SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 3 205 + Intel Arc A310

Get a comprehensive performance analysis of your gaming rig with detailed benchmarks, bottleneck detection, and upgrade recommendations

Build Configuration

Select your components

PROCESSOR (CPU)

▼

GRAPHICS CARD (GPU)

▼

87 Score

Top 13% Ranking

87 / 100

HIGH-END

Power Build

Top 13% of systems. Excellent for 1440p Ultra or 4K High gaming.

1440p Ultra4K High

System Balance Analysis

CPU vs GPU performance ratio

Well Balanced

CPU

89%

GPU

85%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 3 205

31,473 Benchmark Score

Top 11% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

Intel Arc A310

7,550 Benchmark Score

Top 15% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

Market Position

How your build compares to others

Budget

0-30

Mid-Range

30-60

High-End

60-85

Enthusiast

85-100

Your Build

Game Performance Benchmarks

Real-world 4K FPS in popular titles

View All Games →

Performance Insights

Tips to maximize your system

Strong Performance

Excellent for 1440p gaming. Most games will run at high/ultra settings smoothly.

Compatible Games See what you can play Compare CPUs Find upgrades Compare GPUs Find upgrades

Performance Tiers Explained

90-100

Ultimate

4K Ultra gaming, VR ready, ray tracing enabled, professional workloads

4K 60+ FPS VR Ready

70-89

High-End

1440p Ultra or 4K High settings, excellent for modern AAA titles

1440p Ultra 4K High

50-69

Mid-Range

1080p Ultra or 1440p Medium, great value for most gamers

1080p Ultra 1440p Med

30-49

Entry Level

1080p Medium settings, suitable for eSports and older titles

1080p Med eSports

0-29

Legacy

Basic gaming, older titles, consider upgrading for modern games

720p-1080p Low Older Games

# Upgrade Path and Platform

The Intel Core Ultra 3 205 and Intel Arc A310 pairing represents a desktop-class build anchored on Intel's latest Socket 1851 platform. The CPU, part of the Core Ultra Series 2 with Arrow Lake architecture, provides a modern foundation with DDR5 memory support over a dual-channel bus delivering 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The platform's PCIe implementation is Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU, which gives substantial headroom for storage and expansion cards, though the Arc A310 itself interfaces via PCIe 4.0 x8.

Memory configuration is straightforward but critical: the DDR5 requirement means builders must plan for newer, faster memory modules, and the dual-channel setup is essential to saturate the 102.4 GB/s bandwidth figure. ECC memory is not supported, which positions this platform for consumer and prosumer workloads rather than mission-critical server environments. The CPU's 57W TDP is modest, and the GPU's 30W TDP is exceptionally low, with a suggested PSU of 200W for the entire system. This creates a build with enormous power supply headroom — even a modest 300W unit would be excessive, and the absence of power connectors on the GPU means the card draws entirely from the PCIe slot.

The upgrade path is clear: the Socket 1851 platform supports the broader Core Ultra Series 2 lineup, so users can move up to higher-tier parts without changing motherboards. The 20 PCIe Gen 5 lanes provide future-proofing for next-generation storage or add-in cards, though the GPU's x8 interface limits bandwidth-sensitive upgrades. The 57W CPU TDP leaves thermal headroom for air cooling, and the 200W PSU recommendation means even a significant CPU upgrade would likely not require a new power supply. For a sensible next step, users could upgrade to a higher-core-count Arrow Lake part while retaining the same motherboard, memory, and PSU, though the GPU would become the primary bottleneck in gaming scenarios before the CPU does.

# Benchmark Performance

The benchmark data shows a clear split between CPU and GPU capability. The Core Ultra 3 205 achieves an average benchmark score of 31,473, placing it at the 82nd percentile among all CPUs — a strong mid-to-upper-tier result. Its closest rivals are remarkably tight: the Intel Core 7 240H scores 31,483 (0% delta), the AMD Ryzen 9 5980HX scores 31,495 (-0.1%), the Intel Core Ultra 5 225H scores 31,508 (-0.1%), and the Intel Core i5-13500 scores 31,510 (-0.1%). This means the Ultra 3 205 effectively trades blows with these parts, sitting within 0.1% of all four rivals, which is essentially a statistical tie.

