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

FAQ

Q: What are the two graphics solutions being compared here?

A: The comparison is between the Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile, an integrated processor from Intel based on the Raptor Lake chip, and the Lisuan Tech LX ULTRA, a discrete graphics card with the 7G105 chip and TrueGPU architecture. The Intel part is listed as an IGP with a 15 W TDP, while the Lisuan Tech unit is a dual-slot card with a 225 W TDP.

Q: How do their memory configurations differ?

A: The Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile uses System Shared memory, meaning it relies on the host system's RAM with a bus width and type listed as System Shared. The Lisuan Tech LX ULTRA has 24 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, delivering 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective). The Intel part's bandwidth is described as System Dependent.

Q: Which processor node and foundry are used for each?

A: The Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile is built on a 10 nm process at Intel's own foundry. The Lisuan Tech LX ULTRA uses a 6 nm process fabricated by TSMC. The Intel part belongs to the Raptor Lake generation with HD Graphics-M branding, while the Lisuan Tech part is from the 7G100 generation.

Q: What is the difference in raw compute throughput?

A: The Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile delivers 1.856 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the Lisuan Tech LX ULTRA reaches 24.58 TFLOPS. That represents a roughly 13.2x difference in favor of the Lisuan Tech card. In FP16, the Intel part produces 3.712 TFLOPS (2:1), and the Lisuan Tech unit produces 49.15 TFLOPS (2:1).

Q: What API support does each device provide?

A: The Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Lisuan Tech LX ULTRA supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. Both are listed as Active in production status.

Q: What are the physical dimensions and connectivity options?

A: The Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile is an IGP with no listed dimensions, and its display outputs are Portable Device Dependent. The Lisuan Tech LX ULTRA measures 268 mm (10.6 inches) in length, 112 mm (4.4 inches) in height, and 40 mm (1.6 inches) in width, with 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs and a PCIe 4.0 x16 bus interface.

Where Each One Wins

The data shows a fundamental divide between these two products. The Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile is designed for mobility and low power consumption. Its 15 W TDP and IGP form factor make it suitable for thin-and-light laptops where space and thermal headroom are limited. The system shared memory approach means it does not require dedicated VRAM, simplifying system design. Its 640 shading units and 40 TMUs are modest but sufficient for basic display output and light graphical workloads. The Generation 12.2 architecture and Ring Bus interface tie it directly into the host processor.

The Lisuan Tech LX ULTRA wins on nearly every raw performance metric. Its 6144 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs dwarf the Intel part. The 24 GB of GDDR6 memory with 432.0 GB/s bandwidth provides a massive advantage in memory-intensive applications. The 225 W TDP and dual-slot design indicate a product built for sustained high-performance workloads, likely gaming or content creation. The 6 nm TSMC process and TrueGPU architecture point to a more modern fabrication approach. Its 192.0 GPixel/s pixel rate and 384.0 GTexel/s texture rate are more than six times higher than the Intel part's figures.

The Intel part wins in portability, power efficiency, and integration simplicity. The Lisuan Tech wins in compute capacity, memory bandwidth, and feature set like DirectX 12 Ultimate. The release dates also differ significantly: the Intel part was released in January 2023, while the Lisuan Tech is dated March 2026, indicating a newer product generation.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split is stark. Intel's Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile uses the Generation 12.2 architecture built on Raptor Lake, which is Intel's chip design for integrated graphics. The process node is 10 nm at Intel's own foundry. This is an IGP solution that shares system memory, which limits memory bandwidth to whatever the host system provides. The bus interface is Ring Bus, indicating tight coupling with the CPU.

Lisuan Tech's LX ULTRA uses the TrueGPU architecture with the 7G105 chip, built on a 6 nm process at TSMC. This is a discrete GPU with its own dedicated memory subsystem. The 192-bit memory bus and GDDR6 memory are not shared with the system. The PCIe 4.0 x16 interface allows direct communication with the host. The TrueGPU moniker suggests a different design philosophy, possibly focusing on general-purpose compute.

The Intel part has a base clock of 300 MHz and boost clock of 1450 MHz, while the Lisuan Tech's clocks are not listed in the database. The Intel part's memory clock is System Shared, whereas the Lisuan Tech runs at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective). The API support also differs: Intel reaches Vulkan 1.4 but only DirectX 12 (12_1), while Lisuan Tech supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) but stops at Vulkan 1.3.

The Intel part has no listed RT or tensor cores, and neither does the Lisuan Tech. The Intel part's successor is listed as Arc Graphics-M, indicating a planned next step. The Lisuan Tech has no listed successor or predecessor, making it a standalone product in the database.

Specification Differences

The specification table shows clear divergence across every major field. The Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 20 ROPs. The Lisuan Tech LX ULTRA has 6144 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. That is 9.6x more shading units, 4.8x more TMUs, and 4.8x more ROPs.

