Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile vs Lisuan Tech LX MAX Comparison

Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile and Lisuan Tech LX MAX occupy opposite ends of the graphics spectrum, yet both are listed as active products in the database. The Intel part is an integrated graphics processor built for mobile efficiency, while the Lisuan Tech LX MAX is a discrete, dual-slot add-in board aimed at high-throughput workloads. The recorded data shows no overlapping benchmark scores, so this analysis relies entirely on architectural specifications and measured capabilities.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile wins in scenarios where power draw and system integration matter most. Its 15 W TDP fits into thin-and-light laptops, and its Ring Bus interface means it communicates directly with the CPU without a separate PCIe link. The database lists its memory as System Shared, so it uses the same RAM pool as the processor, which eliminates dedicated video memory costs. For everyday desktop rendering, video playback, and light 3D acceleration, this part delivers 1.856 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 29.00 GPixel/s pixel fill rate. Its production status is Active, and it launched on 2023-01-03, making it a current option for portable devices.

The Lisuan Tech LX MAX wins in raw compute and memory bandwidth. It provides 24.58 TFLOPS FP32, which is over 13 times the Intel part’s 1.856 TFLOPS. Its texture rate of 384.0 GTexel/s dwarfs the Intel’s 58.00 GTexel/s, and its pixel rate of 192.0 GPixel/s is more than six times higher. The 12 GB GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus delivers 432.0 GB/s bandwidth, a figure the Intel cannot approach because its bandwidth is listed as System Dependent. The LX MAX also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Intel only reaches DirectX 12 (12_1). For gaming, rendering, or compute tasks that demand sustained memory throughput, the LX MAX is the clear choice.

The use-case split is straightforward: the Intel part wins where power efficiency and portability are priorities, while the Lisuan Tech LX MAX wins where absolute performance and dedicated memory are required. The Intel’s 10 nm process node and 15 W TDP suit fanless or low-noise designs, whereas the LX MAX’s 225 W TDP and suggested 550 W PSU indicate a desktop-only environment with robust cooling.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs share no common architectural lineage. Intel’s Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile uses Generation 12.2 architecture, built on a 10 nm process at Intel’s own foundry. It has 640 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 raster operation units. The chip is Raptor Lake, and the generation field lists HD Graphics-M (Raptor Lake). Its FP16 performance is 3.712 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, meaning it processes two FP16 operations per FP32 operation. The base clock is 300 MHz with a boost of 1450 MHz.

Lisuan Tech LX MAX uses a completely different architecture called TrueGPU, built on a 6 nm process at TSMC. The chip is labeled 7G106, and the generation is 7G100. It has 6144 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. FP16 performance is 49.15 TFLOPS with the same 2:1 ratio. Unlike the Intel part, the LX MAX has no base or boost clock listed, but its memory clock is specified as 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective data rate.

Memory architecture differs fundamentally. The Intel part uses System Shared memory, meaning the GPU borrows from the CPU’s RAM, with bandwidth listed as System Dependent. The LX MAX has 12 GB of dedicated GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, yielding a fixed 432.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel part’s pixel rate of 29.00 GPixel/s comes from its 20 ROPs at 1450 MHz, while the LX MAX’s 192.0 GPixel/s comes from 96 ROPs at a higher unspecified clock.

Bus interfaces also diverge. The Intel uses Ring Bus, which ties the GPU into the processor’s internal ring interconnect, while the LX MAX uses PCIe 4.0 x16, a full-width external slot. Display outputs differ: the Intel is listed as Portable Device Dependent, while the LX MAX has 4x DisplayPort 1.4a. The Intel supports Vulkan 1.4, whereas the LX MAX supports Vulkan 1.3, both supporting OpenGL 4.6.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The Lisuan Tech LX MAX delivers 24.58 TFLOPS FP32, compared to the Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile’s 1.856 TFLOPS. The LX MAX is approximately 13.2 times higher.

Q: Does the Intel part have dedicated video memory?

A: No. The Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile uses System Shared memory, with bandwidth listed as System Dependent. The LX MAX has 12 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory with 432.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What is the TDP difference?

A: The Intel part is rated at 15 W, while the Lisuan Tech LX MAX is rated at 225 W. The LX MAX also requires a suggested 550 W power supply and uses a 1x 16-pin power connector.

Q: Which GPU supports newer DirectX features?

A: The Lisuan Tech LX MAX supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile supports DirectX 12 (12_1). The LX MAX also has higher Vulkan support, with version 1.3 versus 1.4 on the Intel part.

Q: Are both GPUs currently in production?

A: Yes, both are listed with production status Active. The Intel part released on 2023-01-03, and the Lisuan Tech LX MAX released on 2026-03-16.

Q: What are the physical size differences?

A: The Intel part is an IGP with no dimensions listed, while the LX MAX is a dual-slot card measuring 248 mm in length, 118 mm in height, and 48 mm in width.

Specification Differences

The two products differ in nearly every measurable category.

