SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus + Intel Arc A750

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

94 / 100
ULTIMATE READY

Apex Performer

Top 6% 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
96%
VS
GPU
91%
PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus

66,855 Benchmark Score
Top 4% Market Ranking
View Full Specs →
GRAPHICS CARD

Intel Arc A750

20,582 Benchmark Score
Top 9% 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 250K Plus and Intel Arc A750 form a desktop pairing that targets a specific performance tier, but the data available for this combination is limited. No measured FPS rows exist for this exact CPU+GPU combination in the FACT PACK, so all frame rate discussions below are estimates derived from the individual benchmark scores of each component, not from direct game testing. The benchmark results provide a strong basis for these estimates, but they remain projections of gaming performance.

Gaming Performance

Since the FACT PACK contains no measured FPS data for this pairing, the following analysis is based entirely on the synthetic benchmark scores of the CPU and GPU. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus posts a PassMark single-thread score of 4757 and a multi-thread score of 51596, while the Intel Arc A750 achieves a PassMark G3D score of 12534 and a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2612. These figures indicate a system that is well-balanced for 1080p gaming, with the CPU providing strong per-core performance to feed the GPU.

At 1080p resolution with ultra settings, the Arc A750 is likely to deliver playable frame rates in most modern titles. The GPU’s 17.20 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and a 512.0 GB/s memory bandwidth suggest it can handle demanding scenes, though the 8 GB VRAM may become a limiting factor in the most texture-heavy games. The CPU’s 5.30 GHz boost clock ensures that frame pacing remains consistent, avoiding the CPU-bound dips that can occur in less optimized titles. Expect frame rates in the range of 60 to 100 FPS for most AAA games at this resolution, with lighter esports titles pushing well beyond that.

Moving to 1440p, the workload shifts more heavily onto the GPU. The Arc A750’s 268.8 GPixel/s pixel rate and 537.6 GTexel/s texture rate provide sufficient throughput for 1440p, but the 8 GB frame buffer is a more significant concern. Games that exceed this memory capacity will experience stuttering or texture pop-in. Estimated performance at 1440p ultra would see frame rates drop to the 45 to 70 FPS range for demanding titles, with some games requiring a reduction to high settings to maintain smoothness. The CPU’s 93rd percentile ranking among all CPUs means it will not bottleneck the GPU at this resolution.

At 4K, this pairing is not recommended for ultra settings. The Arc A750’s memory bandwidth and compute power are stretched thin, and the 8 GB VRAM is a hard ceiling for many modern titles. Estimated frame rates at 4K ultra would fall below 30 FPS in most cases, making this a configuration better suited for 1080p or 1440p gaming. The CPU’s performance headroom is ample, but the GPU simply lacks the raw throughput for 4K gaming.

GPU Analysis

The Intel Arc A750 is built on the Xe-HPG architecture using a DG2-512 chip manufactured on a 6 nm process at TSMC. It packs 3584 shading units, 224 texture mapping units, and 112 raster operation units. The GPU operates at a base clock of 2050 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz, with a memory clock of 2000 MHz running 16 Gbps effective on 8 GB of GDDR6 memory across a 256-bit bus. This configuration yields a memory bandwidth of 512.0 GB/s, which is substantial for a card in this tier.

For ray tracing, the Arc A750 includes 28 dedicated RT cores. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2612 indicates that the GPU handles DX12 workloads competently, but ray tracing performance will be modest compared to higher-tier cards. The GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, ensuring compatibility with modern game APIs. The lack of dedicated tensor cores means AI-accelerated features like DLSS-style upscaling are absent, though the GPU does support Intel’s XeSS technology, which uses the existing compute units.

In rendering workloads, the GPU’s FP32 performance of 17.20 TFLOPS and FP16 performance of 34.41 TFLOPS (2:1) make it a capable entry-level compute device. The PassMark GPU Compute score of 5368 reflects this, though it lags behind more powerful workstation cards. The 66th percentile ranking among all GPUs places it in the mid-range tier, slightly above the Intel Arc B570, which has an average score of 20556, and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile, which scores 20534. The Arc A750’s average benchmark score of 20582 is essentially tied with these rivals, with a deltaPct of 0.1% against the B570 and 0.2% against the RTX 3070 Mobile.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU benchmark results for the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus are impressive. In Cinebench R23, it scores 30867 in multi-core and 2261 in single-core. The multi-core score places it in the 93rd percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 66855. Its nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 4465P, which scores 66925 (a deltaPct of -0.1%), and the Intel Xeon 6515P, which scores 67006 (a deltaPct of -0.2%). The Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX scores 67469 (a deltaPct of -0.9%), while the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus scores 66159 (a deltaPct of 1.1%). This places the 250K Plus in a tight cluster of high-performance CPUs, just slightly behind the EPYC and Xeon parts but ahead of its KF variant.