The clock speeds differ as well. Intel lists a 300 MHz base and 1450 MHz boost, while Lisuan Tech has no clock speeds recorded. The memory situation is entirely different: Intel uses System Shared memory with System Dependent bandwidth, while Lisuan Tech has 24 GB GDDR6 with 432.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Pixel rate for Intel is 29.00 GPixel/s versus 192.0 GPixel/s for Lisuan Tech. Texture rate is 58.00 GTexel/s versus 384.0 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 1.856 TFLOPS versus 24.58 TFLOPS. FP16 is 3.712 TFLOPS versus 49.15 TFLOPS. Each pair shows the Lisuan Tech at roughly 6.6x to 13.2x the Intel figures.

Power consumption is 15 W for Intel versus 225 W for Lisuan Tech. The Intel part is an IGP with no slot width, while Lisuan Tech is dual-slot. Lisuan Tech uses a 1x 16-pin power connector and suggests a 550 W PSU, while Intel has no power connector or PSU recommendation. Lisuan Tech has four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, while Intel's outputs are portable device dependent.

The process node is 10 nm (Intel) versus 6 nm (TSMC). The bus interface is Ring Bus versus PCIe 4.0 x16. The release dates are January 2023 versus March 2026. The Intel part lists a successor (Arc Graphics-M), while Lisuan Tech has none.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows no direct head-to-head benchmark scores between these two products. Both have empty benchmark arrays, an average benchmark score of 0, and zero wins each in the head-to-head comparison. The percentile versus all GPUs is 50 for both, placing them at the median of the database's tracked devices.

The absence of direct measurements means the comparison rests entirely on the specification differences. The FP32 figure of 24.58 TFLOPS for the Lisuan Tech is 13.2x higher than the Intel's 1.856 TFLOPS. The 432.0 GB/s memory bandwidth of the Lisuan Tech is a categorical advantage over the System Dependent bandwidth of the Intel part. The 24 GB memory capacity versus System Shared memory is similarly one-sided.

The pixel rate difference is notable: 192.0 GPixel/s versus 29.00 GPixel/s. This affects fill-rate-bound workloads like high-resolution rendering. The texture rate of 384.0 GTexel/s versus 58.00 GTexel/s matters for texture-heavy scenes. The ROP count of 96 versus 20 directly impacts multisample anti-aliasing and final pixel output.

The Lisuan Tech's DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) support indicates feature-level parity with modern discrete GPUs, while the Intel part's DirectX 12 (12_1) is a step below. Vulkan support differs in the opposite direction: Intel lists 1.4, while Lisuan Tech lists 1.3. OpenGL 4.6 is identical for both.

The power envelope tells a different story. The Intel part consumes 15 W, which is 15x less than the Lisuan Tech's 225 W. For battery-powered devices, this difference is decisive. The Intel part's 300 MHz base clock and 1450 MHz boost are the only clock figures recorded, and they are far below what the Lisuan Tech likely operates at, though its clocks are unlisted.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split by use case. The Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU Mobile is the appropriate choice for ultra-portable systems where 15 W TDP and IGP integration are requirements. Its 640 shading units and shared memory are adequate for basic graphical output, office productivity, and light media playback. The 10 nm process and Raptor Lake integration make it a low-cost addition to a mobile platform. The System Dependent bandwidth means performance will vary with the host system's memory configuration.

The Lisuan Tech LX ULTRA is designed for performance-critical applications. Its 6144 shading units, 24 GB GDDR6, and 432.0 GB/s bandwidth position it for demanding workloads like high-refresh gaming, 3D rendering, and compute tasks. The 225 W TDP and dual-slot design require a desktop chassis with adequate cooling and a 550 W PSU. The 6 nm TSMC process and TrueGPU architecture represent a newer fabrication approach. The DirectX 12 Ultimate support enables advanced graphical features.

The 13.2x difference in FP32 compute is the single largest gap in the specification sheet. The 6.6x difference in pixel rate and texture rate reinforces the performance hierarchy. No benchmark scores exist in the database to validate real-world performance, so the specification analysis is the only available evidence. The Intel part's successor, Arc Graphics-M, suggests Intel's integrated graphics line will evolve, while the Lisuan Tech has no listed successor.

For mobile users prioritizing battery life and portability, the Intel part is the logical fit. For desktop users prioritizing raw throughput and memory bandwidth, the Lisuan Tech is the clear choice. The 225 W TDP of the Lisuan Tech versus 15 W for the Intel part means these products target entirely different platforms. The database records a 50th percentile ranking for both, but that percentile does not account for the vast specification differences. The recorded data supports a performance hierarchy where the Lisuan Tech dominates in every compute and memory metric, while the Intel part dominates in power efficiency and integration simplicity.