Fivem

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 pairs with the Intel Arc B580 in Fivem, a multiplayer title where the measured data shows a clear performance curve across resolutions and settings. This analysis covers the CPU and GPU roles, ranking context, FAQ, resolution scaling, settings recommendations, and a full measured FPS breakdown.

CPU Role — cores, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 is a 20-core, 20-thread processor built on the Arrow Lake architecture at a 3 nm process node. Its base clock is 2.40 GHz, boosting to 5.30 GHz, with a 65 W TDP. The cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3 cache. Memory support is DDR5 on a dual-channel bus, with a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. The CPU ranks in the 93rd percentile against all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 64640.

In Fivem, the CPU’s role is foundational because the game is a multiplayer modification framework that relies heavily on server-side scripting and entity simulation. The data shows that at 1080p Low settings, the combo reaches 154 FPS, which is the highest measured average across the entire dataset. At 1080p Ultra, the average drops to 75 FPS, indicating that even at the lowest resolution, settings changes impose a significant workload shift. The 20 cores and 20 threads provide substantial headroom for the game’s multi-threaded server communication and client-side physics, but the lack of hyper-threading (20 threads equal to 20 cores) means each thread is a physical core, which can help with latency-sensitive tasks typical of multiplayer interactions.

Comparing to nearest rivals, the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 sits within a tight band. The AMD EPYC 4464P has an average score of 64823, a delta of -0.3% relative to the Ultra 7 265. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265F scores 64438, a delta of +0.3%. The AMD EPYC 7343 scores 64202, a delta of +0.7%, and the AMD EPYC 9124 scores 65104, a delta of -0.7%. These deltas are all within 1%, meaning the CPU’s raw compute performance is statistically similar to these server-class parts. In Fivem, this suggests that the CPU is not a bottleneck at lower resolutions; rather, the GPU takes over as the limiting factor as settings increase.

The benchmark results for the CPU reinforce its multi-threaded strength. In Cinebench R23, the multi-core score is 42216, while the single-core score is 5960. The single-thread performance, as measured by Passmark, is 4689, and the multi-thread score is 49682. Data compression workloads score 522983, while data encryption scores 40456. These numbers indicate a processor that handles both heavily threaded and lightly threaded tasks well, which is relevant for Fivem’s mixed workload of AI-driven NPCs, vehicle physics, and network code. The boost clock of 5.30 GHz provides the single-thread speed needed for the game’s main simulation loop, which often runs on one or two primary threads.

GPU Role — VRAM, clocks, and how they relate to this game's results

The Intel Arc B580 is a Battlemage-generation GPU based on the Xe2-HPG architecture, built on a 5 nm process from TSMC. It features 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, with a memory bandwidth of 456.0 GB/s. The base and boost clocks are both 2670 MHz, with memory running at 2375 MHz (19 Gbps effective). The GPU has 2560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, and 80 raster output units, along with 20 ray tracing cores. Its pixel rate is 213.6 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 427.2 GTexel/s. The FP32 performance is 13.67 TFLOPS, with FP16 at 27.34 TFLOPS (2:1). The GPU ranks in the 68th percentile against all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 23021.

In Fivem, the GPU’s 12 GB VRAM is a significant asset, as the game can load many custom assets, textures, and player models in multiplayer sessions. At 4K, the measured data shows the GPU struggling with higher settings: High averages 35 FPS, Medium averages 44 FPS, Low averages 56 FPS, and Ultra averages 28 FPS. The drop from Low to Ultra at 4K is a 50% reduction in average FPS, indicating that the GPU’s shading and memory bandwidth are under heavy load at that resolution. The 192-bit bus and 456.0 GB/s bandwidth provide sufficient throughput for 1080p and 1440p, but at 4K, the GPU’s compute resources (13.67 TFLOPS FP32) become the limiting factor.

Comparing to nearest rivals, the Intel Arc B580 sits close to several GPUs in average score. The AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP scores 23061, a delta of -0.2%. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 scores 22895, a delta of +0.6%. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 scores 23172, a delta of -0.7%. The NVIDIA P106-100 scores 23249, a delta of -1%. These deltas are all within 1%, meaning the Arc B580’s raw performance is comparable to these older or differently positioned cards. However, in Fivem specifically, the measured FPS at 1080p Low (154 FPS) shows that the GPU can push high frame rates when the load is light, but at 4K Ultra (28 FPS), it falls below playable thresholds for most users.