The GPU’s benchmark scores tell a different story. The Arc A750’s average benchmark score of 20582 places it in the 66th percentile among all GPUs. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2612 and Geekbench OpenCL score of 98554 are solid for a mid-range card. The Vulkan score of 85631 is respectable, indicating good low-level API performance. The PassMark G3D score of 12534 is the most representative of overall gaming performance. The GPU’s nearest rivals are the Intel Arc B570 (avg score 20556, deltaPct 0.1%), NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile (avg score 20534, deltaPct 0.2%), AMD Radeon R9 M390X (avg score 20662, deltaPct -0.4%), and NVIDIA Quadro M4000M (avg score 20480, deltaPct 0.5%). This shows that the Arc A750 is essentially performance-parity with these competitors, differing by less than half a percent.

The combined picture is a system where the CPU is a top-tier performer relative to all CPUs, but the GPU is a mid-range part relative to all GPUs. This creates a CPU-heavy imbalance for gaming, where the processor has far more headroom than the graphics card can utilize. For compute and productivity tasks, however, the CPU’s 93rd percentile ranking ensures that it can handle even the most demanding workloads without breaking a sweat.

Usage Scenarios

For high-refresh gaming at 1080p, this pairing is well-suited. The CPU’s 4757 PassMark single-thread score ensures that frame rates stay high even in CPU-intensive scenes, while the GPU’s 12534 G3D score can push frame rates above 144 FPS in esports titles. The combination of a 5.30 GHz boost clock and 512.0 GB/s GPU memory bandwidth means that the system will not be the bottleneck in most competitive games.

Streaming while gaming is a viable use case for this build. The CPU’s 18 cores and 18 threads, along with a multi-thread score of 51596 in PassMark, provide ample headroom for encoding workloads. The GPU’s 3584 shading units can handle the game rendering while the CPU manages the stream encoding, though the lack of tensor cores means no AI-accelerated encoding features. The system should handle 1080p streaming without significant frame drops.

Video editing is a strong suit for this configuration. The CPU’s Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 30867 is excellent for rendering timelines and exporting projects. The GPU’s 17.20 TFLOPS of FP32 compute can accelerate effects and color grading in compatible software. The 8 GB VRAM may limit the use of large 4K timelines, but for 1080p projects, this system is more than capable.

3D rendering workloads benefit heavily from the CPU’s performance. The PassMark floating point math score of 162692 and integer math score of 125091 indicate strong compute throughput. The CPU’s 93rd percentile ranking means it outperforms the vast majority of processors in rendering tasks like Blender or V-Ray. The GPU can assist with viewport rendering, but its mid-range compute performance (5368 PassMark GPU Compute) means it will not accelerate final renders as effectively as a higher-tier workstation GPU.

Software development is another area where this CPU shines. The PassMark data compression score of 568721 and encryption score of 42144 suggest that compilation and cryptographic workloads will complete quickly. The 18 threads allow for parallel builds, and the 30 MB of L3 cache helps with frequently accessed data. The GPU is less relevant for coding tasks, but its OpenCL score of 98554 can assist with compute-heavy simulations or machine learning prototyping.

For student and office work, this system is overkill but not wasteful. The CPU’s single-thread score of 4757 ensures snappy application launches and responsive multitasking. The GPU’s 732 PassMark G2D score indicates solid 2D performance for desktop rendering and office suites. The combination is more than sufficient for document editing, web browsing, and spreadsheet work, with power to spare for more demanding tasks.

FAQ

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

A: The combined percentile for the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus and Intel Arc A750 is 80, placing it in the upper quintile of all desktop builds.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rival, the AMD EPYC 4465P?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has an average benchmark score of 66855, while the AMD EPYC 4465P scores 66925. This gives the EPYC a deltaPct of -0.1%, meaning the two are essentially tied in performance.

Q: What is the GPU’s memory configuration?

A: The Intel Arc A750 features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, with a memory bandwidth of 512.0 GB/s and a memory clock of 2000 MHz running at 16 Gbps effective.

Q: Does the CPU support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus supports ECC memory, which is a valuable feature for workstation builds that require error correction.

Q: What is the launch MSRP of the CPU?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has a launch MSRP of $199.

Q: What is the GPU’s production status?

A: The Intel Arc A750 is marked as End-of-life in its production status, with a successor named Battlemage.

Q: How does the GPU compare to the Intel Arc B570?

A: The Intel Arc A750 has an average benchmark score of 20582, while the Intel Arc B570 scores 20556. The deltaPct is 0.1%, indicating that the A750 is marginally faster.

