Overpower

Overpower pairs the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 with the Intel Arc B370, and the measured results place this combination at rank 2742 out of 2980 tested combos in the database. That is a bottom-decile outcome, driven almost entirely by the graphics side of the equation. The Core Ultra 7 265 is a strong desktop processor, but the Arc B370 is an integrated graphics solution with a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184, which puts it at the 5th percentile among all GPUs. In practical terms, this combo is not built for high-refresh competitive play or high-resolution rendering; it is a functional, low-power configuration that can handle Overpower at modest settings and frame rates. The data shows a clear ceiling: even at 1080p Low, the average FPS is 65, and every step up in resolution or quality brings the frame rate down quickly. For anyone assembling a system around this pairing, the expectation should be playability at reduced settings, not performance bragging rights.

How This Combo Ranks

The combo’s overall rank of 2742 out of 2980 tested combinations places it in the 8th percentile of all pairings in the database. That is a low position, but the ranking is not a reflection of the CPU’s capability. The Core Ultra 7 265 sits at the 93rd percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 64640. Its nearest rivals are the AMD EPYC 4464P (average score 64823, delta -0.3%), the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F (64438, delta +0.3%), the AMD EPYC 7343 (64202, delta +0.7%), and the AMD EPYC 9124 (65104, delta -0.7%). Those deltas are all within a single percentage point, meaning the processor is performing exactly as expected for its class. The bottleneck is unambiguous: the Arc B370’s average benchmark score of 1184 is nearly identical to its nearest rivals — the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186, delta -0.2%), ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190, delta -0.5%), AMD Radeon HD 7650M (1192, delta -0.7%), and AMD FirePro M2000 (1168, delta +1.4%). Those are all legacy or low-end parts from over a decade ago, which tells you the Arc B370 is not competing with modern discrete GPUs in any meaningful way.

Because the GPU is so weak, the combo rank is essentially a function of the GPU’s percentile. The CPU could be swapped for a much cheaper part and the overall rank would barely move, since Overpower’s frame rates at these settings are limited by the graphics pipeline. The measured FPS data confirms this: at 4K Ultra, the average is 24 FPS, which is borderline unplayable, and even at 1080p Low, the average is only 65 FPS. For context, the difference between the CPU’s nearest rivals is negligible, so upgrading the processor would not change the gaming experience. The only way to improve this combo’s rank would be to replace the integrated GPU with a discrete solution, but that is outside the scope of this analysis. As tested, this is a low-end productivity or light-gaming setup, not a serious gaming rig.

GPU Role

The Intel Arc B370 is the limiting factor in this combo, and the data makes that clear. It is built on Intel’s Xe3-LPG architecture with a Panther Lake chip, fabricated on Intel’s 3 nm process. The GPU has 1280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, 20 ROPs, and 10 ray tracing cores. Its base clock is 300 MHz, with a boost clock of 2400 MHz. The pixel rate is 48.00 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 96.00 GTexel/s. Floating point performance is rated at 6.144 TFLOPS for FP32 and 12.29 TFLOPS for FP16 (2:1). Those numbers are not competitive with even entry-level discrete GPUs from the last several years, and the benchmark results bear that out.

Memory is a major issue. The Arc B370 uses system shared memory, meaning there is no dedicated VRAM. The memory type is system shared, the bus width is system shared, and the bandwidth is system dependent. In practice, this means the GPU is competing with the CPU for the same DDR5 memory bandwidth, which is 102.4 GB/s for the Core Ultra 7 265’s dual-channel memory bus. For a game like Overpower, which appears to be a moderately demanding action title, this shared-memory arrangement severely limits texture loading and frame pacing. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184 is the only GPU benchmark in the pack, and it places the Arc B370 at the 5th percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186, -0.2%), ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190, -0.5%), AMD Radeon HD 7650M (1192, -0.7%), and AMD FirePro M2000 (1168, +1.4%). Those are all parts from the early 2010s, which gives you a rough idea of the performance tier.

The GPU’s TDP is just 25 W, and it is listed as an IGP with no power connectors and a slot width of IGP. That means it draws power from the motherboard and is intended for thin-and-light or low-power systems. The display outputs are listed as portable device dependent, which reinforces that this is not a desktop discrete card. In Overpower, the GPU’s weakness shows up immediately: at 4K Ultra, the average FPS is 24, and at 1080p Ultra, it is only 31. Even at 1080p Low, the average is 65 FPS, which is the best result in the entire measured set. The GPU’s boost clock of 2400 MHz is respectable on paper, but the shared memory and low shader count cap its real-world gaming performance. Ray tracing is technically supported via 10 RT cores, but with 6.144 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and only 20 ROPs, enabling ray tracing would likely tank frame rates far below playable levels. The data does not include any ray tracing measurements, so there is no evidence that this GPU can handle it in Overpower.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the only settings that deliver a consistently playable experience are at Low preset. At 1920x1080 Low, the average FPS is 65, which is smooth enough for most action games, though it is not high enough for competitive play at 144 Hz. At 2560x1440 Low, the average drops to 58, which is still acceptable for casual play but noticeably less fluid. At 3840x2160 Low, the average falls to 49, which is on the edge of playability — some users may find it tolerable, but frame pacing could be an issue since the data shows no min or max values for that row, only the average.

