SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF + Intel Arc A350

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

85 / 100
HIGH-END

Power Build

Top 15% of systems. Excellent for 1440p Ultra or 4K High gaming.

1440p Ultra4K High

System Balance Analysis

CPU vs GPU performance ratio
GPU Bottleneck
CPU
95%
VS
GPU
74%

Your GPU is limiting system performance. Consider upgrading to a more powerful graphics card to better utilize your CPU.

PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF

55,093 Benchmark Score
Top 5% 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.

Bottleneck Detected

GPU Bottleneck - Upgrading the weaker component will improve overall performance.

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

# Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF + Intel Arc A350: A Curious Desktop Combination

This pairing presents an unusual desktop configuration: a high-end 14-core Arrow Lake processor paired with Intel's entry-level Arc A350 integrated-class discrete GPU. The data shows a CPU that ranks in the 91st percentile among all processors, while the GPU sits at the 50th percentile, creating a dramatic performance imbalance that defines every workload discussion that follows. No measured FPS rows exist for this exact combination, so all frame-rate discussions are estimates derived from the benchmark scores.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The platform foundation here is Intel's Socket 1851, which anchors the Core Ultra Series 2 generation. The Core Ultra 5 245KF uses the Arrow Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process at TSMC with 17,800 million transistors packed into a 243 mm² die. This is a desktop-class CPU with a 125 W TDP, and the suggested PSU for the entire build is 200 W — a modest figure that reflects the GPU's 25 W TDP rather than the CPU's substantial power envelope.

Memory support is DDR5 with a dual-channel bus, providing a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. The platform does not support ECC memory. PCIe connectivity is Gen 5 with 20 lanes available from the CPU, which provides ample bandwidth for modern storage and expansion cards, though the Arc A350 itself uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface. The CPU has no integrated graphics, so the discrete GPU is mandatory for any display output — a critical consideration since the Arc A350 lists "No outputs" in its display specifications, meaning this specific GPU model cannot drive monitors directly.

The upgrade path is constrained by the end-of-life status of the Arc A350 GPU. The data indicates the GPU's production status is "End-of-life," with its predecessor being Xe Graphics and successor being Battlemage. For the CPU, the 245KF is unlocked (multiplier unlocked is true), which suggests overclocking headroom, though no specific overclocking results are provided. The benchmark scores show the 245KF is 1.9% ahead of the Core Ultra 5 245K, its closest non-F variant, meaning the unlocked multiplier offers marginal performance gains in synthetic tests.

A sensible next upgrade would focus on replacing the GPU, as the CPU's 91st percentile ranking indicates substantial remaining headroom. The 200 W suggested PSU would need reconsideration with a more powerful GPU, but the platform itself — Socket 1851, DDR5, PCIe Gen 5 — is future-ready for several generations of component swaps. The 14-core, 14-thread configuration with a 5.20 GHz boost clock provides a strong foundation for years of service, making the GPU the clear bottleneck and the primary upgrade target.

Gaming Performance

Since no measured FPS data exists for this CPU+GPU combination, all gaming performance figures are estimates derived from the benchmark scores. The Arc A350's specifications suggest it is positioned at the entry level of discrete GPUs: 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, delivering 124.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU's 50th percentile ranking among all GPUs confirms its mid-pack positioning, but the 4 GB VRAM capacity is a significant constraint for modern titles at higher resolutions.

The CPU side presents a stark contrast. The Core Ultra 5 245KF's Cinebench R23 single-core score of 5173 and multi-core score of 36647 place it firmly in high-performance territory. For gaming, the single-core performance is typically the more relevant metric, and this CPU would not bottleneck most GPU configurations. However, the Arc A350's 3.072 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 48.00 GPixel/s pixel rate limit the achievable frame rates.

Estimated gaming performance would be playable at 1080p for esports and older titles, with the CPU capable of high frame rates but the GPU constraining actual output. At 1440p or 4K, the 4 GB VRAM would likely cause texture thrashing in modern games, leading to stuttering or reduced quality settings. The GPU's lack of display outputs is a critical caveat — this specific Arc A350 model cannot connect to a monitor, making it unsuitable for gaming without additional hardware modifications. For gaming purposes, this pairing is severely GPU-limited, and the benchmark data suggests the CPU would sit idle waiting for the GPU to catch up in most scenarios.

Balance and Bottleneck

The data paints an unmistakable picture of imbalance. The CPU's 91st percentile ranking versus the GPU's 50th percentile creates a 41-percentage-point gap, which is among the most extreme mismatches possible in a desktop build. The combined percentile for this pairing is 71, reflecting the GPU's drag on the overall system performance.

In CPU-intensive workloads — video encoding, 3D rendering, software compilation — the Core Ultra 5 245KF would operate near its full potential. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 36647, PassMark multi-thread score of 43110, and PassMark integer math score of 98854 all indicate a processor capable of sustained heavy lifting across all 14 cores. The data compression score of 460123 and floating-point math score of 131546 further confirm this CPU's strength in parallel processing.