The GPU’s DirectX 12 Ultimate support and Vulkan 1.4 compatibility are relevant for Fivem, which can leverage modern APIs. The Passmark DirectX 12 score is 76, while DirectX 11 scores 128 and DirectX 9 scores 183. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 3068, and the Geekbench Vulkan score is 109672. These scores indicate that the GPU is capable of handling modern rendering paths, but the game’s engine may not fully utilize the hardware, as evidenced by the wide FPS swings between settings.

How This Combo Ranks — use comboRankInGame vs other tested combos

The combo of Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and Intel Arc B580 ranks 2246 out of 3005 tested combos in Fivem. This places it in the 74.8th percentile of all tested combos, meaning roughly three-quarters of tested systems perform better in this game. The rank reflects the GPU’s mid-tier positioning (68th percentile among all GPUs) rather than the CPU’s high-tier positioning (93rd percentile). The data suggests that while the CPU is more than capable of feeding the GPU, the Arc B580’s performance ceiling limits the overall combo rank.

The rank of 2246 implies that many combos with more powerful GPUs, even with weaker CPUs, will outperform this pairing in Fivem. For example, a system with a lower-tier CPU but a higher-tier GPU would likely rank higher because Fivem’s FPS at higher resolutions is heavily GPU-bound. The CPU’s high percentile does not translate to a high combo rank because the game’s frame rate at 1080p and above is constrained by the GPU’s rendering capabilities. At 1080p Low, the combo achieves 154 FPS, which is strong, but at 4K Ultra, it drops to 28 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS target most players expect. This wide range shows that the combo is versatile but not top-tier for demanding settings.

The combo’s rank also reflects the balanced nature of the pairing. The CPU’s 20 cores and 5.30 GHz boost clock ensure that the GPU is not starved for data, as evidenced by the relatively small FPS drop from 1080p Medium (121 FPS) to 1440p Medium (80 FPS) — a 34% reduction. In contrast, the drop from 1440p Medium to 4K Medium (44 FPS) is 45%, indicating that the GPU’s memory bandwidth and shading units are overwhelmed at 4K. This pattern confirms that the combo rank is primarily determined by GPU performance, not CPU performance.

FAQ

Q: What is the highest average FPS this combo achieves in Fivem?

A: The highest average FPS is 154, achieved at 1920x1080 resolution with Low settings. This is the only measured configuration that exceeds 150 FPS.

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

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 has an average benchmark score of 64640. Its nearest rival, the AMD EPYC 4464P, scores 64823, a delta of -0.3%. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265F scores 64438, a delta of +0.3%, meaning the Ultra 7 265 is effectively tied with both within 0.3%.

Q: What is the impact of raising settings from Low to Ultra at 1440p?

A: At 2560x1440, Low settings average 101 FPS, while Ultra settings average 50 FPS. This is a 51 FPS drop, representing a 50.5% reduction in average FPS, showing that settings have a dramatic effect on performance at this resolution.

Q: Does the GPU’s VRAM capacity affect performance at 4K?

A: The GPU has 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus with 456.0 GB/s bandwidth. At 3840x2160, the average FPS ranges from 56 (Low) to 28 (Ultra). The fact that Low settings achieve 56 FPS while Ultra achieves 28 FPS suggests that the GPU’s compute and bandwidth, not just VRAM capacity, are limiting factors at 4K.

Q: How does the combo rank compare to all tested combos?

A: The combo ranks 2246 out of 3005 tested combos in Fivem. This places it below the median, indicating that most tested systems deliver higher frame rates, likely due to more powerful GPUs.

Q: What is the minimum FPS recorded for this combo?

A: The only measured minimum FPS values are for Medium settings: at 1920x1080, the minimum is 103 FPS; at 2560x1440, the minimum is 68 FPS; and at 3840x2160, the minimum is 38 FPS. No minimum FPS data is available for Low, High, or Ultra settings.

Resolution Scaling — how FPS drops from 1080p to 4K and what it says about the limiting component

The measured data shows a clear resolution scaling pattern. At Low settings, the average FPS drops from 154 at 1080p to 101 at 1440p (a 34.4% reduction) and then to 56 at 4K (a 44.6% reduction from 1440p). At Medium settings, the averages are 121 FPS at 1080p, 80 FPS at 1440p (a 33.9% drop), and 44 FPS at 4K (a 45% drop). At High settings, the averages are 97 FPS at 1080p, 64 FPS at 1440p (a 34% drop), and 35 FPS at 4K (a 45.3% drop). At Ultra settings, the averages are 75 FPS at 1080p, 50 FPS at 1440p (a 33.3% drop), and 28 FPS at 4K (a 44% drop).

