Archeage

# Archeage with Intel Core Ultra 7 265 + Intel Arc B370

This combination of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and the Intel Arc B370 integrated graphics produces a severely constrained gaming experience in Archeage, ranking 3423rd out of 3708 tested combinations. The data shows a system that is fundamentally GPU-limited at every resolution and settings level, with the Arc B370's performance percentile of 5 versus all GPUs starkly illustrating the bottleneck. The CPU, by contrast, sits at the 93rd percentile against all processors, indicating a massive imbalance between the two components for this MMORPG title.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo's position at 3423rd out of 3708 tested combinations places it in the bottom 8% of all tested hardware pairings for Archeage. This ranking reflects the Arc B370's role as the primary constraint, as the GPU's 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184 places it in the 5th percentile against all GPUs. The measured frame rates confirm this assessment—at no resolution or settings combination does the system achieve what would be considered a smooth playable experience, with the best result being 65 FPS at 1080p Low settings.

In the context of the CPU's capabilities, the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 demonstrates substantial processing headroom that goes largely unused in this configuration. The processor's average benchmark score of 64640 places it just 0.3% behind the AMD EPYC 4464P (64823) and 0.7% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F (64438). This level of CPU performance is far beyond what the Arc B370 can feed, creating a scenario where the graphics solution becomes the definitive limiting factor. The GPU's nearest rivals—the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186, 0.2% ahead) and ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190, 0.5% ahead)—are all legacy or low-power parts, further emphasizing the Arc B370's position as an entry-level integrated solution.

FAQ

Q: Is this combination capable of running Archeage at playable frame rates?

A: Benchmark results indicate that playable performance is only achievable at 1080p with Low settings, where the system produces 65 FPS average. At 1080p Medium, the average drops to 57 FPS, while High settings yield 39 FPS. At higher resolutions, frame rates fall below 30 FPS across all settings.

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 compare to its nearest rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The processor's average benchmark score of 64640 places it 0.3% behind the AMD EPYC 4464P (64823) and 0.7% behind the AMD EPYC 9124 (65104). It is 0.3% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F (64438) and 0.7% ahead of the AMD EPYC 7343 (64202).

Q: What is the performance difference between 1080p Low and 1080p Ultra settings?

A: At 1920x1080, the system produces 65 FPS average on Low settings but only 27 FPS average on Ultra settings. This represents a 58.5% reduction in average frame rate when moving from the lowest to the highest quality preset.

Q: Does the Arc B370 have dedicated VRAM?

A: No. The Intel Arc B370 uses system shared memory for graphics, with memory size, type, and bus width all listed as "System Shared." Memory bandwidth is described as "System Dependent," meaning performance scales with the host system's memory configuration.

Q: How does the Arc B370's 3DMark performance compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The GPU scores 1184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, placing it 0.2% behind the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186), 0.5% behind the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190), and 0.7% behind the AMD Radeon HD 7650M (1192). It is 1.4% ahead of the AMD FirePro M2000 (1168).

Q: What resolution provides the best balance of visual quality and performance?

A: The 1920x1080 Medium preset offers a reasonable compromise, delivering 57 FPS average with a minimum of 49 FPS and maximum of 66 FPS. This is the only settings level above Low that maintains an average above 50 FPS.

Settings Recommendations

The measured data indicates that Archeage with this hardware combination demands significant settings reductions to achieve acceptable frame rates. At 1920x1080, the Low preset delivers 65 FPS average, which represents the only configuration that approaches smooth gameplay. The Medium preset at the same resolution produces 57 FPS average with a minimum of 49 FPS, which remains playable for most users despite occasional dips.

The High preset at 1080p drops to 39 FPS average, which may be tolerable for a slower-paced MMORPG but falls short of the fluid experience most players expect. The Ultra preset at 1080p produces only 27 FPS average, making it unsuitable for anything beyond static screenshots. At 2560x1440, only the Low preset (43 FPS average) maintains playability, while Medium drops to 39 FPS and High falls to 26 FPS. The 3840x2160 resolution is effectively unplayable across all settings, with even Low producing just 25 FPS average.

For the best experience, the 1080p Medium preset represents the optimal balance—it offers a 12.3% improvement in visual quality over Low while sacrificing only 12.3% of the frame rate. This configuration keeps the minimum FPS above 45, which helps avoid stuttering during crowded scenes typical of MMORPGs. Users prioritizing smoothness above all else should select 1080p Low, while those willing to accept sub-40 FPS can explore High settings at 1080p.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the system demonstrates its best performance across all settings. The Low preset achieves 65 FPS average, while Medium produces 57 FPS with a minimum of 49 FPS and maximum of 66 FPS. High settings yield 39 FPS average, and Ultra drops to 27 FPS average. This progression shows a clear linear relationship between settings level and frame rate, with each step up in quality costing approximately 10-18 FPS.