The GPU tells a different story. The Arc A310 averages 7,550 across its benchmark suite, placing at the 40th percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon R7 250 at 7,557 (-0.1%), the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 at 7,580 (-0.4%), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 at 7,472 (+1%), and the AMD Radeon HD 8850M at 7,447 (+1.4%). The GPU is within 1.4% of its closest competitors, but the overall percentile position reveals it is a lower-mid-range part, far below the CPU's standing.

The combined percentile for this build is 61, which reflects the GPU dragging down the overall system position. In CPU-centric workloads — rendering, compilation, data processing — the system performs at an 82nd-percentile level. In GPU-bound tasks like gaming or GPU compute, performance drops to the 40th percentile. No measured FPS data exists for this exact combination, so all frame-rate discussion is estimated from the benchmark scores. The data indicates a fundamentally imbalanced pairing: a top-quartile CPU paired with a bottom-half GPU.

# CPU Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 3 205 is an 8-core, 8-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, built on a 3nm process at TSMC with 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. It runs at a 3.80 GHz base clock and boosts to 4.90 GHz, with a 57W TDP. The cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 15 MB of shared L3. The CPU is not multiplier-unlocked, so overclocking is not an intended use case, but the 4.90 GHz boost clock already provides strong single-thread performance.

Benchmark results confirm the CPU's balanced capability. In Cinebench R23, the multi-core score is 19,856 and the single-core score is 2,803. The R20 results are 8,339 multi-core and 1,177 single-core, while R15 shows 2,001 multi-core and 282 single-core. These scores cluster tightly with the nearest rivals — the Core 7 240H, Ryzen 9 5980HX, Core Ultra 5 225H, and Core i5-13500 are all within 0.1% of the average score, indicating that the Ultra 3 205 delivers performance equivalent to parts with different core counts and architectures.

PassMark results provide a more granular view. The multi-thread score is 26,167, with single-thread at 4,575. Integer math scores 54,755, floating-point math 75,136, and extended instructions 22,578. Data compression hits 260,651, data encryption 18,772, and random string sorting 31,083. Physics scoring at 2,016 and prime number finding at 268 round out the compute picture. These numbers suggest strong integer and floating-point throughput for a desktop CPU, with the compression score being particularly high, indicating solid performance in data-heavy workloads.

The 82nd percentile ranking across all CPUs means this processor outperforms roughly four out of five CPUs in the benchmark database. For real workloads, this translates to fast compile times, responsive application performance, and capable multi-tasking. The 8-core, 8-thread configuration lacks hyper-threading, but the high boost clock compensates in single-threaded scenarios. The integrated Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 16EU provides a basic display output capability, though the discrete Arc A310 handles graphics duties in this build.

# FAQ

Q: What socket does the Intel Core Ultra 3 205 use?

A: The CPU uses Intel Socket 1851, which is the platform socket for the Core Ultra Series 2 Arrow Lake processors.

Q: What memory type does this build support?

A: The CPU supports DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus, providing 102.4 GB/s of memory bandwidth. ECC memory is not supported.

Q: How does the Arc A310 compare to the GTX 1650 in benchmarks?

A: The Arc A310 averages 7,550 in benchmark scores, while the GTX 1650 averages 7,472. The Arc A310 is 1% ahead of the GTX 1650 according to the nearestRivals deltaPct.

Q: What is the combined performance percentile of this CPU+GPU pairing?

A: The combined percentile is 61, which reflects the CPU's strong 82nd-percentile performance tempered by the GPU's weaker 40th-percentile showing.

Q: Does the GPU require additional power connectors?

A: No, the Arc A310 has no power connectors and draws all its power from the PCIe slot. The suggested PSU for the system is 200W.

Q: What is the CPU's boost clock and TDP?

A: The CPU boosts to 4.90 GHz from a 3.80 GHz base clock, with a TDP of 57W.

Q: Is the Arc A310 still in production?

A: No, the Arc A310 is marked as end-of-life, with its production status listed as "End-of-life" and a release date of October 2022.

# Balance and Bottleneck

The balance analysis reveals a severe bottleneck asymmetry. The CPU sits at the 82nd percentile while the GPU sits at the 40th percentile — a 42-point gap that ensures the GPU is the limiting factor in virtually every graphics-bound workload. In gaming scenarios, the Arc A310's 40th-percentile position means frame rates will be constrained by the GPU's compute throughput, which is 2.688 TFLOPS FP32 with a 2.688 TFLOPS pixel rate of 28.00 GPixel/s and texture rate of 56.00 GTexel/s. The CPU's 82nd-percentile performance is more than sufficient to feed the GPU in most cases.