• Manufacturer: Intel for the Iris Xe, Unknown for Lisuan Tech.
• Chip: Raptor Lake versus 7G106.
• Architecture: Generation 12.2 versus TrueGPU.
• Process Node: 10 nm (Intel foundry) versus 6 nm (TSMC).
• Clock Speeds: Intel has base 300 MHz and boost 1450 MHz; LX MAX has no base or boost listed, but memory clock is 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective).
• Memory Size: System Shared versus 12 GB GDDR6.
• Memory Bus Width: System Shared versus 192 bit.
• Memory Bandwidth: System Dependent versus 432.0 GB/s.
• Shading Units: 640 versus 6144.
• Texture Mapping Units: 40 versus 192.
• Raster Operation Units: 20 versus 96.
• Pixel Rate: 29.00 GPixel/s versus 192.0 GPixel/s.
• Texture Rate: 58.00 GTexel/s versus 384.0 GTexel/s.
• FP32 Performance: 1.856 TFLOPS versus 24.58 TFLOPS.
• FP16 Performance: 3.712 TFLOPS versus 49.15 TFLOPS.
• TDP: 15 W versus 225 W.
• Slot Width: IGP versus Dual-slot.
• Power Connectors: None versus 1x 16-pin.
• Suggested PSU: None versus 550 W.
• Bus Interface: Ring Bus versus PCIe 4.0 x16.
• Display Outputs: Portable Device Dependent versus 4x DisplayPort 1.4a.
• DirectX Support: 12 (12_1) versus 12 Ultimate (12_2).
• Vulkan Support: 1.4 versus 1.3.
• Dimensions: None versus 248 mm x 118 mm x 48 mm.
• Release Date: 2023-01-03 versus 2026-03-16.
• Successor: Intel has Arc Graphics-M as successor; LX MAX has none listed.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark runs for these two products, so the comparison relies on the recorded peak specifications. The largest win for the Lisuan Tech LX MAX appears in FP32 throughput. At 24.58 TFLOPS versus 1.856 TFLOPS, the LX MAX delivers a 13.2x advantage. This translates directly to compute-heavy workloads such as physics simulation, AI inference, or large matrix operations.

Memory bandwidth provides another decisive margin. The LX MAX’s 432.0 GB/s is fixed and dedicated, while the Intel part’s bandwidth is listed as System Dependent, meaning it shares the CPU’s memory controller and is limited by the platform’s RAM speed and channel configuration. In practice, even a dual-channel DDR5 laptop system would achieve less than 100 GB/s, making the LX MAX’s advantage likely four to five times in real-world memory-bound scenarios. The database does not provide a specific number for the Intel’s bandwidth, so the exact comparison cannot be quantified, but the architectural difference is clear.

Texture rate shows a 6.6x gap: 384.0 GTexel/s versus 58.00 GTexel/s. This affects any workload that samples textures heavily, such as 3D rendering or image processing. The LX MAX’s 192 TMUs handle 192 texels per clock, while the Intel’s 40 TMUs handle 40, and the LX MAX operates at a higher clock. Pixel rate differs by 6.6x as well, with 192.0 GPixel/s versus 29.00 GPixel/s, which impacts fill-rate-bound scenes in games or high-resolution compositing.

Memory capacity is another clear differentiator. The LX MAX has 12 GB of GDDR6, while the Intel part has System Shared memory with no fixed size. For large datasets that exceed the shared system memory allocation, the LX MAX avoids swapping to slower storage. The Intel part’s memory type is also System Shared, so it cannot be expanded independently.

The Intel part does win in power efficiency. At 15 W, it consumes only 6.7% of the LX MAX’s 225 W TDP. For sustained workloads, the Intel part can run without active cooling in many chassis, while the LX MAX requires a dual-slot cooler and a 550 W PSU. The database lists the LX MAX’s dimensions as 248 mm long, 118 mm high, and 48 mm wide, which mandates a full-sized desktop case.

Vulkan API support differs slightly, with Intel at version 1.4 and Lisuan at 1.3. This gives the Intel part a minor compatibility advantage for newer Vulkan extensions, but the LX MAX’s raw compute power outweighs this in most rendering scenarios. Both support OpenGL 4.6, so cross-platform compatibility is equal at that level.

The Intel part also has a newer successor, Arc Graphics-M, indicating a planned roadmap, while the LX MAX has no successor listed. This suggests the Intel part belongs to a longer product line, while the LX MAX may be a standalone design.

Release dates show a three-year gap, with Intel launching on 2023-01-03 and Lisuan on 2026-03-16. The newer process node for the LX MAX, 6 nm versus 10 nm, explains part of its performance advantage, though the architecture differences are more significant.

In summary, the Lisuan Tech LX MAX leads decisively in every performance metric recorded: FP32, FP16, texture rate, pixel rate, memory bandwidth, memory capacity, and shading unit count. The Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile counters with lower power draw, a smaller footprint, and a newer Vulkan version. The data indicates a clear segmentation: the Intel part serves integrated mobile graphics duties, while the LX MAX targets high-end desktop compute and gaming.