SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 5 235T + Intel Arc A350

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)

▼

83 Score

Top 17% Ranking

83 / 100

HIGH-END

Power Build

Top 17% 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%

GPU

74%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 5 235T

38,561 Benchmark Score

Top 8% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

Intel Arc A350

0 Benchmark Score

Top 26% 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 paired with the Intel Arc A350 is an all-Intel desktop combination that leans heavily on the CPU side of the ledger. The Core Ultra 5 235T sits in the 86th percentile of all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 38561, while the Arc A350 occupies the 50th percentile of all GPUs — a distinctly mid-pack graphics position that shapes every recommendation below. No measured frame-rate data exists for this exact pairing, so all FPS discussion here is estimated from the benchmark scores rather than drawn from recorded gameplay results.

CPU Analysis

The Core Ultra 5 235T is a 14-core, 14-thread Arrow Lake-S processor built on TSMC's 3 nm node, carrying 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. It runs a 2.20 GHz base clock with boost up to 5.00 GHz, all within a 65 W TDP envelope. The 14 threads match the core count — no hyperthreading doubling here — which means each core contributes one hardware thread. Cache allocation is generous per core: 192 KB of L1 and 3 MB of L2 per core, backed by 24 MB of shared L3. That per-core L2 sizing benefits latency-sensitive workloads where threads work on private data sets.

The benchmark record is consistent across generations of Cinebench. In Cinebench R23 the chip scores 3703 single-core and 26232 multi-core; stepping back to R20 yields 1555 single-core and 11017 multi-core, and R15 shows 373 single-core and 2644 multi-core. The single-core trajectory matters most: a 5.00 GHz boost on the 3 nm node pushes per-thread output into territory that comfortably handles lightly threaded applications — office suites, browsers, most game engines, and interactive development work. The multi-core score of 26232 in R23 reflects 14 genuine cores doing work, not a thread-count advantage.

Context comes from the rivals. The nearest competitor by average score is the Intel Core i5-14500 at 38531, a delta of just 0.1 percent — effectively a tie. The Intel Xeon w3-2525 sits 0.4 percent behind at 38392, the Intel Core 9 270H is 0.6 percent adrift at 38335, and even the Intel Core Ultra 9 285H, a higher-tier mobile-branded part, lands only 0.7 percent lower at 38312. In other words, the 235T edges out every one of its nearest rivals, but the margins are within one percent. The data shows a processor that competes in a tight cluster; nothing about its average score separates it dramatically from peers, and users cross-shopping any of those four parts should expect near-identical aggregate performance.

The PassMark subtests reveal workload-specific strengths. Integer math lands at 84244, floating point math at 106546, extended instructions at 23212, and physics at 2157. Data compression posts 295100 while encryption posts 23457, and random string sorting reaches 35377 — numbers that speak to competent, though not exceptional, memory and string handling. The single-thread PassMark figure of 4339 and multithread figure of 30918 put single-threaded throughput at roughly one seventh of multi-threaded throughput, exactly what a 14-thread symmetric design should produce. Prime number finding at 318 rounds out the picture. For real workloads, this means compilation, code editing, spreadsheet recalculation, and audio work will feel quick; rendering and batch encoding will complete in reasonable time but not at workstation pace.

Two platform facts deserve attention. The multiplier is locked, so tuning headroom is limited to whatever the platform allows beyond stock behavior. And ECC memory is not supported, which rules the chip out of builds where memory integrity verification is a hard requirement.

GPU Analysis

The Arc A350 is a modest card built on the DG2-128 chip of Intel's Xe-HPG architecture, marketed under the Arc 3 (Alchemist) generation. It is fabricated on TSMC's 6 nm process with 7,200 million transistors over a 157 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 45.9 million per square millimetre. Core configuration includes 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, 24 render output units, and 6 ray tracing cores. There are no dedicated tensor cores listed in the specification.

