SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 5 235T + Intel Arc A310

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

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
92%
VS
GPU
85%
PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 5 235T

38,561 Benchmark Score
Top 8% 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

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235T and Intel Arc A310 form a desktop pairing that sits at a distinct performance crossroads. The CPU is a modern, power-efficient 14-core processor built on a 3 nm process, while the GPU is an entry-level Alchemist part that has already reached end-of-life status. The benchmark data reveals a significant imbalance: the processor ranks in the 86th percentile among all CPUs, while the graphics card sits in the 40th percentile. This gap defines the system's character, making it a capable productivity machine that is strictly limited in graphics-intensive tasks.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235T is a 14-core, 14-thread processor from the Core Ultra Series 2, built on the Arrow Lake architecture. It operates on the Intel Socket 1851 platform and is manufactured on a 3 nm process by TSMC, containing 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. The chip has a base clock of 2.20 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, with a 65 W TDP. Cache configuration includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache.

Benchmark results show a processor that excels in multi-threaded workloads. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 26,232 places it in the 86th percentile of all CPUs, indicating strong performance for its class. The single-core score of 3,703 in Cinebench R23 is similarly solid, suggesting good responsiveness for everyday tasks and lightly-threaded applications. PassMark results reinforce this picture: a multithread score of 30,918 and a single-thread score of 4,339 show balanced capability across both metrics.

The data positions this CPU in close competition with several notable rivals. The nearest rival, the Intel Core i5-14500, has an average benchmark score of 38,531, which is only 0.1% different from the Ultra 5 235T's average of 38,561. This effectively puts the two processors at parity. The Intel Xeon w3-2525 (38,392) is 0.4% behind, while the Intel Core 9 270H (38,335) and Intel Core Ultra 9 285H (38,312) trail by 0.6% and 0.7% respectively. This clustering suggests the Ultra 5 235T is positioned at a performance plateau shared by several competing designs.

In real workloads, the PassMark data compression score of 295,100 indicates strong throughput for file archiving and data-heavy tasks. The floating-point math score of 106,546 suggests good scientific computing capability, while the integer math score of 84,244 supports general productivity. The physics score of 2,157 is notably lower, hinting that the chip may not be optimized for certain simulation workloads. The single-thread performance of 4,339 ensures that legacy applications and single-core-heavy software will run without excessive bottlenecking.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The Ultra 5 235T uses the Intel Socket 1851 platform, which represents the current mainstream desktop socket for Intel. Memory support is limited to DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration, with a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. ECC memory is not supported, which may be a consideration for certain workstation users. The CPU provides PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the processor itself, enabling high-bandwidth connectivity for modern SSDs and expansion cards.

The integrated Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 24 execution units provides a basic display output capability, though it is not intended for demanding gaming. The CPU has a 65 W TDP, and the system's suggested PSU is 200 W, which includes headroom for the Arc A310's 30 W TDP. This low power envelope means the system can be built with a modest power supply, keeping the overall platform compact and efficient.

A sensible next upgrade for this platform would be a more powerful discrete GPU. The current Arc A310 sits in the 40th percentile of GPUs, and the CPU's 86th percentile ranking means there is substantial headroom for a faster graphics card without creating a CPU-bound scenario. The PCIe Gen 5 support on the CPU ensures that future GPUs will have adequate bandwidth. The 20 CPU lanes, however, may limit configurations with multiple high-bandwidth devices simultaneously. The platform's DDR5 memory support is current, though the dual-channel configuration and 102.4 GB/s bandwidth may become a limiting factor for memory-intensive applications if the CPU is paired with a high-end GPU in the future.

Balance and Bottleneck

The performance data reveals a clear bottleneck: the GPU is the limiting factor in graphics-intensive workloads. The CPU's 86th percentile ranking versus the GPU's 40th percentile creates a substantial gap. In gaming scenarios, the Arc A310 will constrain frame rates well below what the CPU can support. The CPU's strong single-thread score of 4,339 and multicore score of 30,918 indicate it can handle game logic, physics, and AI calculations without issue, but the GPU's rendering throughput will cap overall performance.

The PassMark GPU compute score of 2,157 is notably low, even compared to the GPU's own graphics scores. This suggests the Arc A310 is particularly weak in compute-heavy tasks like GPU-accelerated rendering or machine learning inference. The CPU would need to shoulder these workloads, but its integrated Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 24 EUs is not designed for such tasks either. The result is a system that is well-balanced for CPU-bound productivity but severely unbalanced for GPU-accelerated work.