Medium settings are a significant step down. At 1080p Medium, the average FPS is 41, with a minimum of 34 and maximum of 47. That is playable but with visible stutter in busy scenes. At 1440p Medium, the average is 36, with a minimum of 31 and maximum of 42. At 4K Medium, the average is 31, with a minimum of 26 and maximum of 35. Those minimums are below the 30 FPS threshold that most players consider the floor for a playable game, so Medium at 4K is not recommended. High settings are worse: 1080p High averages 38 FPS, 1440p High averages 34, and 4K High averages 28. None of those are ideal, and 4K High is clearly not playable. Ultra settings are the worst: 1080p Ultra averages 31 FPS, 1440p Ultra averages 28, and 4K Ultra averages 24. Those numbers are all below the 30 FPS playability floor, and in fast-paced action sequences, the experience would be poor.

The practical recommendation is to run Overpower at 1080p Low for the best balance of visual clarity and frame rate. The 65 FPS average at that setting is the only row in the entire data set that clears 60 FPS. If you need to use a higher resolution, 1440p Low at 58 FPS is the next best option, but the 7 FPS drop from 1080p Low suggests diminishing returns. 4K Low at 49 FPS is technically above 30, but it is unlikely to feel smooth given the shared memory bandwidth constraints. Medium settings are only recommended at 1080p, and even then, the 41 FPS average with a 34 FPS minimum means you will notice hitches. For any resolution above 1080p, stick to Low. Ultra settings are effectively unusable across all resolutions, with the best case being 31 FPS at 1080p.

Measured FPS Breakdown

The measured FPS data covers three resolutions (1920x1080, 2560x1440, 3840x2160) and four settings presets (Low, Medium, High, Ultra). At 1920x1080, the progression is as follows: Low averages 65 FPS, Medium averages 41 FPS (min 34, max 47), High averages 38 FPS, and Ultra averages 31 FPS. The gap between Low and Medium is 24 FPS, which is a massive drop for a single preset step. That suggests the Medium preset enables some feature that the Arc B370 cannot handle efficiently, possibly related to shadows or post-processing. The difference between Medium and High is only 3 FPS, and between High and Ultra is 7 FPS. The scaling is not linear; it is steep at the low end and then flattens out, which is typical of a GPU that is already saturated.

At 2560x1440, the results are predictably lower. Low averages 58 FPS, Medium averages 36 FPS (min 31, max 42), High averages 34 FPS, and Ultra averages 28 FPS. The drop from 1080p Low to 1440p Low is 7 FPS, which is a moderate penalty. The drop from 1080p Medium to 1440p Medium is 5 FPS, and from 1080p High to 1440p High is 4 FPS. The Ultra preset drops below 30 FPS at 1440p, hitting 28 FPS on average. The minimum FPS values for Medium at 1440p (31) are just above the 30 FPS threshold, but the average of 36 leaves little headroom for demanding scenes.

At 3840x2160, the data shows a hard wall. Low averages 49 FPS, Medium averages 31 FPS (min 26, max 35), High averages 28 FPS, and Ultra averages 24 FPS. The 4K Low result is the only 4K row above 30 FPS, and even that is 16 FPS below the 1080p Low result. The Medium preset at 4K has a minimum of 26 FPS, which is below the playability floor, and the High and Ultra presets are firmly in slideshow territory. The difference between 1440p Low and 4K Low is 9 FPS, which is a larger penalty than the difference between 1080p Low and 1440p Low (7 FPS). This indicates that the GPU’s fill rate and memory bandwidth are insufficient for 4K, regardless of settings.

The data also shows that the Arc B370’s performance is heavily dependent on resolution. At 1080p Low, the average FPS is 65, which is 2.7 times the average FPS at 4K Ultra (24). The scaling from 4K Ultra to 1080p Low suggests that the GPU is not entirely useless, but it is only viable at the lowest resolution and quality settings. The only rows with min FPS data are the Medium presets: 1080p Medium (min 34, max 47), 1440p Medium (min 31, max 42), and 4K Medium (min 26, max 35). The 4K Medium minimum of 26 FPS is the lowest recorded minimum in the entire data set, which confirms that 4K Medium is not a recommended configuration.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution and settings preset for playing Overpower with this combo?

