SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 5 235H + 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)

▼

92 Score

Top 8% Ranking

92 / 100

ULTIMATE READY

Apex Performer

Top 8% of systems. Capable of 4K Ultra gaming and advanced rendering.

4K 60+ FPSVR ReadyRay Tracing

System Balance Analysis

CPU vs GPU performance ratio

Well Balanced

CPU

91%

GPU

92%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 5 235H

37,522 Benchmark Score

Top 9% 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

Optimal Performance

Your system is in the top tier. You can run any modern game at maximum settings.

4K Gaming Ready

Consider a 4K 144Hz monitor to fully utilize your hardware capabilities.

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

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235H paired with the Intel Arc A350M is a laptop configuration built on the foundations of a strong modern CPU and a modest dedicated GPU. The benchmark data indicates this is a system where the processor significantly outclasses the graphics solution, creating a clear performance hierarchy that favors CPU-intensive tasks. This analysis will detail the measured benchmark results, estimated gaming capabilities, and the overall balance of this platform.

The data shows a combined percentile ranking of 78, placing this configuration ahead of the majority of systems. However, this aggregate score is heavily weighted by the CPU’s impressive 85th percentile ranking, while the GPU sits at a lower 70th percentile. This disparity is the defining characteristic of this build, suggesting a system engineered for productivity and multitasking rather than high-end gaming. While the CPU is a top-tier performer in its class, the GPU serves as a competent entry-level dedicated solution.

Gaming Performance

The FACT PACK contains no measured FPS rows for this exact CPU/GPU combination, so all gaming performance figures discussed here are estimates derived from the individual component benchmark scores. It is crucial to state clearly that `dataIsMeasured` is false for this configuration, meaning the following analysis is an interpretation of the components' relative strengths rather than a record of real-world testing.

Based on the GPU's performance, the Arc A350M is positioned in the lower-midrange of the graphics hierarchy. Its average benchmark score of 24647 places it in the 70th percentile of all GPUs, a respectable position for a mobile chip. The nearest rivals provide context for its raw compute power: it is statistically tied with the AMD Radeon RX 590 and NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile, with a negligible 0.4-0.5% performance delta. This places its raw compute capability on par with older desktop-class GPUs, which suggests it can handle 1080p gaming, but likely not at maximum settings in demanding titles.

In terms of estimated frame rates, this GPU should be considered a 1080p gaming solution. For esports and older titles, it should be capable of delivering high frame rates, potentially exceeding 60 FPS on high settings. However, for modern AAA games, the expectation is that users will need to adjust settings to medium or low to achieve playable frame rates. The 4 GB VRAM capacity will also be a limiting factor in texture-heavy games at higher resolutions. The GPU lacks the raw throughput of modern high-end cards, and the estimated performance is more about consistent 60 FPS in optimized titles than chasing high refresh rates.

The CPU, with its high single-core performance, will not be the bottleneck in most gaming scenarios. The primary constraint will be the GPU. The estimated gaming experience is therefore one of a stable, capable entry-level machine that is best suited for 1080p gaming with settings tuned for performance over visual fidelity.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The platform is built around the Intel BGA 2049 socket, which is a mobile-specific package. This means the CPU is soldered to the motherboard and is not upgradeable. The upgrade path for this system is therefore limited to components that are not physically integrated into the mainboard.

The system supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory over a dual-channel bus, offering a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. This is a modern memory standard, providing ample bandwidth for the CPU's 14 cores. Upgrading or replacing the memory modules is the most straightforward performance upgrade, provided the laptop chassis allows for it. The CPU itself also features integrated graphics in the form of Arc Graphics 140T, which could serve as a fallback if the dedicated GPU fails, though it would be significantly less powerful.

The PCIe support is listed as Gen 5, 8 Lanes (CPU only). This is a crucial detail, as it provides a high-speed, modern interface for the primary M.2 NVMe SSD. The GPU, however, operates on a separate PCIe 4.0 x8 interface. Upgrading the storage to a Gen 5 NVMe drive would be a tangible improvement for load times and data-intensive tasks. The PSU headroom is dictated by the combined TDP of the CPU (28 W) and GPU (25 W), which is a very low total draw. This indicates that the power supply is not a limiting factor for this configuration, and any future component upgrades, aside from the CPU, would be well within the existing power budget.

A sensible next upgrade, given the constraints, would be to maximize the system's memory and storage. Increasing the RAM capacity and ensuring it runs at the highest supported speed would benefit the CPU's multi-threaded workload. Replacing the primary storage with a Gen 5 capable SSD would also yield noticeable improvements in system responsiveness and application loading times.

Benchmark Performance

The benchmark scores paint a clear picture of a CPU-dominant system. The Intel Core Ultra 5 235H achieves an average benchmark score of 37522, placing it in the 85th percentile of all CPUs. This is a high performance ranking, placing it in direct competition with some of Intel's previous-generation top-tier mobile processors.

