host-device transfers, although the practical impact depends on workload and platform support.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two accelerators, per the recorded data:

• Chip: Intel Max 1100 uses Ponte Vecchio; LX PRO uses 7G105.
• Architecture: Intel Max 1100 uses Generation 12.5; LX PRO uses TrueGPU.
• Generation: Intel Max 1100 is Data Center GPU (Ponte Vecchio); LX PRO is 7G100.
• Process node: Intel Max 1100 is 10 nm; LX PRO is 6 nm.
• Foundry: Intel Max 1100 uses Intel; LX PRO uses TSMC.
• Transistors: Intel Max 1100 has 100,000 million; LX PRO is unknown.
• Die size: Intel Max 1100 is 1280 mm²; LX PRO is unknown.
• Transistor density: Intel Max 1100 is 78.1M / mm²; LX PRO is null.
• Base clock: Intel Max 1100 is 1000 MHz; LX PRO is null.
• Boost clock: Intel Max 1100 is 1550 MHz; LX PRO is null.
• Memory clock: Intel Max 1100 is 600 MHz (1200 Mbps effective); LX PRO is 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective).
• Memory size: Intel Max 1100 is 48 GB; LX PRO is 24 GB.
• Memory type: Intel Max 1100 is HBM2e; LX PRO is GDDR6.
• Memory bus width: Intel Max 1100 is 8192 bit; LX PRO is 192 bit.
• Memory bandwidth: Intel Max 1100 is 1.23 TB/s; LX PRO is 432.0 GB/s.
• Shading units: Intel Max 1100 has 7168; LX PRO has 6144.
• TMUs: Intel Max 1100 has 448; LX PRO has 192.
• ROPs: Intel Max 1100 has 0; LX PRO has 96.
• RT cores: Intel Max 1100 has 56; LX PRO is null.
• Pixel rate: Intel Max 1100 is 0 MPixel/s; LX PRO is 192.0 GPixel/s.
• Texture rate: Intel Max 1100 is 694.4 GTexel/s; LX PRO is 384.0 GTexel/s.
• FP32: Intel Max 1100 is 22.22 TFLOPS; LX PRO is 24.58 TFLOPS.
• FP16: Intel Max 1100 is 22.22 TFLOPS (1:1); LX PRO is 49.15 TFLOPS (2:1).
• TDP: Intel Max 1100 is 300 W; LX PRO is 225 W.
• Power connectors: Intel Max 1100 uses 1x 12-pin; LX PRO uses 1x 16-pin.
• Suggested PSU: Intel Max 1100 is 700 W; LX PRO is 550 W.
• Bus interface: Intel Max 1100 is PCIe 5.0 x16; LX PRO is PCIe 4.0 x16.
• Display outputs: Intel Max 1100 has no outputs; LX PRO has 4x DisplayPort 1.4a.
• DirectX: Intel Max 1100 is 12 (12_1); LX PRO is 12 Ultimate (12_2).
• Vulkan: Intel Max 1100 is null; LX PRO is 1.3.
• Dimensions: Intel Max 1100 is 267 mm (10.5 inches) long, height and width null; LX PRO is 248 mm (9.8 inches) long, 118 mm (4.6 inches) high, 48 mm (1.9 inches) wide.
• Release date: Intel Max 1100 is 2023-01-09; LX PRO is 2026-03-16.
• Successor: Intel Max 1100 has H3C Graphics; LX PRO has none.

Fields that match: both are dual-slot, both are Active in production, both have an OpenGL 4.6 API, both sit at the 50th percentile, and both have an average benchmark score of zero.

The Verdict

The recorded data describes two very different accelerators. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1100 is a high-bandwidth, high-capacity compute card with no display outputs and no rasterization pipeline. Its strengths are memory bandwidth (1.23 TB/s), memory capacity (48 GB), texture rate (694.4 GTexel/s), and the PCIe 5.0 x16 interface. It also carries 56 ray tracing cores, though with no pixel output, these serve compute paths rather than graphics rendering.

The Lisuan Tech LX PRO is a more conventional graphics-capable card with a full display output suite (4x DisplayPort 1.4a), 96 ROPs, and a pixel rate of 192.0 GPixel/s. It leads in raw FP32 compute (24.58 TFLOPS versus 22.22 TFLOPS) and FP16 throughput (49.15 TFLOPS versus 22.22 TFLOPS), and it does so at a lower TDP of 225 W versus 300 W. Its memory subsystem is smaller and slower, but its GDDR6 implementation is sufficient for a 192-bit bus.

For workloads that are bandwidth-bound or require large memory footprints, the Intel Max 1100 is the stronger choice on paper. Its 8192-bit bus and 48 GB HBM2e pool provide a 2.85x bandwidth advantage, and its higher texture rate suggests strong performance in texture-heavy compute tasks. The lack of display outputs and zero pixel rate confirm it is not intended for graphics output.

For FP32-heavy compute at lower power, the LX PRO is the better fit. It delivers higher raw throughput, more than double the FP16 rate, and a lower power draw. Its display outputs and ROPs also allow it to function as a graphics card, which the Intel part cannot do. The LX PRO's newer release date (2026-03-16 versus 2023-01-09) and 6 nm TSMC process indicate a more recent design.

The database shows no benchmark scores for either card, so these conclusions rest entirely on specification data. The percentile ranking for both is identical at 50, and the average benchmark score is zero for each. Buyers should select based on workload requirements: memory capacity and bandwidth point to the Intel Max 1100, while FP32 throughput, efficiency, and graphics output point to the Lisuan Tech LX PRO.