Conversely, GPU-bound workloads — gaming, real-time graphics, AI inference — would be starved by the Arc A350's modest capabilities. The GPU's 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 24 ROPs provide a baseline level of graphics performance, but the 64-bit memory bus is a severe constraint. The 4 GB VRAM capacity, combined with 124.0 GB/s bandwidth, creates a bottleneck for any workload that requires large texture sets or high-resolution framebuffers.

The balanced scenario would be a system where neither component consistently limits the other. Here, the CPU would limit the GPU in virtually every graphics task, while the GPU would limit the CPU in every compute task that offloads to the graphics card. The PassMark physics score of 2998 and single-thread score of 4715 indicate strong CPU performance in physics simulations, but the GPU's 3.072 TFLOPS would constrain any GPU-accelerated physics engine.

Who Should Build It

This configuration targets users who prioritize CPU performance above all else, with GPU capabilities as an afterthought. The data suggests several specific user profiles. Software developers working on large codebases would benefit from the 14 cores and 24 MB of L3 cache, with the PassMark data encryption score of 33381 and extended instructions score of 37912 indicating strong performance in cryptographic and SIMD workloads.

Students in computer science or engineering programs would find the CPU's multi-core prowess useful for compilation tasks and simulations, though the GPU would limit graphics-heavy applications like CAD or game development. Small business workstations performing data analysis, database management, or server-side tasks would leverage the CPU's PassMark multi-thread score of 43110 and data compression score of 460123, while the GPU remains mostly idle.

Content creators working in video editing would see mixed results. The CPU's Cinebench scores suggest strong encoding performance, but the GPU's 4 GB VRAM and 64-bit bus would struggle with 4K video timelines or GPU-accelerated effects. The absence of display outputs on the Arc A350 means this GPU cannot drive the monitors needed for editing work, making it a compute-only accelerator at best.

The most sensible user for this exact pairing is someone who already owns the Arc A350 for a specific compute task and wants to build a high-performance CPU system around it, with plans to upgrade the GPU later. The 200 W suggested PSU provides headroom for the CPU's 125 W TDP plus the GPU's 25 W TDP, leaving room for peripherals but requiring a PSU upgrade for any substantial GPU replacement.

Benchmark Performance

The Core Ultra 5 245KF delivers an average benchmark score of 55093, placing it in the 91st percentile among all CPUs. This positions it 0.6% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D (avg score 54762) and 1.9% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K (avg score 54053). It trails the Intel Core 7 253PQE by 1.5% (avg score 55919) and the Intel Core i9-14900HX by 1.6% (avg score 56004). These narrow margins place the 245KF in a tightly contested performance band.

The Cinebench results show consistent scaling: R15 multi-core 3693, R20 multi-core 15391, and R23 multi-core 36647. The single-core scores of 521 (R15), 2172 (R20), and 5173 (R23) confirm the 5.20 GHz boost clock's effectiveness. PassMark results reveal specific strengths: floating-point math at 131546, integer math at 98854, and random string sorting at 55206. The data compression score of 460123 is particularly strong, while the find prime numbers score of 416 is modest.

The Arc A350 has no benchmark scores listed in the data pack, with an average benchmark score of 0 and a 50th percentile ranking. This absence of data makes direct GPU performance comparisons impossible, but the 50th percentile position indicates it sits at the median of all GPUs, which aligns with its entry-level specifications. The combined percentile of 71 for this pairing reflects the CPU's dominance in the overall score calculation.

GPU Analysis

The Intel Arc A350 is built on the Xe-HPG architecture, codenamed Alchemist, representing the Arc 3 generation. It uses the DG2-128 chip on a 6 nm process at TSMC, with 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die. The transistor density of 45.9M per mm² indicates a moderately packed design.

Memory configuration is the GPU's most limiting factor: 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, providing 124.0 GB/s of bandwidth. This is a fraction of what modern GPUs offer, and the 1937 MHz memory clock (15.5 Gbps effective) cannot compensate for the narrow bus. The 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 24 ROPs provide a baseline compute capability, with a pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s and texture rate of 96.00 GTexel/s.

The GPU includes 6 ray tracing cores, supporting DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The FP32 performance of 3.072 TFLOPS and FP16 of 6.144 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio) place it in entry-level territory. The 25 W TDP is remarkably low, and the single-slot design with no power connectors reflects its efficiency focus. The suggested PSU of 200 W is minimal, but the "No outputs" specification is a critical limitation — this GPU cannot connect to any display without additional hardware.

The GPU's end-of-life status and missing launch MSRP suggest it was a transitional product. Its predecessor, Xe Graphics, was integrated graphics, and its successor, Battlemage, represents the next architecture generation. The benchmark scores are absent, making the 50th percentile ranking a positional indicator rather than a performance measurement. For rendering workloads, the 3.072 TFLOPS would handle basic 3D scenes but struggle with complex geometry or high-resolution textures.