Clock behavior is unusual: both base and boost clocks are listed at 2000 MHz, meaning the GPU effectively runs at a single flat frequency. The resulting raw throughput figures are 48.00 GPixel/s pixel rate, 96.00 GTexel/s texture rate, 3.072 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, and 6.144 TFLOPS of FP16 at a 2:1 ratio. Those numbers place the card firmly in entry-level discrete territory — its 50th percentile position among all GPUs confirms dead-center median placement rather than any gaming-class aspiration.

Memory is the defining constraint. The A350 carries 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, clocked at 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective), producing 124.0 GB/s of bandwidth. A 64-bit interface combined with 4 GB of capacity means modern game textures at high settings will exceed what the card can hold, forcing texture streaming and quality reductions. Bandwidth in the 124 GB/s range is entry-level by any measure and will limit both effective shader throughput and high-resolution rendering.

Ray tracing is technically supported — the 6 RT cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) API support guarantee it — but 6 RT cores is a minimal allocation. Ray-traced effects will be computationally expensive on this hardware and should be considered a checkbox feature rather than a practical rendering mode. Vulkan 1.4 and OpenGL 4.6 support mean compatibility with modern and legacy titles is broad. The card is single-slot, draws 25 W, requires no auxiliary power connectors, and connects via PCIe 4.0 x8. Notably, it lists no display outputs, and its production status is End-of-life — it is a predecessor-generation part whose successor line is Battlemage.

For rendering and content work, the FP32 figure of 3.072 TFLOPS sets expectations: GPU-accelerated viewport work, video decode assist, and light rendering acceleration are realistic; heavy GPU rendering farms of shaders or large-scale ray-traced scenes are not. The 4 GB VRAM buffer is the hard wall for any renderer that builds large scenes in GPU memory.

Balance and Bottleneck

The combined percentile for this pairing is 68 — meaningfully lower than the CPU's standalone 86th percentile, and that gap is the story of this build. The CPU operates well above the median of all processors, essentially tied with parts one tier up in Intel's own stack (within 0.1 percent of the Core i5-14500). The GPU sits exactly at the median of all GPUs. Pairing a sub-median-tier discrete GPU with an 86th-percentile CPU produces an unbalanced system for graphics workloads: the Arc A350 will be the limiting factor in any GPU-bound task, long before the 235T runs out of headroom.

The evidence is structural. A 4 GB, 64-bit, 124 GB/s card with 768 shading units cannot feed modern games at high settings and high resolutions; meanwhile the CPU's 3703 Cinebench R23 single-core score and 4339 PassMark single-thread result indicate it can drive game logic far faster than the GPU can rasterize frames. In CPU-bound scenarios — simulation-heavy strategy games, high-refresh esports titles at low settings — the 235T has ample single-thread capability. In GPU-bound scenarios, the A350 caps the experience.

For non-gaming workloads the balance inverts in the CPU's favor, which is healthy. Compilation, compression, encryption, and general productivity load the processor and barely touch the discrete GPU. The passmark_multithread score of 30918 and the subtest spread across integer, floating point, and string operations show a processor capable of absorbing parallel work while the GPU idles. The practical conclusion: this is a compute-forward build with entry-level graphics attached, and users should evaluate it primarily on the CPU's numbers.

Since dataIsMeasured is false and no measuredFpsUltraByGame rows exist for this combination, FPS scaling statements must remain estimates. Based on the benchmark percentiles, expect the A350 to govern frame delivery at higher resolutions and settings, while the 235T's single-core scores suggest no processor-side ceiling at entry-level frame rates.

Who Should Build It

Students and general office users are the clearest fit. The 235T's single-thread scores (4339 PassMark, 3703 R23) guarantee snappy web browsing, document editing, and multitasking, and the 65 W TDP keeps the platform cool and quiet in dorm or office settings where a small, efficient machine is preferable. The integrated Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 24 execution units provides display output and basic acceleration even without the discrete card.

Software developers, particularly those working on web services, scripts, or mid-size codebases, benefit from 14 cores at a 26232 R23 multi-core score. Parallel builds and test suites will complete briskly relative to the median CPU. Small businesses building office workstations will find the dual-channel DDR5 platform with 102.4 GB/s of memory bandwidth suitable for database work, accounting software, and multi-monitor productivity — though the absence of ECC rules out builds where data integrity certification is required.