Who Should Build It

This build is ideal for gamers targeting 1080p resolution with high refresh rates. The CPU’s 93rd percentile ranking ensures that it will not bottleneck the GPU, and the GPU’s 66th percentile ranking is sufficient for smooth gaming at this resolution. The combination is less suitable for 1440p or 4K gaming, where the GPU’s 8 GB VRAM and mid-range compute power become limiting factors.

Content creators who work with video editing and 3D rendering will find the CPU to be the main attraction. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 30867 and the PassMark multi-thread score of 51596 are strong indicators of productivity performance. The GPU can accelerate effects and viewport rendering, but its 5368 PassMark GPU Compute score means it is not a primary renderer.

Software developers and data analysts will benefit from the CPU’s high single-thread and multi-thread performance. The PassMark data compression score of 568721 and encryption score of 42144 suggest fast compilation and secure computation. The 18 threads allow for efficient parallel builds, and the 30 MB L3 cache reduces latency for frequently accessed data.

Students and small business users building a general-purpose workstation will find this system more than adequate. The CPU’s single-thread score of 4757 ensures responsive day-to-day use, while the GPU’s 732 PassMark G2D score handles desktop rendering and office applications without issue. The system is overkill for basic tasks but provides headroom for future, more demanding workloads.

Balance and Bottleneck

The balance of this system is heavily skewed toward the CPU. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus ranks in the 93rd percentile among all CPUs, while the Intel Arc A750 ranks in the 66th percentile among all GPUs. This means that in gaming workloads, the GPU will be the primary bottleneck, especially at higher resolutions. The CPU can comfortably feed the GPU at 1080p, but at 1440p and above, the GPU’s lower relative performance will limit frame rates.

In productivity workloads, the bottleneck shifts depending on the task. For CPU-bound tasks like video encoding, 3D rendering, and software compilation, the CPU’s high percentile ensures that it is not the limiting factor. The GPU may become a bottleneck for GPU-accelerated tasks like effects rendering or machine learning inference, where its mid-range compute performance (5368 PassMark GPU Compute) will be slower than higher-tier cards.

The FPS scaling evidence, while estimated, supports this analysis. At 1080p, the CPU’s high single-thread score (4757) allows the GPU to reach its full potential, resulting in frame rates that are GPU-limited but still playable. At 1440p, the GPU’s memory bandwidth and compute power become the limiting factor, with frame rates dropping accordingly. The CPU’s performance headroom is largely unused in gaming, indicating that a more powerful GPU could be paired with this CPU without introducing a CPU bottleneck.

Build Overview

This is a desktop build combining the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus processor with the Intel Arc A750 graphics card. The CPU is part of the Core Ultra Series 2, codenamed Arrow Lake Refresh, and is manufactured on a 3 nm process at TSMC. The GPU is based on the Xe-HPG architecture, codenamed Alchemist, and is manufactured on a 6 nm process also at TSMC. The combined percentile for this pairing is 80, placing it in the upper tier of desktop builds.

The CPU’s 93rd percentile ranking among all CPUs is exceptional, while the GPU’s 66th percentile ranking is solidly mid-range. This creates a system that is top-heavy, with the processor capable of far more than the graphics card can deliver. For gaming, this means the GPU is the limiting factor. For productivity tasks like rendering and compilation, the CPU provides outstanding performance. The system is best described as a high-CPU-performance desktop with a mid-range GPU, suitable for a wide range of tasks but optimized for CPU-intensive workloads.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is a desktop processor from the Core Ultra Series 2, codenamed Arrow Lake Refresh. It features 18 cores and 18 threads, with a base clock of 4.20 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. The CPU is manufactured on a 3 nm process at TSMC, with 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. It supports DDR5 memory on a dual-channel bus with a memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s, and it includes ECC memory support. The CPU has a TDP of 125 W and uses the Intel Socket 1851. It features 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 30 MB of shared L3 cache.

In Cinebench R23, the CPU scores 30867 in multi-core and 2261 in single-core. These scores place it in the 93rd percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 66855. The multi-core performance is particularly strong, rivaling server-class processors like the AMD EPYC 4465P, which scores 66925 (deltaPct -0.1%). The single-core performance is also excellent, with a PassMark single-thread score of 4757 that ensures responsive application performance.

The CPU’s benchmark scores indicate that it excels in heavily threaded workloads. The PassMark multi-thread score of 51596, floating point math score of 162692, and integer math score of 125091 all point to strong compute throughput. The data compression score of 568721 and encryption score of 42144 suggest fast data handling, which is beneficial for file compression, database operations, and secure communications. The extended instructions score of 44565 indicates solid SIMD performance, which is useful for scientific computing and media processing. The CPU’s 3 nm process node and 30 MB of L3 cache contribute to its efficiency and performance, making it a top-tier choice for desktop workstations.