SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 5 226V + Intel Arc A350M

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)

▼

88 Score

Top 12% Ranking

88 / 100

HIGH-END

Power Build

Top 12% of systems. Excellent for 1440p Ultra or 4K High gaming.

1440p Ultra4K High

System Balance Analysis

CPU vs GPU performance ratio

Well Balanced

CPU

84%

GPU

92%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 5 226V

19,368 Benchmark Score

Top 16% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

Intel Arc A350M

24,647 Benchmark Score

Top 8% 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

This is a laptop pairing built around Intel’s Lunar Lake architecture and the entry-level Arc Alchemist mobile GPU. The combination targets a specific niche: ultra-portable productivity with a surprisingly capable integrated-class discrete GPU. The data shows a system that punches above its weight in CPU tasks but requires careful expectations for gaming. Here is the practical breakdown.

FAQ

Q: How does the CPU compare to a desktop processor like the Intel Core i7-8700K?

A: The Core Ultra 5 226V’s average benchmark score of 19368 is 0.7% higher than the Core i7-8700K’s 19238. This means the mobile chip matches a six-core desktop processor from several generations ago in overall CPU throughput, despite its 17W TDP.

Q: Is the Arc A350M faster than a desktop GTX 1630?

A: Yes. The Arc A350M posts an average GPU benchmark score of 24647, which is 1.5% higher than the GeForce GTX 1630’s 24277. It also sits 0.8% above the Radeon RX 6600 XT in the average score, though that desktop card typically has higher peak performance in sustained loads.

Q: What is the CPU's single-thread performance like?

A: The Cinebench R23 single-core score is 1744, and the Geekbench single-core score is 1930. These numbers indicate strong per-core efficiency, placing the CPU in the 73rd percentile among all CPUs, which is excellent for a low-power mobile part.

Q: Does the GPU support modern upscaling and ray tracing?

A: Yes. The Arc A350M is based on the Xe-HPG architecture and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). It has 6 dedicated RT cores, and while tensor cores are not listed in the data, the architecture supports Intel’s upscaling technologies, making ray tracing technically feasible at low settings.

Q: How much VRAM does the GPU have, and is it enough?

A: The GPU has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, providing 112.0 GB/s of bandwidth. This is sufficient for 1080p gaming with low to medium textures, but it will struggle with high-resolution texture packs or modern AAA titles that require more than 4 GB.

Q: What is the performance delta between the CPU and its closest rival?

A: The CPU’s average score is nearly identical to the AMD Ryzen 5 7533HS, with a deltaPct of 0%. It is 0.2% slower than the Core i5-1345U and 0.7% faster than the Core i7-10700F.

Q: Is this a desktop or laptop processor?

A: This is a mobile processor. The market segment is listed as "Mobile," the socket is Intel BGA 2833, and the build class for this pairing is "laptop."

Benchmark Performance

The combined picture from the benchmark data is one of a highly efficient CPU paired with a modest but competent GPU. The processor’s average benchmark score of 19368 places it in the 73rd percentile of all CPUs. This is a strong result for a 17W part, achieved through the 3nm TSMC process and Lunar Lake architecture. The multi-core Cinebench R23 score of 9848 shows sustained throughput, while the single-core score of 1744 indicates excellent responsiveness for everyday tasks. The Geekbench multicore score of 8598 reinforces this position, showing the chip is competitive with much higher-wattage parts from previous generations.

The GPU, an Intel Arc A350M, posts an average benchmark score of 24647, placing it in the 70th percentile of all GPUs. Its OpenCL score of 24546 and Vulkan score of 24747 are nearly identical, suggesting consistent performance across different API workloads. This consistency is notable for an entry-level mobile GPU. The combined percentile for this CPU+GPU pairing is 72, indicating that the system is well-balanced for its class, with neither component dragging the overall score down drastically.

The deltaPct comparisons show a tight cluster of rivals for the CPU. The 0% delta against the Ryzen 5 7533HS and the 0.7% lead over the Core i7-8700K mean that in raw CPU throughput, this chip is indistinguishable from those alternatives. For the GPU, the 0.8% lead over the RX 6600 XT is surprising, but the data shows the Arc A350M holds its own in synthetic benchmarks. The real-world takeaway is that this laptop will handle productivity workloads with ease, but the GPU will be the limiting factor in graphically intensive tasks.

GPU Analysis

The Intel Arc A350M is built on the Xe-HPG architecture using a DG2-128 chip fabricated on a 6nm process. The GPU contains 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 24 raster operation pipelines. It operates at a base clock of 1150 MHz and boosts up to 2200 MHz. The memory configuration is 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 112.0 GB/s. This bandwidth is modest by modern standards, but the clock speeds are respectable for a 25W part.