CPU Analysis

The Core Ultra 5 245KF is a 14-core, 14-thread processor from the Core Ultra Series 2, built on the Arrow Lake architecture (codename Arrow Lake-S). The 3 nm process at TSMC houses 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. Base clock is 4.20 GHz with a boost clock of 5.20 GHz, and the processor is unlocked for overclocking.

The cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. Memory support is DDR5 with dual-channel configuration, delivering 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. The CPU has no integrated graphics, requiring a discrete GPU for display output — a design choice that explains the mandatory pairing with the Arc A350.

Benchmark results show a processor that excels in multi-threaded workloads. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 36647 is strong for a 14-core chip, and the single-core score of 5173 confirms the high boost clock's effectiveness. PassMark scores reveal specific strengths: data compression at 460123, floating-point math at 131546, and integer math at 98854. The multithread score of 43110 and single-thread score of 4715 demonstrate balanced performance across both parallel and single-threaded tasks.

The CPU's 91st percentile ranking places it among the top 9% of all processors, with nearest rivals showing tight competition. The 0.6% lead over the Ryzen 9 9900X3D and 1.9% lead over the Core Ultra 5 245K are within noise margins, while the 1.5-1.6% deficits to the Core 7 253PQE and i9-14900HX are similarly marginal. The 245KF's position is solidly mid-high range, with the data encryption score of 33381 and extended instructions score of 37912 indicating strong performance in security and SIMD workloads.

FAQ

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

A: The combined percentile is 71, reflecting the CPU's 91st percentile ranking and the GPU's 50th percentile ranking.

Q: How does the Core Ultra 5 245KF compare to the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D?

A: The 245KF has an average benchmark score of 55093, which is 0.6% higher than the Ryzen 9 9900X3D's score of 54762.

Q: What is the TDP of the CPU and the suggested PSU for this build?

A: The CPU has a 125 W TDP, and the suggested PSU for the entire system is 200 W.

Q: Does the Intel Arc A350 have any display outputs?

A: No, the Arc A350's display outputs are listed as "No outputs," meaning it cannot connect to a monitor directly.

Q: What memory type and bandwidth does the CPU support?

A: The CPU supports DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, providing 102.4 GB/s of memory bandwidth.

Q: Is the Core Ultra 5 245KF overclockable?

A: Yes, the multiplier is unlocked, and the CPU has a base clock of 4.20 GHz and boost clock of 5.20 GHz.

Q: What is the GPU's VRAM capacity and memory bus width?

A: The Arc A350 has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, providing 124.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: The CPU's single-core score of 5173 in Cinebench R23 would support high frame rates, but the GPU's 3.072 TFLOPS and 4 GB VRAM would cap performance at 1080p with reduced settings. The 50th percentile GPU ranking indicates mid-pack performance, making 144Hz monitors unrealistic except in undemanding esports titles.

Streaming: The CPU's 14 cores and data compression score of 460123 would handle software encoding efficiently, but the GPU's lack of display outputs complicates the streaming setup. The 25 W GPU TDP means minimal thermal impact, but the 4 GB VRAM would limit game capture quality.

Video editing: The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 36647 provides strong export performance, but the GPU's 64-bit memory bus and 4 GB VRAM would struggle with 4K timelines or GPU-accelerated effects. The PassMark floating-point score of 131546 helps with color grading, but the overall GPU weakness dominates.

3D rendering: CPU-based rendering would excel with the multi-thread score of 43110, but GPU rendering would be severely limited by the 3.072 TFLOPS and 4 GB VRAM. The 6 ray tracing cores provide some hardware acceleration, but the 50th percentile ranking suggests modest results.

Software development: The CPU's data encryption score of 33381 and extended instructions score of 37912 support secure coding and SIMD operations. The 14 cores handle parallel builds efficiently, and the passmark multithread score of 43110 indicates strong compilation performance.

Student and office work: The CPU's single-thread performance of 4715 in PassMark handles everyday tasks with ease, while the 125 W TDP and 200 W suggested PSU keep power consumption reasonable. The GPU's 25 W TDP adds negligible heat, making this a quiet, efficient workstation for documents, spreadsheets, and web applications.

Build Overview

This desktop configuration pairs the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF — a 14-core Arrow Lake processor in the 91st CPU percentile — with the Intel Arc A350 — an entry-level Xe-HPG GPU in the 50th GPU percentile. The combined percentile of 71 places this system in the upper-midrange tier overall, though the distribution is highly uneven. The CPU is a current-generation part with a launch MSRP of $294, while the GPU is end-of-life with no launch MSRP listed.

The 245KF's 5.20 GHz boost clock and 24 MB L3 cache provide strong single and multi-threaded performance, as evidenced by Cinebench R23 scores of 5173 and 36647 respectively. The Arc A350's 4 GB VRAM and 64-bit memory bus limit it to entry-level graphics duties, and its lack of display outputs makes it unsuitable as a primary graphics solution. This pairing makes sense only for users who prioritize CPU performance and have a specific compute-only use case for the GPU, with a clear upgrade path to a more capable graphics card in the future.