The consistent pattern of roughly a one-third drop from 1080p to 1440p and then a 44-45% drop from 1440p to 4K indicates that the GPU is the primary limiting component. The CPU’s performance, which would typically show diminishing returns at higher resolutions if it were the bottleneck, remains strong across all settings, as evidenced by the CPU’s high percentile and benchmark scores. The GPU’s 13.67 TFLOPS FP32 compute and 456.0 GB/s memory bandwidth are insufficient to maintain high frame rates at 4K, especially at higher settings where the pixel load quadruples from 1080p to 4K.

The scaling also reveals that the GPU’s memory subsystem is not the sole constraint. If VRAM bandwidth were the only issue, the drop from 1080p to 1440p would be more severe relative to the 4K drop. Instead, the uniform percentage drops suggest that the GPU’s shading units and ROPs (80) are saturated at all resolutions above 1080p, with the 4K resolution pushing the GPU beyond its efficient operating range. The fact that Low settings at 4K achieve 56 FPS, while Ultra at 1080p achieves 75 FPS, indicates that resolution has a larger impact than settings on this combo’s performance.

Settings Recommendations — which preset gives the best experience per the measured rows

Based on the measured FPS data, the best experience depends on the target resolution. At 1920x1080, Medium settings provide the best balance, with an average of 121 FPS and a minimum of 103 FPS. This is comfortably above 60 FPS and offers a significant visual upgrade over Low settings, which average 154 FPS but lack detail. High settings at 1080p average 97 FPS, which is still smooth, but Medium’s higher minimum FPS (103 vs. no minimum data for High) suggests more consistent frame pacing. Ultra at 1080p averages 75 FPS, which is playable but may introduce noticeable frame drops in busy multiplayer areas.

At 2560x1440, Medium settings average 80 FPS with a minimum of 68 FPS, making it the recommended preset for a smooth experience. High settings average 64 FPS, which is close to 60 FPS but may dip below in heavy scenes. Low settings average 101 FPS, but the visual compromise is substantial. Ultra at 1440p averages 50 FPS, which is below the 60 FPS threshold and not ideal for fast-paced multiplayer gameplay. The 68 FPS minimum at Medium provides a safety margin against sudden drops.

At 3840x2160, no settings achieve a consistent 60 FPS. Low settings average 56 FPS, which is the highest average at 4K, but this comes with significant visual sacrifices. Medium averages 44 FPS with a minimum of 38 FPS, making it playable for single-player or less demanding scenarios. High averages 35 FPS, and Ultra averages 28 FPS, both of which are below playable thresholds for most users. For 4K, Low settings are the only viable option if a playable frame rate is required, but users should consider lowering the resolution to 1440p for a better experience.

Measured FPS Breakdown — resolution by resolution, settings by settings, exact numbers

The measured FPS data is organized by resolution and settings. At 1920x1080, Low settings produce an average FPS of 154, with no minimum or maximum recorded. Medium settings average 121 FPS, with a minimum of 103 FPS and a maximum of 140 FPS. High settings average 97 FPS, with no minimum or maximum recorded. Ultra settings average 75 FPS, with no minimum or maximum recorded.

At 2560x1440, Low settings average 101 FPS, with no minimum or maximum recorded. Medium settings average 80 FPS, with a minimum of 68 FPS and a maximum of 92 FPS. High settings average 64 FPS, with no minimum or maximum recorded. Ultra settings average 50 FPS, with no minimum or maximum recorded.

At 3840x2160, Low settings average 56 FPS, with no minimum or maximum recorded. Medium settings average 44 FPS, with a minimum of 38 FPS and a maximum of 51 FPS. High settings average 35 FPS, with no minimum or maximum recorded. Ultra settings average 28 FPS, with no minimum or maximum recorded.

The data shows a clear hierarchy: for each resolution, Low settings yield the highest average FPS, followed by Medium, then High, and then Ultra. The Medium settings are the only configuration with recorded minimum and maximum values, providing the most detailed frame-time information. At 1080p Medium, the minimum of 103 FPS and maximum of 140 FPS indicate a 37 FPS range, suggesting some frame variability. At 1440p Medium, the range is 24 FPS (68 to 92), and at 4K Medium, the range is 13 FPS (38 to 51), showing that as resolution increases, the frame rate becomes more stable but also lower. The absence of minimum and maximum data for Low, High, and Ultra settings means that only average FPS can be used for comparison, but the pattern across resolutions is consistent with the GPU being the limiting factor.