The GPU’s theoretical performance figures include a pixel rate of 52.80 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 105.6 GTexel/s. The FP32 performance is 3.379 TFLOPS, with FP16 performance at 6.758 TFLOPS via a 2:1 ratio. These numbers indicate that the GPU is capable of handling light compute tasks and 1080p gaming, but it will not excel at heavy 3D rendering. The 6 RT cores allow for ray tracing, but the low FP32 throughput means ray-traced scenes will run at playable frame rates only with significant upscaling and low settings.

The benchmark scores confirm this assessment. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 24546 and Vulkan score of 24747 show that the GPU performs consistently across both compute and graphics APIs. Its nearest rival, the RTX A5000 Mobile, is only 0.5% faster in average score, which suggests the Arc A350M is competitive with professional mobile GPUs in synthetic tests. However, in real rendering workloads, the 4 GB VRAM will be a hard limit for large scenes or high-resolution textures.

Who Should Build It

This pairing is for users who prioritize CPU performance and portability over GPU grunt. The 73rd percentile CPU ranking means it is a strong choice for professionals who run multi-threaded applications like compilers, data analysis scripts, or spreadsheet-heavy financial models. The 8 cores and 8 threads, combined with a 4.5 GHz boost clock, handle compilation tasks briskly. The PassMark multi-thread score of 17850 and data compression score of 170687 indicate solid throughput for office and development workloads.

Students and small business users will find this laptop sufficient for all-day battery work, given the 17W TDP. The single-thread performance, evidenced by the Cinebench R23 score of 1744, ensures snappy UI responsiveness and quick application launches. Content creators working with 1080p video or light photo editing will benefit from the GPU’s capabilities, but they should be aware of the 4 GB VRAM limit.

Gamers at 1080p with low to medium settings are the target audience. The GPU’s 70th percentile ranking means it can play esports titles and older games well, but it is not suited for high-refresh-rate gaming on modern AAA titles. This is not a system for high-end 3D artists or hardcore gamers. It is for users who need a powerful CPU in a thin-and-light chassis and are willing to accept moderate gaming performance on the side.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: This is not the primary use case. The GPU’s FP32 throughput of 3.379 TFLOPS is too low for high-refresh 1440p gaming. Esports titles at 1080p with low settings may hit 60-100 FPS, but the 112.0 GB/s bandwidth will limit frame pacing in fast-paced scenes.

Streaming: The CPU’s strong multi-core score of 9848 in Cinebench R23 allows for software encoding at 1080p. The GPU does not have dedicated NVENC-class hardware listed, so x264 encoding on the CPU is viable. The 8 threads will handle a game and encoding simultaneously, but frame drops are possible in CPU-heavy titles.

Video editing: The PassMark floating point math score of 52270 and the GPU’s OpenCL score of 24546 support hardware-accelerated effects in editors like DaVinci Resolve. Timeline scrubbing and 1080p exports will be smooth. 4K editing is possible but will be slow due to the 4 GB VRAM limit on the GPU.

3D rendering: The CPU performs admirably in CPU-based renderers. The Cinebench R20 multicore score of 6381 shows it can handle Blender’s Cycles CPU engine for simple scenes. GPU rendering is limited by the 3.379 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is roughly a third of what a mid-range desktop GPU offers.

Software development: The PassMark data encryption score of 12710 and integer math score of 38647 indicate strong performance for code compilation and cryptographic operations. The single-thread score of 3754 ensures fast IDE responsiveness. This is an excellent laptop for developers who value battery life and portability.

Student and office work: The 17W TDP and 73rd percentile CPU ranking mean this laptop will breeze through document editing, web browsing, and spreadsheet calculations. The integrated Arc 130V GPU handles 4K video playback efficiently. The long battery life implied by the low TDP is a major plus for all-day campus use.

Gaming Performance

The data contains no measured FPS rows for this exact CPU+GPU combination. All FPS figures discussed here are estimates based on the benchmark scores. The GPU’s 70th percentile ranking and average benchmark score of 24647 suggest it performs similarly to a desktop GTX 1630, which is a known 1080p low-settings card. In esports titles like CS, Valorant, or Rocket League, expect 60-100 FPS at 1080p with low to medium settings. The CPU’s single-core score of 1744 ensures that the frame rate will not be CPU-bound in these light titles.