In CPU-bound workloads, the balance shifts. The data shows the CPU performs at parity with the Intel Core i5-14500 and slightly ahead of the Intel Core 9 270H, meaning users upgrading from those chips will not see significant gains. The bottleneck in these scenarios is more likely to be memory bandwidth or storage speed, given the 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth and PCIe Gen 5 support. For users primarily running office applications, web browsing, and light content creation, the system will feel responsive and capable.

Who Should Build It

This build targets users who prioritize CPU performance over graphics capability. The 86th percentile CPU ranking makes it suitable for professionals running multi-threaded workloads such as software compilation, data analysis, and scientific computing. The PassMark data encryption score of 23,457 and extended instructions score of 23,212 indicate strong performance for security-related tasks and modern instruction set utilization.

Students and small business users will find the system adequate for general productivity. The single-thread score of 4,339 ensures smooth operation in office suites and web applications, while the multicore score of 30,918 handles multitasking with multiple applications open simultaneously. The low 65 W TDP and 200 W suggested PSU make it economical to run and cool, though the lack of ECC memory support may rule out certain error-sensitive workstation applications.

Content creators working with 2D assets or light video editing may find the CPU sufficient, but the GPU's 40th percentile ranking will limit GPU-accelerated effects and rendering. The system is not suited for 3D rendering, high-end gaming, or machine learning workloads where GPU compute is essential. For users in these fields, a different GPU would be necessary to unlock the CPU's full potential.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming is not a viable scenario for this build. The Arc A310's 40th percentile GPU ranking and low DirectX benchmark scores will produce frame rates far below what high-refresh monitors require. The CPU can handle game logic, but the GPU will bottleneck every frame.

Streaming is possible but with significant limitations. The CPU's multicore score of 30,918 can handle encoding workloads, but the GPU's low compute score of 2,157 means hardware encoding will be weak. Software encoding on the CPU would work but would compete with game performance, which is already GPU-limited.

Video editing is feasible for basic timelines. The CPU's strong multicore performance handles timeline scrubbing and export encoding, but the GPU's 4 GB VRAM and low compute scores limit effects, color grading, and any GPU-accelerated rendering. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 26,232 suggests the CPU can handle 1080p editing without major issues.

3D rendering is not recommended. The GPU's FP32 performance of 2.688 TFLOPS is far below what modern renderers require, and the CPU would need to fall back to software rendering, which is slow for complex scenes. The CPU's floating-point math score of 106,546 helps, but rendering engines increasingly rely on GPU acceleration.

Software development is a strong scenario. The CPU's 86th percentile ranking and high multithread score make compilation times reasonable. The PassMark random string sorting score of 35,377 indicates good performance for text processing and data manipulation, useful in code analysis and testing. The single-thread score ensures fast IDE responsiveness.

Student and office work is well-supported. The CPU's single-thread score of 4,339 handles word processing, spreadsheets, and web browsing smoothly. The data compression score of 295,100 makes file archiving quick. The low power draw and compact cooling requirements make it suitable for quiet office environments.

GPU Analysis

The Intel Arc A310 is a 4 GB GDDR6 graphics card based on the Xe-HPG architecture, specifically the DG2-128 chip. It is built on a 6 nm process by TSMC, with 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die. The card has a base clock of 1750 MHz, which is also the boost clock, indicating a fixed operating point. Memory runs at 1937 MHz, delivering 15.5 Gbps effective speed across a 64-bit bus, resulting in 124.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

The GPU features 768 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output pipelines. It includes 6 ray tracing cores, providing entry-level RT capability. The card has a pixel rate of 28.00 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 56.00 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is rated at 2.688 TFLOPS, with FP16 at 5.376 TFLOPS (2:1). The 30 W TDP is exceptionally low, and the card requires no power connectors, drawing power solely from the PCIe slot.

Benchmark results show modest graphics performance. The PassMark G3D score of 5,433 places the card in the 40th percentile of all GPUs. The DirectX 12 score of 29 is low, suggesting limited capability in modern graphics APIs. The DirectX 11 score of 33 and DirectX 10 score of 31 are similarly modest, while the DirectX 9 score of 69 is comparatively better. The G2D score of 625 indicates basic 2D performance is adequate for desktop use.

The nearest rival data shows the Arc A310 is closely matched with several older cards. The AMD Radeon R7 250 has an average score of 7,557, which is 0.1% different from the Arc A310's 7,550. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 (7,580) is 0.4% different, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (7,472) is 1% different. The AMD Radeon HD 8850M (7,447) trails by 1.4%. This clustering indicates the Arc A310 performs in the range of decade-old or entry-level cards.