Content creators doing light work — 1080p video editing, photo retouching, audio production — get a capable processor held back modestly by graphics. GPU-accelerated effects that fit within 4 GB of VRAM will run; heavier effects will not. 3D artists should treat this as a modeling and previz machine, not a final-frame rendering box, given the 3.072 TFLOPS FP32 figure.

Gamers are the weakest fit at high resolutions. At 1080p with modest settings, esports and older titles will be playable, driven by the strong CPU; AAA titles at ultra settings will strain the 4 GB frame buffer. High-refresh enthusiasts should look elsewhere or plan a GPU upgrade.

Benchmark Performance

CPU results in full: Cinebench R15 multi-core 2644, single-core 373; Cinebench R20 multi-core 11017, single-core 1555; Cinebench R23 multi-core 26232, single-core 3703. PassMark results: multithread 30918, single thread 4339, integer math 84244, floating point math 106546, extended instructions 23212, physics 2157, data compression 295100, data encryption 23457, find prime numbers 318, random string sorting 35377. The average benchmark score is 38561, placing the chip in the 86th percentile of all CPUs.

Against rivals, the margins are razor thin: 0.1 percent ahead of the Core i5-14500 (38531), 0.4 percent ahead of the Xeon w3-2525 (38392), 0.6 percent ahead of the Core 9 270H (38335), and 0.7 percent ahead of the Core Ultra 9 285H (38312). The 235T tops its nearest-rival list, but by fractions of a percent — performance parity is the honest read.

The GPU carries no recorded benchmark scores — its benchmark list is empty and its avgBenchmarkScore is 0 — so its positioning rests on the 50th percentile field and its specifications. The combined build percentile of 68 reflects a system dragged toward the median by its graphics card relative to the CPU's individual standing. The combined picture: elite-adjacent processing at the 86th percentile, median graphics at the 50th, landing the build as a whole in the 68th percentile.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: The CPU's 3703 single-core R23 score and 5.00 GHz boost indicate the processor can push high frame counts, but the Arc A350's 768 shading units and 124 GB/s of bandwidth cap realistic output to modest settings at 1080p. High-refresh gaming is CPU-ready and GPU-limited. Frame figures here are estimates, as no measured data exists for this pairing.

Streaming: CPU encoding is viable — 14 cores and a 30918 PassMark multithread score leave headroom for encode alongside gameplay — but the GPU's 4 GB buffer and low compute throughput preclude dual PC-class quality. Single-PC streaming at entry-level settings is the realistic ceiling.

Video editing: Timeline responsiveness will be strong thanks to single-thread performance and 102.4 GB/s of memory bandwidth. GPU-accelerated effects must fit within 4 GB of VRAM. The physics score of 2157 and multi-core throughput support 1080p workflows well; heavy 4K multicam work will stress the graphics side.

3D rendering: Modeling and viewport work at small scene sizes will run on 3.072 TFLOPS of FP32 and 6 RT cores. Final-frame rendering is better delegated to the CPU's 26232 R23 multi-core score, which is competent but not workstation-class. Large GPU-rendered scenes are off the table with 4 GB.

Software development: This is the build's strongest scenario. Parallel compilation benefits from 14 cores; interactive tooling benefits from the 4339 single-thread score. Data compression at 295100 and encryption at 23457 also help with repository and artifact handling.

Student and office work: Word processing, spreadsheets, video calls, and browsing are trivially handled. The 65 W TDP and the integrated Arc Xe-LPG graphics (24 EU) make for an efficient, reliable daily machine, with the discrete card adding only marginal benefit for such tasks.

Gaming Performance

This database entry contains no measured FPS rows for this exact CPU+GPU combination — measuredFpsUltraByGame is empty and dataIsMeasured is false — so the following is framed as estimation from benchmark scores, not recorded results.

