Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 vs Lisuan Tech LX 7G100 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains no benchmark results for either the Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 or the Lisuan Tech LX 7G100. The head-to-head benchmark array is empty, and both products show an average benchmark score of 0 in the database. Consequently, there are no measured performance deltas, no win counts, and no percentile comparisons against rivals to reference. The percentileVsAllGpus field places both at the 50th percentile, but this is a neutral position with no supporting benchmark data to interpret.

Without benchmark scores, the analysis must rely entirely on the specification sheets. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 delivers 52.43 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Lisuan Tech LX 7G100 delivers 24.58 TFLOPS FP32. This represents a 2.13x advantage for the Intel part in raw single-precision throughput. In FP16, the Intel part maintains 52.43 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, while the Lisuan Tech part reaches 49.15 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio. The FP16 comparison is nearly even, with the Intel part ahead by only 6.7 percent.

Memory bandwidth separates the two more decisively. The Intel part accesses 128 GB of HBM2e across an 8192-bit bus, yielding 3.28 TB/s of bandwidth. The Lisuan Tech part uses 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, providing 432.0 GB/s. The Intel part offers 7.6 times the memory bandwidth. Texture rate also favors Intel: 1,638.4 GTexel/s versus 384.0 GTexel/s, a 4.27x difference. Pixel rate is inverted, however. The Intel part lists 0 MPixel/s, while the Lisuan Tech part lists 192.0 GPixel/s.

The Intel part has 16,384 shading units and 1,024 TMUs, against 6,144 shading units and 192 TMUs for the Lisuan Tech part. The Intel part also includes 128 ray tracing cores, while the Lisuan Tech part lists none. The Lisuan Tech part has 96 ROPs, while the Intel part lists 0 ROPs. These structural differences explain the texture and pixel rate outcomes.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 wins in FP32 compute, FP16 compute, memory capacity, memory bandwidth, texture rate, shading unit count, TMU count, and ray tracing capability. It is designed for dense parallel workloads where data movement and raw floating-point throughput dominate. The 128 GB memory pool and 3.28 TB/s bandwidth indicate a system oriented toward large model inference or high-performance computing tasks that require massive resident datasets.

The Lisuan Tech LX 7G100 wins in pixel rate, ROP count, display outputs, and power efficiency. It provides 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, whereas the Intel part has no display outputs. The Lisuan Tech part also lists a 225 W TDP against 600 W for the Intel part, and a suggested PSU of 550 W against 1000 W. The pixel rate advantage, 192.0 GPixel/s versus 0 MPixel/s, suggests the Lisuan Tech part can drive rasterization workloads, though the absence of benchmark data limits how far this interpretation can extend.

The FP16 performance of the Lisuan Tech part, 49.15 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, is close to the Intel part's 52.43 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio. For workloads that use FP16 with reduced precision requirements, the Lisuan Tech part closes most of the gap. The Intel part still leads, but the margin narrows to 6.7 percent, which is far smaller than the 2.13x FP32 gap.

The Lisuan Tech part also wins on physical integration. Its dual-slot design, 294 mm length, 120 mm height, and 49 mm width, along with a single 8-pin power connector, allow installation in conventional workstation chassis. The Intel part uses an OAM Module form factor, which requires a different physical infrastructure.

FAQ

Q: How much FP32 compute does each GPU deliver?

A: The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 delivers 52.43 TFLOPS of FP32, while the Lisuan Tech LX 7G100 delivers 24.58 TFLOPS, making the Intel part 2.13x faster in single-precision throughput.

Q: What are the memory configurations?

A: The Intel part has 128 GB of HBM2e on an 8192-bit bus with 3.28 TB/s bandwidth. The Lisuan Tech part has 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 432.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: How do FP16 capabilities compare?

A: The Intel part achieves 52.43 TFLOPS FP16 at a 1:1 ratio. The Lisuan Tech part achieves 49.15 TFLOPS FP16 at a 2:1 ratio, which is 6.7 percent less than the Intel part.

Q: Does either GPU support display output?

A: The Lisuan Tech LX 7G100 provides 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 has no display outputs.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The Intel part has a 600 W TDP and a suggested PSU of 1000 W. The Lisuan Tech part has a 225 W TDP and a suggested PSU of 550 W.

Q: What is the form factor of each GPU?

A: The Intel part is an OAM Module. The Lisuan Tech part is dual-slot, measuring 294 mm by 120 mm by 49 mm, with a single 8-pin power connector.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every measured specification. The Intel part uses a 10 nm process node from Intel foundry, while the Lisuan Tech part uses a 6 nm node from TSMC. Transistor count for the Intel part is 100,000 million on a 1280 mm² die, giving a density of 78.1M per mm². The Lisuan Tech part lists unknown transistor count, die size, and density.