For modern AAA games, the 4 GB VRAM is the primary constraint. Games like Cyberpunk 2077 or Call of Duty will require low texture quality to stay within memory limits. The FP32 throughput of 3.379 TFLOPS suggests roughly 30-45 FPS at 1080p low settings with upscaling enabled. The 112.0 GB/s bandwidth is sufficient for 1080p, but high-resolution texture packs will cause stuttering. Older titles from 2015-2018 will run well, often hitting 60 FPS at high settings. Ray tracing is technically supported via the 6 RT cores, but the low compute power means it is only usable at 720p or with aggressive upscaling.

The Vulkan score of 24747 is slightly higher than the OpenCL score of 24546, indicating that the GPU performs well in Vulkan-based games. This is good news for Doom Eternal and other Vulkan titles. Overall, treat this as a 1080p low-to-medium settings gaming laptop. It is not for high-refresh competitive play or maxed-out AAA visuals.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 5 226V is an 8-core, 8-thread processor based on the Lunar Lake architecture. It has a base clock of 2.10 GHz and a boost clock of 4.50 GHz. The cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. This is a notable departure from previous Intel designs, as there is no hyper-threading, meaning the 8 threads are physical cores only. The chip is fabricated on a 3nm process from TSMC, which explains the low 17W TDP.

The benchmark scores show a processor that excels in single-threaded tasks. The Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1744 and Geekbench single-core score of 1930 are excellent for a mobile part. The PassMark single-thread score of 3754 corroborates this. The multi-threaded performance is also strong, with a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 9848. This is a 5.6x scaling from single-core to multi-core, which is expected for an 8-core chip with no SMT.

The nearest rival data shows the CPU is essentially tied with the AMD Ryzen 5 7533HS (0% delta) and the Intel Core i7-8700K (0.7% faster). This means the 226V offers desktop-class performance from several generations ago while consuming a fraction of the power. The PassMark data compression score of 170687 and encryption score of 12710 indicate strong performance in data-heavy workloads. The find prime numbers score of 166 is low, suggesting the chip is not optimized for pure integer iteration tasks, but this is a niche workload.

Build Overview

This is a laptop build class pairing. The CPU is a mobile Lunar Lake part, and the GPU is an Arc A350M, which is listed as an "IGP" slot width, meaning it is integrated onto the motherboard or a low-profile discrete chip. The combined percentile of 72 places this system in the upper-midrange tier of all laptop configurations. The CPU’s 73rd percentile is the stronger component, while the GPU’s 70th percentile is slightly weaker but still above average.

The system is defined by efficiency. The 17W CPU TDP and 25W GPU TDP suggest a total package that can be cooled passively or with a small fan. This enables a thin and light chassis with long battery life. The PCIe Gen 5 interface for the CPU (4 lanes) and PCIe 4.0 x8 for the GPU ensure that data transfer is not a bottleneck. This is a mainstream ultraportable with a discrete GPU, sitting above integrated-only options but below gaming laptops with larger dGPUs.

The overall tier is "balanced ultraportable." It is not a workstation or a gaming rig. It is a machine for professionals and students who need CPU horsepower on the go, with the GPU as a bonus for light gaming or hardware acceleration. The production status of the GPU is "End-of-life," which means it may be found in clearance or budget laptops.

Balance and Bottleneck

The data shows a system where the CPU is clearly the stronger component. The CPU’s 73rd percentile versus the GPU’s 70th percentile is a narrow gap, but the nature of the workloads matters more. In CPU-bound tasks like compiling, data compression, or office work, the 226V will be the limiting factor only in extreme multi-threaded scenarios, where its 8 threads without SMT may lag behind 16-thread parts.

In gaming and GPU-accelerated rendering, the Arc A350M is the definitive bottleneck. The GPU’s 3.379 TFLOPS FP32 performance and 4 GB VRAM will cap frame rates and texture quality well before the CPU is stressed. The CPU’s single-core score of 1744 is strong enough to feed the GPU in most games at 1080p, but the GPU will still be the constraint. In light esports titles, the CPU can push higher frame rates than the GPU can render, meaning the GPU is always the limiting factor in gaming.

For mixed workloads like video editing, the balance is tighter. The CPU handles timeline and codec tasks, while the GPU accelerates effects and exports. The PassMark floating point score of 52270 indicates the CPU can handle software encoding, but the GPU’s OpenCL score of 24546 will speed up hardware encoding in supported apps. The 112.0 GB/s memory bandwidth on the GPU is low, which will cause a bottleneck when reading large texture files or geometry data. Overall, this is a CPU-first system where the GPU is adequate but never the star.

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 5 226V + Intel Arc A350M

Power Build

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core Ultra 5 226V

Intel Arc A350M

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

FAQ

Benchmark Performance

GPU Analysis

Who Should Build It

Usage Scenarios

Gaming Performance

CPU Analysis

Build Overview

Balance and Bottleneck

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