SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus + 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
96%
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 250K Plus

66,855 Benchmark Score
Top 4% 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

The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus and Intel Arc A350 pairing represents a highly asymmetric desktop configuration: an 18-core, 3nm Arrow Lake Refresh processor paired with a 25W entry-level discrete GPU. Because the FACT PACK contains no measured FPS rows for this exact combination, all gaming performance figures discussed below are estimates derived from the CPU’s and GPU’s respective benchmark scores, not from direct frame-rate testing.

Gaming Performance

The data shows no measured frames-per-second results for this specific CPU and GPU pairing. All FPS values must therefore be inferred from the component benchmark scores. The GPU, an Intel Arc A350, sits at the 50th percentile among all GPUs with no benchmark scores in the FACT PACK, making its raw compute power the limiting factor for any gaming workload. The CPU, in contrast, is exceptionally strong, with an average benchmark score of 66,855 and a 93rd percentile ranking.

For 1080p gaming, the Arc A350’s specifications suggest it is suited for esports and older titles rather than modern AAA releases. The GPU has 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 24 render output units, with a pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 96.00 GTexel/s. These figures point to a card that can handle light loads at moderate settings, but the 4 GB GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus with 124.0 GB/s bandwidth will likely cause stutter or texture pop-in in memory-hungry modern games.

At 1440p, the situation worsens. The GPU’s FP32 compute of 3.072 TFLOPS is modest by current standards, and the 64-bit memory bus will struggle to feed even the 768 shading units at higher resolutions. The CPU’s massive headroom — a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 30,867 and single-core score of 2,261 — will be largely wasted in gaming scenarios, as the GPU will saturate long before the processor reaches its limits. For 4K gaming, this combination is not viable beyond the most graphically trivial titles, as the Arc A350’s 4 GB VRAM and 124.0 GB/s bandwidth are fundamentally insufficient for the memory footprints of modern 4K textures.

The integrated graphics of the CPU, the Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU, could serve as a fallback for basic 2D workloads, but the presence of the discrete Arc A350 implies the builder intends some level of gaming. The estimated frame rates for esports titles like Counter-Strike 2 or Valorant might be playable at 1080p with low settings, but any game requiring more than 4 GB of VRAM or heavy shader work will likely drop below acceptable thresholds. The data simply does not support a strong gaming verdict for this pairing beyond entry-level 1080p.

Balance and Bottleneck

The benchmark results reveal a stark imbalance. The CPU operates at the 93rd percentile among all CPUs, while the GPU sits at the 50th percentile. The combined percentile for the build is 72, which reflects a system where the processor vastly outclasses the graphics card in every measurable workload.

In CPU-bound tasks, such as data compression (PassMark score of 568,721), encryption (42,144), and extended instructions (44,565), the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus will dominate. The 18 cores and 18 threads, running at a base clock of 4.20 GHz and boost clock of 5.30 GHz, provide exceptional throughput for multi-threaded applications. However, in gaming, the GPU becomes the bottleneck almost immediately. The Arc A350’s 25W TDP and 200W suggested PSU indicate a low-power component that cannot sustain high frame rates.

The FPS scaling evidence supports this: with no measured FPS data, the only way to assess balance is through the component scores. The CPU’s PassMark single-thread score of 4,757 and multi-thread score of 51,596 suggest it can feed frames to any GPU without breaking a sweat. The GPU, with no benchmark scores, has no comparable metric. The practical outcome is that the CPU will sit idle during gaming while the GPU runs at 100% utilization. In productivity tasks, the opposite occurs: the GPU is barely used, and the CPU carries the load.

For creators or developers who occasionally game, this build is workable — the CPU excels at compilation, rendering, and math, while the GPU handles light gaming. For pure gamers, this is a poorly balanced system. The data indicates the CPU is the star, and the GPU is a placeholder that should be upgraded as soon as possible.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU’s benchmark scores are extensive and strong. In Cinebench, the processor scores 4,640 in R15 multi-core, 328 in R15 single-core, 18,442 in R20 multi-core, 2,603 in R20 single-core, 30,867 in R23 multi-core, and 2,261 in R23 single-core. The PassMark suite shows 568,721 for data compression, 42,144 for data encryption, 44,565 for extended instructions, 486 for prime numbers, 162,692 for floating point math, 125,091 for integer math, 51,596 for multithread, 3,494 for physics, 69,090 for random string sorting, and 4,757 for single-thread performance.