The GPU is listed as end-of-life, with its predecessor being Xe Graphics and its successor being Battlemage. The display outputs are 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0, providing modern connectivity options. The card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, ensuring API compatibility, though performance in these APIs is limited by the hardware.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU's average benchmark score is 38,561, placing it in the 86th percentile of all CPUs. This is a strong result, driven by the Cinebench R23 multicore score of 26,232 and PassMark multithread score of 30,918. The CPU outperforms its nearest rival, the Intel Core i5-14500, by 0.1%, a negligible margin that effectively makes them equal. The Intel Xeon w3-2525 trails by 0.4%, while the Intel Core 9 270H and Intel Core Ultra 9 285H are 0.6% and 0.7% behind respectively.

The GPU's average benchmark score is 7,550, placing it in the 40th percentile of all GPUs. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 30,607 and Vulkan score of 28,964 show the card performs better in compute-oriented benchmarks than in graphics-specific tests. The PassMark G3D score of 5,433 is the primary indicator of gaming performance, and it is low. The GPU is closely matched with the AMD Radeon R7 250 (0.1% different) and AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 (0.4% different), with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 1% different and AMD Radeon HD 8850M 1.4% different.

The combined percentile for this build is 63, reflecting the wide gap between the CPU and GPU performance. The data indicates a system that is strong in CPU-bound tasks but weak in GPU-bound tasks. The CPU's 86th percentile ranking suggests it can handle demanding productivity workloads, while the GPU's 40th percentile ranking limits the system to older or less demanding games and basic graphics applications. This imbalance is the defining characteristic of the build.

FAQ

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 5 235T compare to the Intel Core i5-14500?

A: The Ultra 5 235T has an average benchmark score of 38,561, which is 0.1% different from the i5-14500's 38,531. This places the two processors at virtual parity, with no meaningful performance difference between them.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of the Ultra 5 235T?

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

Q: Does the Intel Arc A310 require a power connector?

A: No, the Arc A310 has no power connectors and draws all its power from the PCIe slot. Its TDP is 30 W, and the suggested PSU for the system is 200 W.

Q: What is the GPU's percentile ranking?

A: The Arc A310 is in the 40th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 7,550. It is closely matched with the AMD Radeon R7 250, which is 0.1% different.

Q: What is the CPU's boost clock?

A: The Ultra 5 235T has a base clock of 2.20 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. It has 14 cores and 14 threads.

Q: Is the Arc A310 still in production?

A: No, the Arc A310 is listed as end-of-life. Its successor is Battlemage.

Q: What PCIe generation does the CPU support?

A: The CPU supports PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the processor. The GPU uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface.

Gaming Performance

No measured FPS data exists for this exact CPU and GPU combination. The FACT PACK contains no measured FPS rows, so all frame rate discussions are estimates derived from the benchmark scores. The GPU's 40th percentile ranking and low PassMark G3D score of 5,433 indicate that gaming performance will be limited.

The Arc A310's performance is comparable to the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650, which is 1% different in average score. This places it in the entry-level gaming tier of several years ago. The GPU's 4 GB VRAM is also a limitation for modern games that require more memory at higher resolutions and detail settings. The 124.0 GB/s memory bandwidth is low by current standards.

For 1080p gaming at low to medium settings, the Arc A310 may run older titles or esports games at playable frame rates. The DirectX 9 score of 69 suggests older DirectX 9 games may run better than modern DirectX 12 titles, which score only 29. The CPU's strong single-thread performance will not compensate for the GPU's rendering limitations in gaming scenarios. Users seeking a gaming-focused build should consider a more powerful GPU to leverage the CPU's 86th percentile performance.

Build Overview

This build pairs the Intel Core Ultra 5 235T with the Intel Arc A310 in a desktop configuration. The CPU is a 14-core, 14-thread Arrow Lake processor with a 65 W TDP, and the GPU is an end-of-life Alchemist part with a 30 W TDP. The combined percentile is 63, reflecting the significant performance gap between the two components.

The CPU is a strong performer, ranking in the 86th percentile of all CPUs and matching the Intel Core i5-14500 in average score. The GPU is a weak performer, ranking in the 40th percentile of all GPUs and matching the AMD Radeon R7 250. This makes the build a productivity-focused system where CPU-bound tasks run well but GPU-bound tasks are severely limited.

The overall tier of this build is defined by the GPU's limitations. It is suitable for office work, software development, and light productivity tasks where the CPU's performance is the primary factor. It is not suitable for modern gaming, 3D rendering, or GPU-accelerated compute workloads. The low power requirements and compact nature of the components make it a candidate for small form factor or low-noise builds, but users should be aware of the GPU's constraints before committing to this pairing.