Clock speeds: the Intel part has a base clock of 900 MHz and a boost clock of 1600 MHz. The Lisuan Tech part lists no base or boost clocks. Memory clocks also differ: the Intel part runs at 1600 MHz with 3.2 Gbps effective, while the Lisuan Tech part runs at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective.

Memory type, size, bus width, and bandwidth all differ: HBM2e versus GDDR6, 128 GB versus 12 GB, 8192 bit versus 192 bit, 3.28 TB/s versus 432.0 GB/s. Shading units are 16,384 versus 6,144, TMUs are 1,024 versus 192, ROPs are 0 versus 96, and ray tracing cores are 128 versus none.

Pixel rate: 0 MPixel/s versus 192.0 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 1,638.4 GTexel/s versus 384.0 GTexel/s. FP32: 52.43 TFLOPS versus 24.58 TFLOPS. FP16: 52.43 TFLOPS (1:1) versus 49.15 TFLOPS (2:1). TDP: 600 W versus 225 W. Slot width: OAM Module versus dual-slot. Power connectors: none listed versus 1x 8-pin. Suggested PSU: 1000 W versus 550 W. Bus interface: PCIe 5.0 x16 versus PCIe 4.0 x16. Display outputs: none versus 4x DisplayPort 1.4a. API support: DirectX 12 (12_1) versus DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), with the Lisuan Tech part adding Vulkan 1.3. Dimensions are listed only for the Lisuan Tech part: 294 mm length, 120 mm height, 49 mm width.

Release dates differ: the Intel part released on 2023-01-09, the Lisuan Tech part on 2026-06-17. The Intel part lists a successor, H3C Graphics, while the Lisuan Tech part lists none.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 uses the Ponte Vecchio chip, built on Generation 12.5 architecture. It is part of the Data Center GPU (Ponte Vecchio) generation. The process node is 10 nm at Intel foundry. It carries 100,000 million transistors on a 1280 mm² die. The architecture includes 16,384 shading units, 1,024 TMUs, and 128 ray tracing cores. It lists no ROPs, which aligns with a compute-focused design that does not output to displays. Memory is HBM2e with 128 GB capacity.

The Lisuan Tech LX 7G100 uses the 7G106 chip, built on TrueGPU architecture. It is part of the 7G100 generation. The process node is 6 nm at TSMC foundry. Transistor count, die size, and density are unknown. The architecture includes 6,144 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. It lists no ray tracing cores. Memory is GDDR6 with 12 GB capacity. The architecture supports DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.3, indicating a broader feature set for graphics rendering.

The Intel part uses a 1:1 FP16 to FP32 ratio, meaning FP16 throughput equals FP32 throughput. The Lisuan Tech part uses a 2:1 ratio, meaning FP16 throughput is double FP32 throughput. This reflects different design priorities: the Intel part maintains full precision across formats, while the Lisuan Tech part trades precision for higher reduced-precision throughput.

The Intel part uses an OAM Module slot and PCIe 5.0 x16, while the Lisuan Tech part uses a dual-slot design and PCIe 4.0 x16. The Intel part has no display outputs, while the Lisuan Tech part provides four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The Intel part has no listed power connector, while the Lisuan Tech part uses a single 8-pin connector. The manufacturing ecosystem also differs: Intel fabricates its own chip, while TSMC fabricates the Lisuan Tech chip.

The Verdict

The data indicates two fundamentally different products. The Intel Data Center GPU Max 1550 is a high-bandwidth, high-capacity compute accelerator. Its 128 GB HBM2e pool, 3.28 TB/s bandwidth, and 52.43 TFLOPS FP32 place it in a class for large-scale data center workloads. The 600 W TDP, OAM Module form factor, and lack of display outputs confirm a server-oriented design. It leads in FP32 by 2.13x, in memory bandwidth by 7.6x, and in texture rate by 4.27x.

The Lisuan Tech LX 7G100 is a more conventional graphics card. It fits in a dual-slot chassis, uses a single 8-pin power connector, draws 225 W, and outputs to four displays. Its 192.0 GPixel/s pixel rate and 96 ROPs support rasterization. Its 24.58 TFLOPS FP32 and 49.15 TFLOPS FP16 provide substantial compute for a 225 W part, and its 6 nm TSMC process gives it a manufacturing advantage over the Intel part's 10 nm node.

For compute-intensive applications that require large memory footprints and maximum FP32 throughput, the Intel part is the clear choice based on the specification data. For workloads that need display output, conventional PCIe 4.0 installation, and lower power draw, the Lisuan Tech part is the appropriate selection. The absence of benchmark results means these conclusions rest on specification comparisons, but the recorded differences are substantial enough to support distinct positioning. The Intel part targets the data center; the Lisuan Tech part targets workstation and graphics applications. Neither product is a substitute for the other.