A: The best measured result is at 1920x1080 with Low settings, which produces an average of 65 FPS. That is the only configuration that clears 60 FPS. If you need a higher resolution, 2560x1440 Low averages 58 FPS, and 3840x2160 Low averages 49 FPS, but both are less stable.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B370 compare to its nearest GPU rivals in terms of benchmark scores?

A: The Arc B370 has a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1184. Its nearest rivals are the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 (1186, delta -0.2%), ATI Radeon HD 5770 (1190, delta -0.5%), AMD Radeon HD 7650M (1192, delta -0.7%), and AMD FirePro M2000 (1168, delta +1.4%). All scores are within 1.4% of each other.

Q: Is the Core Ultra 7 265 the reason for the low frame rates in Overpower?

A: No. The Core Ultra 7 265 is at the 93rd percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 64640. Its nearest rivals are within 0.7% of its score. The frame rates are limited by the Arc B370, which sits at the 5th percentile among all GPUs.

Q: Can this combo handle Overpower at 4K resolution?

A: Barely. At 3840x2160 Low, the average FPS is 49. At Medium, it drops to 31 FPS with a minimum of 26. At High, it averages 28 FPS, and at Ultra, it averages 24 FPS. Only the Low preset is above 30 FPS, and even that is not smooth.

Q: What is the difference between Low and Medium settings at 1080p?

A: At 1920x1080, Low averages 65 FPS, while Medium averages 41 FPS (min 34, max 47). That is a 24 FPS drop, which is the largest single-preset drop in the entire data set. The Medium preset is playable but with noticeable stutter.

Q: Does the Arc B370 have dedicated video memory?

A: No. The Arc B370 uses system shared memory, with the memory type, bus width, and bandwidth all listed as system shared or system dependent. It relies on the same DDR5 memory as the CPU, which has a bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s.

CPU Role

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 is a 20-core, 20-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, fabricated on a 3 nm process by TSMC. It has a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz, with a TDP of 65 W. The cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3. It supports DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration with a bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s, and it is installed on an Intel Socket 1851 motherboard. The processor’s integrated graphics are listed as Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 32EU, which is a separate, smaller iGPU, but the measured FPS data uses the discrete-style Arc B370. The CPU’s launch MSRP is $394, and it was released on January 6, 2025.

In Overpower, the CPU’s role is to feed the GPU with draw calls and game logic, but the Arc B370 is so weak that the CPU is never the bottleneck. The benchmark results for the Core Ultra 7 265 show it is a high-end desktop part: Cinebench R23 multicore score is 42216, single-core is 5960, and PassMark multithread is 49682. Its percentile vs all CPUs is 93, and its nearest rivals are all EPYC server chips or a slightly different variant of the same CPU. The delta percentages are tiny — the AMD EPYC 4464P is 0.3% lower, the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F is 0.3% higher, the AMD EPYC 7343 is 0.7% higher, and the AMD EPYC 9124 is 0.7% lower. That means the Core Ultra 7 265 is performing exactly in line with expectations for its specifications.

The CPU’s 20 cores and 20 threads are far more than Overpower needs, especially at the low settings where the game is playable. At 1080p Low, the game is likely CPU-bound in some scenes, but the average FPS of 65 is still limited by the GPU’s shared memory and low pixel throughput. The CPU’s boost clock of 5.30 GHz is high, but it does not translate to higher frame rates because the GPU cannot keep up. The L3 cache of 30 MB and the dual-channel DDR5 bandwidth are both adequate for gaming, but they are irrelevant when the GPU is rendering at 6.144 TFLOPS. In this combo, the CPU is like a high-performance engine bolted to a bicycle; it has plenty of power, but the drivetrain cannot deliver it.

The CPU’s integrated graphics (Arc Xe-LPG 32EU) are not used in the measured FPS data, which specifically lists the Intel Arc B370 as the GPU. However, the presence of a 25 W IGP in the same system suggests that this configuration could run Overpower on the CPU’s iGPU in a pinch, though the B370 is the intended graphics solution. The CPU’s 20 lanes of PCIe Gen 5 are also not relevant to the B370, since it is an IGP with a bus interface of IGP, meaning it does not use the PCIe lanes. The CPU’s 17,800 million transistors and 243 mm² die size are architectural facts that do not directly affect gaming performance, but they do indicate a high transistor budget. Ultimately that the Core Ultra 7 265 is overkill for this GPU pairing, and any gains in Overpower would require a better graphics solution, not a faster processor.