However, the bottleneck direction reverses in CPU-bound workloads. The Core Ultra 3 205's multi-thread score of 26,167 in PassMark and Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 19,856 indicate that rendering and compilation tasks will be CPU-limited, with the GPU's 40th-percentile compute score of 2,157 in PassMark GPU compute providing minimal acceleration for general-purpose compute. The GPU's 4 GB GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus with 124.0 GB/s bandwidth further constrains memory-intensive graphics tasks, as modern games increasingly require more than 4 GB of VRAM even at 1080p.

The combined percentile of 61 accurately reflects this imbalance. The FPS scaling, estimated from benchmark scores since no measured FPS data exists, would show that in lightweight e-sports titles, the CPU could push high frame rates but the GPU would cap them at its 40th-percentile level. In AAA titles at higher settings, the GPU would be the outright bottleneck, with the CPU's 82nd-percentile performance going largely unused. For productivity workloads like video editing or 3D rendering, the CPU dominates and the GPU's contribution is minimal, making the system feel faster than its gaming performance suggests.

# Who Should Build It

This build targets users who prioritize CPU performance over GPU capability. The 82nd-percentile CPU makes it an excellent choice for software developers, particularly those compiling large codebases or running virtual machines, where the 8 cores and 4.90 GHz boost clock provide responsive iteration times. Students in computer science or engineering fields would benefit from the CPU's strong PassMark integer math score of 54,755 and floating-point math of 75,136, which accelerate simulation and data analysis workloads.

Small business workstations handling spreadsheets, databases, and office productivity would find the CPU's data compression score of 260,651 useful for file operations and archival tasks. The 57W TDP and 30W GPU TDP mean the system runs cool and quiet, suitable for office environments. Content creators working with 2D design or light photo editing would appreciate the CPU's single-thread performance of 4,575 in PassMark, though the GPU's 40th-percentile position limits heavy graphics work.

Gamers at 1080p with modest settings expectations could build this system for e-sports titles, where the CPU's high boost clock helps maintain frame pacing. However, the GPU's 40th-percentile ranking means it is not suited for high-refresh-rate gaming at max settings in modern titles. The system is best suited as a productivity-first machine that can handle light gaming on the side, rather than a gaming-first rig.

# Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: The CPU's 82nd-percentile performance can drive high frame rates in CPU-bound scenarios, but the GPU's 40th-percentile position caps actual FPS well below what the CPU could support. Estimated from benchmark scores, the Arc A310's 2.688 TFLOPS FP32 throughput limits 1080p gaming to lower settings for playable frame rates, making high-refresh monitors a poor investment for this build.

Streaming: The CPU's 8 cores and strong multi-thread score of 26,167 in PassMark can handle software encoding, while the GPU's Xe-HPG architecture with 6 RT cores provides some acceleration. However, the GPU's 4 GB VRAM and 64-bit memory bus constrain concurrent gaming and encoding, making this a marginal scenario for streaming.

Video editing: The CPU's Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 19,856 accelerates timeline rendering and export, while the GPU's 40th-percentile compute score of 2,157 in PassMark GPU compute offers modest hardware acceleration for effects. The 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth helps with large video files, though the 4 GB GPU memory is a limitation for complex projects.

3D rendering: CPU-based rendering benefits from the 8 cores and 82nd-percentile performance, with Cinebench scores indicating solid performance in applications like Blender's CPU renderer. GPU rendering is severely limited by the Arc A310's 40th-percentile position and 2.688 TFLOPS FP32 throughput, making this a CPU-centric workflow.

Software development: The CPU excels here, with high single-thread performance of 4,575 in PassMark for fast compilation and an integer math score of 54,755 for code processing. The 20 PCIe Gen 5 lanes support fast NVMe storage for large repositories, and the 57W TDP allows sustained all-core boost during long builds.

Student and office work: The combination of a 30W GPU and 57W CPU makes for an energy-efficient system that runs quietly. The CPU's data encryption score of 18,772 and random string sorting of 31,083 handle typical office tasks with ease, while the GPU's 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs support multi-monitor setups for productivity.