The CPU’s average benchmark score is 66,855, placing it in the 93rd percentile. Compared to its nearest rivals, it trails the AMD EPYC 4465P by 0.1% (average score 66,925), the Intel Xeon 6515P by 0.2% (67,006), and the Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX by 0.9% (67,469). It leads the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus by 1.1% (66,159). These deltas are marginal, indicating the 250K Plus is essentially on par with server-class chips in aggregate performance.

The GPU has no benchmark scores in the FACT PACK. Its percentile ranking of 50 is the only quantitative measure, and its average benchmark score is listed as 0, which is unhelpful for direct comparison. The combined picture is a system that scores in the 72nd percentile overall, heavily weighted by the CPU’s dominance. The GPU’s lack of data means its contribution to the combined score is negligible, reinforcing the idea that this build is about CPU horsepower first, GPU capability second.

Who Should Build It

This configuration targets users who prioritize CPU-intensive workloads over gaming. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus, with its 18 cores and 30 MB of shared L3 cache, is ideal for software developers compiling large codebases, students running data analysis in Python or R, and small business workstations handling spreadsheets, databases, and virtualization. The PassMark data compression score of 568,721 and integer math score of 125,091 indicate exceptional performance for file archiving, encryption, and financial modeling.

Content creators who work with video encoding or 3D rendering will benefit from the CPU’s Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 30,867, which is competitive with the AMD EPYC 4465P (delta -0.1%) and Xeon 6515P (delta -0.2%). However, the Arc A350 is not suited for GPU-accelerated rendering in Blender or DaVinci Resolve beyond the lightest tasks, so creators must rely on CPU-based rendering.

Gamers at 1080p with low expectations for graphical fidelity might find the Arc A350 acceptable for indie titles or esports, but the data does not support recommending this build for high-refresh or AAA gaming. The 4 GB VRAM will be a hard limit. For streamers, the CPU’s multi-threaded performance can handle x264 encoding at high presets, but the GPU will struggle to render the game simultaneously. This is fundamentally a productivity-first system with a token gaming capability.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The platform is built around Intel Socket 1851, which supports DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration with a bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. The CPU supports ECC memory, making this a viable choice for workstation reliability. The PCIe interface is Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU, providing ample bandwidth for future high-end GPUs or NVMe storage.

The suggested PSU for the Arc A350 is 200W, which is trivial. The CPU’s TDP is 125W, so a modest power supply would suffice for the current build. However, the upgrade path is clear: replace the Arc A350 with a more powerful GPU. The PCIe 4.0 x8 bus interface of the current GPU is a bottleneck even now; a PCIe 5.0 x16 card would eliminate this constraint. The CPU’s 18 cores will remain relevant for years, so a GPU upgrade is the sensible next step.

Memory upgrades are also straightforward. The dual-channel DDR5 support with ECC means users can expand capacity without compromising data integrity. The 30 MB L3 cache and 3 MB L2 per core are generous, so memory bandwidth is the more likely bottleneck for CPU-bound workloads. The platform is future-proof on the CPU side, but the GPU is a dead end at 25W TDP and end-of-life production status.

GPU Analysis

The Intel Arc A350 is based on the Xe-HPG architecture, codenamed Alchemist, and is manufactured on a 6nm process at TSMC. It uses the DG2-128 chip, which contains 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die. The GPU has a base and boost clock of 2000 MHz, with memory clocked at 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective). The 4 GB GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus yields 124.0 GB/s bandwidth, which is the primary limitation for gaming.

The shading units number 768, with 48 TMUs and 24 ROPs. The pixel rate is 48.00 GPixel/s and the texture rate is 96.00 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 3.072 TFLOPS, while FP16 is 6.144 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio. There are 6 ray tracing cores, but no tensor cores are listed. The GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The lack of display outputs is notable — this is a compute-only card, meaning it cannot drive a monitor directly. The TDP is 25W, and the production status is end-of-life, with Battlemage as the successor. With no benchmark scores, the 50th percentile ranking is the only performance indicator, and that is a middling position. For rendering, the 3.072 TFLOPS FP32 is adequate for basic 2D effects but insufficient for heavy 3D workloads. The ray tracing cores are present but will likely deliver poor performance due to the low compute throughput and memory bandwidth.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is part of the Core Ultra Series 2, codenamed Arrow Lake Refresh. It is manufactured on a 3nm process at TSMC, with 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. The processor has 18 cores and 18 threads — notably no hyperthreading — with a base clock of 4.20 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. The TDP is 125W, and the socket is Intel Socket 1851.

Cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3. The memory support is dual-channel DDR5 with a bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s and ECC capability. The PCIe interface is Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU. The integrated graphics are Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units. The multiplier is unlocked, and the launch MSRP is $199. The production status is active, with a release date of March 10, 2026.

Benchmark results show a processor that is strong in every metric. In Cinebench, the multi-core scores scale impressively: 4,640 in R15, 18,442 in R20, and 30,867 in R23. Single-core scores are equally consistent: 328 in R15, 2,603 in R20, and 2,261 in R23. The PassMark multithread score of 51,596 and single-thread score of 4,757 indicate a balanced design that excels at both lightly-threaded and heavily-threaded workloads. The floating-point math score of 162,692 is particularly strong for scientific computing, while the data encryption score of 42,144 suggests robust security capabilities.

The 93rd percentile ranking puts this CPU in the top 7% of all processors. Its nearest rivals are server and workstation chips, which it matches within 1%. The 18 cores without hyperthreading are unusual, but the high boost clock of 5.30 GHz compensates in single-threaded tasks. For real workloads, this CPU will handle virtualization, compilation, and rendering with ease. The lack of hyperthreading may slightly reduce performance in heavily oversubscribed scenarios, but the physical core count is high enough to mitigate this.

FAQ

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

A: The combined percentile for the build is 72, reflecting the CPU’s high performance and the GPU’s moderate ranking.

Q: How does the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus compare to its nearest rival, the AMD EPYC 4465P?

A: The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has an average benchmark score of 66,855, which is 0.1% lower than the AMD EPYC 4465P’s score of 66,925.

Q: What is the GPU’s memory bandwidth and size?

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

Q: Does the CPU support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus supports ECC memory in a dual-channel DDR5 configuration.

Q: What is the suggested power supply wattage for this GPU?

A: The suggested PSU for the Arc A350 is 200W, which is low due to the GPU’s 25W TDP.

Q: What is the CPU’s socket and PCIe generation?

A: The CPU uses Intel Socket 1851 and supports PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU.

Q: Is the GPU still in production?

A: No, the Arc A350 is listed as end-of-life, with Battlemage as its successor.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: Not recommended. The Arc A350’s 4 GB VRAM and 3.072 TFLOPS FP32 are insufficient for high frame rates at 1080p in modern titles. The CPU’s 5.30 GHz boost clock and 4,757 single-thread score would support high FPS, but the GPU cannot deliver it. Expect playable but not competitive frame rates in esports titles at low settings.

Streaming: Acceptable for CPU-based encoding. The 18 cores and 51,596 multithread score can handle x264 encoding at high presets while gaming, but the GPU will struggle to render the game itself. Streamers should upgrade the GPU to make this scenario viable.

Video editing: Good for CPU-based editing in Premiere Pro or DaVinci Resolve. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 30,867 and data compression score of 568,721 indicate fast timeline scrubbing and export times. The GPU will accelerate only basic effects, so 4K editing will rely on the CPU’s horsepower.

3D rendering: Strong CPU performance, weak GPU acceleration. The 162,692 floating-point math score is excellent for CPU-based renderers like Blender Cycles or V-Ray. The Arc A350’s 6 ray tracing cores will provide minimal GPU acceleration, so expect long render times for complex scenes.

Software development: Excellent. The 568,721 data compression score and 125,091 integer math score speed up compilation, testing, and version control operations. Developers will appreciate the 18 cores for parallel builds and the 30 MB L3 cache for frequent data access.

Student and office work: Overkill but effective. The 4,757 single-thread score ensures snappy UI and spreadsheet responses, while the 51,596 multithread score handles multitasking across dozens of browser tabs and office applications. The ECC memory support adds reliability for long-running data analyses.