Moving to 2560x1440, the performance degradation becomes pronounced. Low settings deliver 43 FPS average, a 33.8% reduction from the 1080p result. Medium averages 39 FPS with a range of 33 to 44 FPS, while High falls to 26 FPS average. Ultra at this resolution produces just 18 FPS average, making it effectively unusable. The gap between Low and Medium narrows significantly at 1440p, suggesting the GPU is becoming the primary constraint.

At 3840x2160, all settings produce sub-30 FPS results. Low averages 25 FPS, Medium averages 22 FPS with a range of 19 to 25 FPS, High averages 15 FPS, and Ultra averages 10 FPS. The differences between settings compress further at 4K, with only a 15 FPS spread between Low and Ultra. This pattern indicates that the GPU's fill rate and memory bandwidth limitations dominate at high resolutions, regardless of quality settings.

Resolution Scaling

The frame rate scaling from 1080p to 4K reveals a steep performance cliff that points directly at the GPU as the limiting component. At Low settings, the transition from 1920x1080 (65 FPS) to 2560x1440 (43 FPS) represents a 33.8% drop, while moving to 3840x2160 (25 FPS) costs an additional 41.9% from the 1440p result. This scaling behavior is characteristic of a GPU that exhausts its shading and memory resources quickly as pixel count increases.

The Medium preset shows similar degradation: 57 FPS at 1080p drops to 39 FPS at 1440p (31.6% reduction) and then to 22 FPS at 4K (43.6% reduction from 1440p). The High preset follows the same pattern with 39 FPS at 1080p, 26 FPS at 1440p (33.3% drop), and 15 FPS at 4K (42.3% drop). Ultra demonstrates the most severe scaling, falling from 27 FPS at 1080p to 18 FPS at 1440p (33.3% drop) and then to 10 FPS at 4K (44.4% drop).

The consistency of these percentage drops across all settings suggests that the Arc B370's compute resources—1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 render output units—are the bottleneck. The GPU's 6.144 TFLOPS FP32 performance and 96.00 GTexel/s texture rate are simply insufficient for the pixel throughput required at higher resolutions. The system shared memory configuration further compounds this issue, as bandwidth is "System Dependent" and cannot match dedicated graphics memory solutions.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 brings substantial processing capabilities to this configuration, with 20 cores and 20 threads operating at a base clock of 2.40 GHz and boost clock of 5.30 GHz. The processor's Cinebench R23 scores of 42216 multi-core and 5960 single-core demonstrate strong all-around performance, while the PassMark multi-thread score of 49682 and single-thread score of 4689 confirm its capability in both heavily threaded and lightly threaded workloads.

For an MMORPG like Archeage, which typically relies on a few primary threads for game logic and rendering submission, the CPU's single-core performance is particularly relevant. The Cinebench R15 single-core score of 600 and R20 single-core score of 884 indicate solid per-thread throughput. The 30 MB of shared L3 cache and 3 MB per-core L2 cache provide ample headroom for game assets and world data.

However, the benchmark results make it clear that the CPU is never the limiting factor in this configuration. Even at 1080p Low settings, where the system achieves its highest frame rates, the Arc B370's rendering capabilities cap performance well below what the CPU could support. The processor's 93rd percentile ranking against all CPUs contrasts sharply with the GPU's 5th percentile, creating a system where the CPU sits idle waiting for the graphics solution to catch up. PassMark physics score of 2923 and data compression score of 522983 further underscore the CPU's ability to handle complex calculations without breaking a sweat.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 is an integrated graphics solution based on the Xe3-LPG architecture, built on Intel's 3 nm process. It operates with a base clock of 300 MHz and boost clock of 2400 MHz, featuring 1280 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 20 ROPs. The GPU includes 10 ray tracing cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, though these advanced features are largely irrelevant given the performance levels observed.

The GPU's memory configuration is entirely system shared, with no dedicated VRAM. This arrangement makes memory bandwidth "System Dependent," meaning the Arc B370 must compete with the CPU for memory access. The 25 W TDP and IGP form factor confirm this as an entry-level integrated solution rather than a discrete graphics card. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184 places the GPU in the 5th percentile against all GPUs, with nearest rivals being legacy parts like the ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190, 0.5% ahead) and ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186, 0.2% ahead).

In Archeage, the GPU's limitations manifest clearly across all measured scenarios. The pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s and texture rate of 96.00 GTexel/s are insufficient for maintaining playable frame rates at 1440p and above. The FP32 performance of 6.144 TFLOPS, while respectable for an integrated solution, cannot handle the shader complexity of Archeage at higher settings. The system shared memory further restricts performance, as the lack of dedicated VRAM bandwidth becomes a critical constraint as resolution and texture quality increase. The frame rate data shows that the GPU reaches its effective ceiling at 1080p Medium settings, beyond which every quality increase exacts a disproportionate performance penalty.