The Medium

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and Intel Arc B370 combination delivers playable performance only at the lowest settings across all tested resolutions in The Medium, with the data showing a severe GPU bottleneck that the CPU's high multi-threaded throughput cannot overcome. This pairing ranks 2681st out of 2911 tested combinations, placing it in the bottom 8% of systems, making it unsuitable for this horror title at medium or higher presets.

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 based on the Arrow Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process at TSMC with 17,800 million transistors. Its base clock runs at 2.40 GHz and it boosts up to 5.30 GHz, with a 65 W TDP. The CPU features a 30 MB shared L3 cache alongside 192 KB of L1 and 3 MB of L2 per core, and it supports dual-channel DDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. It connects via PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU, and its integrated Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 32 execution units is present but unused in this configuration.

Benchmark data shows this processor is a strong performer in synthetic tests. It scores 42,216 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 5,960 in single-core, while PassMark multithread reaches 49,682. Its average benchmark score of 64,640 places it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, indicating that by raw processing power alone, it is well above typical desktop processors.

However, the measured frame rates in The Medium tell a different story. At 1920x1080 with Low settings, the combination achieves 46 FPS, and at 2560x1440 Low it reaches 39 FPS. These results, when compared to the CPU's 93rd percentile standing, indicate that the processor is far from being the limiting factor. The CPU's nearest rivals in overall benchmark scores include the AMD EPYC 4464P at 64,823 (0.3% higher), the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F at 64,438 (0.3% lower), the AMD EPYC 7343 at 64,202 (0.7% lower), and the AMD EPYC 9124 at 65,104 (0.7% higher). All of these are within a single percentage point, confirming that the Core Ultra 7 265 is a top-tier compute part, but its performance headroom is irrelevant when the graphics subsystem cannot keep pace.

The data suggests that the CPU's 20 cores and high boost clock are not being exercised meaningfully in this game at these settings. The frame rate drop from Low to Medium settings across all resolutions—from 46 to 29 FPS at 1080p, from 39 to 24 at 1440p, and from 30 to 19 at 4K—is far larger than any CPU-related scaling would produce. This pattern points to the GPU as the primary constraint, with the CPU remaining largely idle in terms of gaming workload.

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

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 a boost clock of 2400 MHz, but critically, its memory configuration is "System Shared," meaning it uses the system RAM rather than dedicated VRAM. This results in memory bandwidth that is "System Dependent," which introduces a significant performance penalty in memory-intensive scenarios such as those found in The Medium. The GPU has 1,280 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 20 raster operation units, along with 10 ray tracing cores. Its peak pixel rate is 48.00 GPixel/s, texture rate is 96.00 GTexel/s, and it delivers 6.144 TFLOPS of FP32 compute or 12.29 TFLOPS in FP16 with a 2:1 ratio. The TDP is just 25 W, and it has no power connectors, reflecting its integrated nature.

In the single benchmark available, the Arc B370 scores 1,184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, which places it in the 5th percentile of all GPUs. This is an extraordinarily low standing, and its nearest rivals are all legacy or low-end parts: the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570 scores 1,186 (0.2% higher), the ATI Radeon HD 5770 scores 1,190 (0.5% higher), the AMD Radeon HD 7650M scores 1,192 (0.7% higher), and the AMD FirePro M2000 scores 1,168 (1.4% lower). This puts the Arc B370 in the same performance class as a mobile GPU from over a decade ago, explaining the poor frame rates.

The measured FPS data confirms that this GPU is the bottleneck. At 1920x1080, even the Low preset only yields 46 FPS, and the High preset drops to 21 FPS. At 2560x1440, Low produces 39 FPS, while High falls to 17 FPS. At 3840x2160, Low manages 30 FPS, and High is just 14 FPS. The GPU's lack of dedicated VRAM and system-dependent bandwidth means that as resolution and settings increase, the memory subsystem becomes a critical constraint, leading to the steep performance cliffs observed. The 25 W TDP also indicates that this is not designed for sustained gaming workloads, and the data reflects this limitation across every resolution and preset.

FAQ

Q: What is the best resolution to play The Medium with this hardware?

A: The data shows that only 1920x1080 with Low settings exceeds 40 FPS, reaching 46 FPS. At 2560x1440 Low, the average drops to 39 FPS, and at 3840x2160 Low it falls to 30 FPS, so 1080p Low is the only resolution that approaches playable smoothness.

Q: How does the Intel Arc B370 compare to its nearest GPU rivals in synthetic benchmarks?

A: The Arc B370 scores 1,184 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, which is 0.2% lower than the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5570's 1,186 and 0.5% lower than the ATI Radeon HD 5770's 1,190. It is 0.7% behind the AMD Radeon HD 7650M's 1,192 but 1.4% ahead of the AMD FirePro M2000's 1,168.

Q: Is the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 a fast processor in general compute benchmarks?

A: Yes, its average benchmark score of 64,640 places it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs. It achieves 42,216 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, 5,960 in single-core, and 49,682 in PassMark multithread, showing it is a top-tier compute part.

Q: What frame rates can be expected at Medium settings in The Medium?

A: At 1920x1080 Medium, the average FPS is 29 with a minimum of 24 and maximum of 33. At 2560x1440 Medium, the average is 24 with a range of 21 to 28. At 3840x2160 Medium, the average is 19 with a range of 16 to 22.

Q: Does raising the settings from Low to Ultra provide a proportional increase in visual quality relative to the performance cost?