The CPU's multi-core strength is evident in Cinebench tests, with a score of 25598 in R23 multicore. This performance is closely matched by its nearest rivals. The data shows it is statistically similar to the Intel Core i9-13900HK, with a deltaPct of just 0.3% higher, and the Intel Core i5-13600K, which is 0.4% faster. This places the Ultra 5 235H firmly in the same performance class as these high-end desktop and mobile chips from the previous generation.

The GPU, the Intel Arc A350M, has an average benchmark score of 24647, placing it in the 70th percentile. Its Geekbench scores of 24546 (OpenCL) and 24747 (Vulkan) are nearly identical, indicating consistent compute performance across different APIs. When looking at its rivals, the picture is one of a mid-range performer. It is 0.8% slower than the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT but 1.5% faster than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630.

The combined picture is a system with an exceptional CPU that can handle heavy computational loads with ease, paired with a GPU that is competent for mainstream tasks and entry-level gaming. The CPU’s performance is a major highlight, while the GPU’s is merely average. The overall combined percentile of 78 is a direct reflection of this high-low pairing.

Balance and Bottleneck

The performance balance in this configuration is heavily skewed towards the CPU. The processor holds an 85th percentile ranking, while the GPU sits at a 70th percentile. This 15-point gap is significant and indicates that the CPU is the dominant component. In any workload that is not purely graphics-bound, the CPU will be the primary driver of performance.

The most obvious bottleneck is the GPU in gaming scenarios. Even though the CPU is powerful enough to feed frames at a high rate, the Arc A350M will struggle to keep up in demanding titles, especially at higher resolutions. The estimated FPS scaling would show that while the CPU can handle the physics and game logic, the GPU's rendering capabilities will cap the final output. In this context, the GPU is the limiting factor for achieving high frame rates and high visual fidelity.

Conversely, in CPU-intensive tasks like video encoding, 3D rendering, or software compilation, the GPU plays a minor role. In these workloads, the CPU's 14 cores and high clock speeds will be fully utilized, and the system will perform exceptionally well. The GPU would only be a bottleneck if a specific task required GPU acceleration for effects or rendering, but for pure compute, the CPU is the star. The data indicates a system where the CPU is the workhorse, and the GPU is a supporting component that is sufficient for standard graphics tasks but not for high-end gaming.

Usage Scenarios

High-Refresh Gaming: This is not the target use case. While the CPU is more than capable of processing the game logic, the Arc A350M's 70th percentile ranking and 4 GB VRAM will limit the system to 1080p gaming. Achieving high refresh rates (144Hz+) in modern AAA titles is unlikely, and users should expect to target 60 FPS with adjusted settings.

Streaming: The CPU is the hero here. With a strong multi-threaded score of 25598 in Cinebench R23, the Intel Core Ultra 5 235H can easily handle x264 encoding for streaming while simultaneously running a game. The dedicated GPU will handle the rendering, and while it may not produce the highest quality graphics, the system is well-equipped to manage a single-PC streaming setup without the CPU becoming the bottleneck.

Video Editing: This is a strong scenario for this system. Video editing software often utilizes both CPU and GPU. The CPU's high multi-core performance (85th percentile) will accelerate timeline scrubbing, rendering, and export times. The GPU's 4 GB VRAM and 112 GB/s bandwidth can assist with real-time effects and playback, though the limited VRAM may be a constraint with complex 4K projects. The system is a capable editor for 1080p and light 4K work.

3D Rendering: The CPU's performance is the primary driver for CPU-based renderers. Its high passmark multithread score of 30091 indicates it can handle complex scenes in applications like Blender (Cycles) or V-Ray. The GPU can also contribute via its 3.379 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, but its 4 GB VRAM will be a limiting factor for rendering large, texture-heavy scenes. For smaller projects, it is a competent solution.

Software Development: This is an ideal scenario. The CPU's 14 cores and high single-thread score of 4359 (Passmark) make it excellent for compiling code and running multiple virtual machines or containers. The fast memory bandwidth (102.4 GB/s) will also benefit memory-intensive development tasks. The GPU is sufficient for driving multiple 4K displays for code editors and documentation.

Student and Office Work: This system is overkill for standard office tasks. The CPU provides instant responsiveness for spreadsheets, document editing, and web browsing. The dedicated GPU ensures smooth rendering of the OS and any graphical interfaces. The low TDP of the CPU (28W) and GPU (25W) suggests good battery life, making it a portable and powerful choice for a demanding student or professional.

Who Should Build It

This configuration is a clear target for content creators and software developers who require significant CPU power for their work but do not have a primary need for high-end gaming performance. The data supports this, showing a CPU that outperforms previous-generation high-end chips while the GPU is a secondary component.

For gamers, this build is suitable for those who play at 1080p resolution and are willing to adjust settings to medium or low to achieve smooth frame rates in modern titles. It is not for the enthusiast gamer seeking maximum visual fidelity or high refresh rates. The GPU's performance is comparable to the older RX 590, which gives a clear indication of its capabilities.