# Build Overview

This is a desktop-class build combining the Intel Core Ultra 3 205 CPU with the Intel Arc A310 GPU. The CPU, part of the Core Ultra Series 2 with Arrow Lake architecture, is a mainstream desktop processor on Socket 1851 with 8 cores and 8 threads. The GPU, based on the Xe-HPG architecture with the DG2-128 chip, is an entry-level discrete graphics card in the Arc 3 generation.

The overall tier of this build is defined by its combined percentile of 61, which places it in the upper-mid range of all systems. The CPU's 82nd-percentile ranking makes it a standout component, while the GPU's 40th-percentile ranking pulls the system down. The build class is desktop, indicating a stationary, upgradeable platform. The pairing is unusual — a top-quartile CPU with a bottom-half GPU — which creates a system that excels in CPU-bound tasks but underperforms in graphics-intensive applications.

The CPU's launch MSRP is $140, which positions it as an accessible entry point into the Core Ultra Series 2 platform. The GPU has no launch MSRP listed in the data. The system's power requirements are minimal — a 200W PSU is suggested — making it suitable for compact or energy-conscious builds. The GPU is end-of-life with a 2022 release date, while the CPU was released in 2025, creating a generational mismatch that buyers should consider.

# GPU Analysis

The Intel Arc A310 is based on the Xe-HPG architecture with the DG2-128 chip, built on a 6nm process at TSMC with 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die. It features 768 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 render output units, with 6 RT cores for ray tracing. The GPU operates at a fixed 1750 MHz for both base and boost clocks, with memory running at 1937 MHz effective 15.5 Gbps. The 4 GB GDDR6 memory sits on a 64-bit bus, providing 124.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

Compute performance is modest: FP32 throughput is 2.688 TFLOPS, with FP16 at 5.376 TFLOPS via a 2:1 ratio. The pixel rate is 28.00 GPixel/s and texture rate is 56.00 GTexel/s. The GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, covering modern graphics APIs. Display output is via 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0, which supports high-resolution monitors, though the GPU's compute capability limits its ability to drive demanding games at those resolutions.

Benchmark results place the A310 at the 40th percentile among all GPUs, with a PassMark G3D score of 5,433 and a G2D score of 625. DirectX scores are notably low: DirectX 9 at 69, DirectX 10 at 31, DirectX 11 at 33, and DirectX 12 at 29. The GPU compute score is 2,157, while Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan scores are 30,607 and 28,964, respectively. These numbers indicate that the A310 is competitive with the GTX 1650 (1% ahead) and Radeon R7 250 (0.1% ahead), but its 40th-percentile ranking places it firmly in entry-level territory.

For rendering workloads, the 6 RT cores provide ray tracing capability, but the 2.688 TFLOPS FP32 throughput limits overall rendering performance. The 4 GB VRAM is a significant constraint for modern games and professional applications, and the 64-bit memory bus with 124.0 GB/s bandwidth creates a bandwidth bottleneck for texture-heavy workloads. The GPU's 30W TDP is remarkably low, making it ideal for low-power builds, but the performance trade-off is substantial. The Arc A310 is best suited for basic graphics tasks, light gaming at reduced settings, and multi-monitor productivity setups, with its end-of-life status indicating that driver optimization and support may not improve over time.

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 3 205 + Intel Arc A310

Power Build

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core Ultra 3 205

Intel Arc A310

Market Position

Game Performance Benchmarks

Cyberpunk 2077

Red Dead Redemption 2

Microsoft Flight Simulator

Control

Call of Duty: Warzone

Fortnite

Performance Insights

Strong Performance

Performance Tiers Explained

Ultimate

High-End

Mid-Range

Entry Level

Legacy

4K Gaming Performance

Cyberpunk 2077

Red Dead Redemption 2

Microsoft Flight Simulator

Control

Call of Duty: Warzone

Fortnite

1440p Gaming Performance

Cyberpunk 2077

Red Dead Redemption 2

Microsoft Flight Simulator

Control

Call of Duty: Warzone

Fortnite

1080p Gaming Performance

Cyberpunk 2077

Red Dead Redemption 2

Microsoft Flight Simulator

Control

Call of Duty: Warzone

Fortnite

Related Processors

Related Graphics Cards

Compare Your CPU

Compare Your GPU

Related PC Builds

Same CPU with Different GPUs

Same GPU with Different CPUs

Other Popular Builds