Estimating from the components: the 235T's percentile (86) and single-core scores indicate it will not bottleneck frame delivery in any title the A350 can render. The A350, at the 50th GPU percentile with 4 GB of GDDR6, 124.0 GB/s of bandwidth, and 3.072 TFLOPS FP32, sets the frame ceiling. At 1080p with reduced settings, esports-style and lighter titles should reach playable frame rates; at 1440p or with ultra presets, the 64-bit bus and 4 GB capacity will produce steep quality or framerate trade-offs as textures exceed the frame buffer. Ray tracing, supported through 6 RT cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate, is expected to be impractically slow and should be disabled. Any specific frame-count claims beyond these qualitative expectations would exceed the available data.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The platform foundation is Intel Socket 1851 with DDR5 memory support in dual-channel configuration, 102.4 GB/s of memory bandwidth, and PCIe Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes. The Gen 5 lanes matter for the future: a next-generation GPU on the CPU's lanes will not be interface-limited, though the current A350 itself attaches via PCIe 4.0 x8.

Power headroom is generous. The CPU's TDP is 65 W and the GPU's is 25 W, against a suggested PSU of 200 W for the graphics card alone. Even a modest system PSU provides substantial margin above the combined draw of both components, so the sensible next upgrade is graphical: replacing the end-of-life A350 (its successor line is Battlemage) with a stronger card would raise the build's combined percentile directly, since the 68th-percentile standing is constrained by the GPU's 50th percentile, not the CPU's 86th. CPU-side upgrades are less urgent — the 235T already matches the Core i5-14500 within 0.1 percent — and the locked multiplier means overclocking is not an upgrade avenue. The multiplierUnlocked flag is false, and ECC is unavailable, so platform growth is confined to GPU, memory capacity, and storage on the Gen 5 lanes.

FAQ

Q: How does the Core Ultra 5 235T compare to its closest rival? A: Its average score of 38561 is 0.1 percent above the Intel Core i5-14500's 38531 — effectively a tie. It also leads the Xeon w3-2525 by 0.4 percent, the Core 9 270H by 0.6 percent, and the Core Ultra 9 285H by 0.7 percent.

Q: Is this build good for gaming? A: Partially. The CPU sits in the 86th percentile with strong single-core scores, but the Arc A350 is at the 50th GPU percentile with 4 GB of VRAM and 124.0 GB/s of bandwidth, making the GPU the clear limiter at higher settings and resolutions.

Q: Are there measured FPS numbers for this combination? A: No. The FACT PACK contains no measured FPS data for this pairing, so all frame-rate discussion is estimated from benchmark scores.

Q: Can the CPU be overclocked? A: No. The multiplier is locked, and ECC memory is not supported on this platform.

Q: What power supply does the GPU require? A: The suggested PSU for the Arc A350 is 200 W. The card itself draws 25 W and needs no auxiliary power connectors.

Q: What memory does the platform support? A: DDR5 in dual-channel configuration, delivering 102.4 GB/s of memory bandwidth, on Intel Socket 1851.

Q: What is the GPU's current production status? A: The Arc A350 is End-of-life. Its successor generation is Battlemage.

Build Overview

This is a desktop build pairing Intel's Core Ultra 5 235T — a 14-core, 14-thread Arrow Lake-S processor on Socket 1851, 3 nm TSMC silicon, 5.00 GHz boost, 65 W TDP, launch MSRP $247 — with the Intel Arc A350, a single-slot, 25 W Alchemist card carrying 4 GB of GDDR6. The tier picture is asymmetric by design or by circumstance: an 86th-percentile CPU attached to a 50th-percentile GPU yields a combined 68th-percentile system. That places the build above the median overall — a solidly above-average machine — with all of its upside concentrated in processing and all of its constraints concentrated in graphics. For compute-oriented desktops, student machines, and developer workstations, the numbers support the pairing; for graphics-intensive use, the data indicates the CPU is waiting on the GPU.

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 5 235T + Intel Arc A350

Power Build

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core Ultra 5 235T

Intel Arc A350

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

CPU Analysis

GPU Analysis

Balance and Bottleneck

Who Should Build It

Benchmark Performance

Usage Scenarios

Gaming Performance

Upgrade Path and Platform

FAQ

Build Overview

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