For students in engineering, computer science, or data science fields, this system provides the computational headroom needed for simulations, coding projects, and data analysis. The CPU's 85th percentile ranking ensures it can handle demanding academic software.

For small business workstations, the system offers a compelling mix of performance and efficiency. The powerful CPU can handle financial modeling, database management, and other professional applications, while the dedicated GPU provides a smooth visual experience for any GUI-based software. The low power draw is also a benefit for businesses looking to manage energy costs.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235H is a 14-core, 14-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process by TSMC. It operates with a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. This high boost clock is a key factor in its exceptional single-thread performance, evidenced by its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3613.

The CPU has a cache hierarchy of 192 KB L1 and 3 MB L2 per core, along with 18 MB of shared L3 cache. This configuration is designed for high data throughput. Its memory support for DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a dual-channel bus provides a significant 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth, ensuring the cores are well-fed with data.

In terms of real-world workloads, the benchmark scores are impressive. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 25598 places it at the top of its class, matching the performance of the previous generation's flagship mobile i9-13900HK. Its Passmark scores further reinforce this, with a multithread score of 30091 and a single-thread score of 4359. The data encryption and compression scores (23121 and 301979, respectively) show a processor that is also highly capable in tasks involving data manipulation and security. The CPU's performance is not just about peak speed; it is about sustained, high-level output across a wide range of tasks, making it a dominant force in mobile computing.

FAQ

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 5 235H compare to the Intel Core i9-13900HK?

A: The benchmark data shows they are statistically tied. The Ultra 5 235H has an average score of 37522, which is only 0.3% higher than the i9-13900HK's 37425. This means the newer Ultra 5 chip delivers comparable performance to Intel's previous top-tier mobile processor.

Q: What is the gaming performance of the Intel Arc A350M?

A: While there is no measured FPS data, the GPU's benchmark scores suggest it is a 1080p gaming solution. Its performance is comparable to the AMD Radeon RX 590, meaning it is best suited for esports and older titles at high settings, or modern AAA games at medium to low settings.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the main bottleneck for gaming?

A: The GPU is the primary bottleneck for gaming. The CPU is in the 85th percentile of all processors, while the GPU is in the 70th. This indicates that the Arc A350M will limit frame rates in graphically demanding games, even though the CPU is powerful enough to handle the processing load.

Q: Can this system handle video editing?

A: Yes, it is well-suited for this task. The CPU's high multi-core score of 25598 in Cinebench R23 will accelerate rendering and export times. The GPU can assist with effects and playback, but its 4 GB of VRAM may be a limitation for very complex 4K projects.

Q: What memory types does the Intel Core Ultra 5 235H support?

A: The processor supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory types. It operates on a dual-channel memory bus, providing a total memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s.

Q: Is the CPU upgradeable?

A: No, the CPU is not upgradeable. It uses the Intel BGA 2049 socket, which is a mobile-specific package that is soldered directly onto the motherboard. The upgrade path for this system is limited to memory and storage.

Q: How does the GPU's performance compare to the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630?

A: The Intel Arc A350M performs slightly better. The data shows a deltaPct of 1.5, meaning the Arc A350M is 1.5% faster than the GTX 1630 in average benchmark scores. Both are entry-level GPUs, but the Intel solution has a slight edge.

GPU Analysis

The Intel Arc A350M is a dedicated mobile GPU based on the Xe-HPG architecture and the DG2-128 chip, manufactured on a 6 nm process by TSMC. It is a compact chip with 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die. The GPU operates at a base clock of 1150 MHz and a boost clock of 2200 MHz, with memory running at an effective speed of 14 Gbps.

The GPU is equipped with 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 112.0 GB/s. This is a modest memory configuration, and the 4 GB capacity will be a limiting factor for high-resolution textures and modern game assets. The GPU has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 24 ROPs, which translates to a pixel rate of 52.80 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 105.6 GTexel/s. Its FP32 performance is rated at 3.379 TFLOPS.

For rendering, the GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate and features 6 ray tracing cores. This means it is technically capable of hardware-accelerated ray tracing, though the limited compute power will result in low performance in RT-enabled titles. The benchmark scores reflect its mid-range positioning. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 24546 and Vulkan score of 24747 place it in the 70th percentile, making it faster than the GTX 1630 but slightly slower than the RX 6600 XT. This indicates a GPU that is suitable for 1080p gaming at moderate settings and can handle light creative workloads, but its 4 GB VRAM and 64-bit bus will prevent it from being a high-performance part.

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 5 235H + Intel Arc A350M

Apex Performer

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core Ultra 5 235H

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

Optimal Performance

4K Gaming Ready

Performance Tiers Explained

Ultimate

High-End

Mid-Range

Entry Level

Legacy

Gaming Performance

Upgrade Path and Platform

Benchmark Performance

Balance and Bottleneck

Usage Scenarios

Who Should Build It

CPU Analysis

FAQ

GPU Analysis

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