A: No, the cost is steep. At 1080p, Low runs at 46 FPS, Medium at 29, High at 21, and Ultra at 16. At 4K, Low runs at 30 FPS, Medium at 19, High at 14, and Ultra at 11, meaning Ultra is roughly a third of the Low frame rate at every resolution.

Q: How does this combo rank among all tested systems for The Medium?

A: It ranks 2681st out of 2911 tested combinations, placing it in the bottom 8% of all systems. This rank reflects the GPU's 5th percentile standing, not the CPU's 93rd percentile performance.

How This Combo Ranks

The combination of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and Intel Arc B370 ranks 2681st out of 2911 tested combos in The Medium, which puts it in the bottom 8% of all systems. This ranking is almost entirely determined by the GPU, which sits in the 5th percentile of all graphics cards, while the CPU sits in the 93rd percentile. The disparity between the two components is stark: the processor is a high-end compute part, but the integrated graphics solution is among the weakest ever benchmarked.

The data shows this is not a balanced pairing. The CPU's nearest rivals—the AMD EPYC 4464P, Intel Core Ultra 7 265F, AMD EPYC 7343, and AMD EPYC 9124—are all within 0.7% of its average score, but they cannot influence the frame rates in this game because the GPU is the limiting factor. The 2681st rank is consistent with the measured FPS data: even at the lowest settings, the system barely achieves 46 FPS at 1080p, which is below the threshold for smooth gameplay in a horror title that relies on atmospheric tension.

When compared to other tested combos, this system falls into a cluster of legacy or low-power integrated graphics solutions. The GPU's benchmark score of 1,184 places it alongside parts like the ATI Radeon HD 5770 and AMD Radeon HD 7650M, which are over a decade old. The ranking does not improve at higher settings either, as the combination struggles to maintain even 20 FPS at 4K Ultra. The conclusion is that this rank is a direct reflection of the GPU's performance ceiling, and the CPU's substantial compute headroom does not translate into any meaningful gaming advantage in The Medium.

Settings Recommendations

Based on the measured FPS rows, the only viable preset for this hardware is Low, and only at 1920x1080 does it reach a playable average of 46 FPS. At 2560x1440 Low, the average drops to 39 FPS, which may be acceptable for some users but is borderline for a game that benefits from consistent frame pacing. The Medium preset is not recommended, as it drops the average to 29 FPS at 1080p, 24 FPS at 1440p, and 19 FPS at 4K, all of which are below the threshold for smooth gameplay.

The High and Ultra presets are effectively unplayable across all resolutions. High settings yield 21 FPS at 1080p, 17 FPS at 1440p, and 14 FPS at 4K. Ultra settings are worse still, with 16 FPS at 1080p, 14 FPS at 1440p, and 11 FPS at 4K. The data shows that the performance drop from Low to Medium is around 37% at 1080p (from 46 to 29 FPS), and from Low to Ultra it is over 65% (from 46 to 16 FPS). This indicates that the GPU's limited memory bandwidth and low compute throughput cannot support the increased texture and shading loads at higher presets.

For users who insist on higher visual fidelity, the minimum and maximum FPS data for Medium settings provides a range: at 1080p Medium, frames swing between 24 and 33, which introduces noticeable stutter. The recommendation is clear: run at 1080p Low for the best experience, or accept 1440p Low at 39 FPS if the resolution is more important than smoothness. There is no scenario in the measured data where Medium or higher provides a playable experience, and the 4K resolution should be avoided entirely.

Measured FPS Breakdown

At 1920x1080, the lowest settings provide the best result with an average of 46 FPS. Moving up to Medium reduces the average to 29 FPS, with a minimum of 24 and a maximum of 33. High settings drop the average further to 21 FPS, and Ultra falls to 16 FPS. The progression shows a steep decline from Low to Medium, a 17 FPS loss, followed by smaller losses of 8 FPS from Medium to High and 5 FPS from High to Ultra.

At 2560x1440, Low settings achieve an average of 39 FPS, which is 7 FPS lower than at 1080p. Medium settings produce an average of 24 FPS, with a minimum of 21 and a maximum of 28. High settings yield 17 FPS, and Ultra drops to 14 FPS. The pattern is similar to 1080p, but each preset is roughly 5-7 FPS lower, indicating that the resolution increase places additional strain on the GPU's system-shared memory bandwidth.

At 3840x2160, the results are borderline unplayable at every setting. Low settings manage an average of 30 FPS, while Medium falls to 19 FPS with a range of 16 to 22. High settings produce 14 FPS, and Ultra drops to 11 FPS. The difference between Low and Ultra at 4K is only 19 FPS, meaning that the GPU is so constrained that even lowering the settings cannot unlock meaningful performance gains. The minimum FPS data available for Medium settings shows that at 1080p the floor is 24 FPS, at 1440p it is 21 FPS, and at 4K it is 16 FPS, all of which are below the threshold for a smooth horror experience.

Across all resolutions, the data demonstrates that this hardware is only suitable for Low settings, and even then, only at 1080p does it approach a stable 46 FPS average. The 4K resolution is effectively a slide show at every preset, and the 1440p resolution is only marginally better. The measured FPS numbers consistently show that the Intel Arc B370's 5th percentile GPU performance is the ceiling for this system, and the Intel Core Ultra 7 265's 93rd percentile CPU performance cannot compensate for the graphics bottleneck.