SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus + Intel Arc A380

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)

▼

91 Score

Top 9% Ranking

91 / 100

ULTIMATE READY

Apex Performer

Top 9% 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%

GPU

86%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus

66,159 Benchmark Score

Top 4% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

Intel Arc A380

8,558 Benchmark Score

Top 14% 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 250KF Plus paired with an Intel Arc A380 is a desktop combination that presents a stark contrast in capability. The CPU is a high-performance, multi-threaded powerhouse, while the GPU is a modest entry-level component. The benchmark data shows a clear disparity in their respective performance percentiles, with the processor ranking in the 93rd percentile and the graphics card in the 44th. This pairing is a study in imbalance, where the processor’s potential is heavily gated by the graphics subsystem in gaming and graphics-intensive tasks, yet the CPU alone offers exceptional compute performance for other workloads.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus is a desktop processor from the Core Ultra Series 2, built on the Arrow Lake Refresh architecture using a 3 nm process from TSMC. It houses 18 cores and 18 threads, meaning it lacks the simultaneous multithreading of some rivals. The base clock is 4.20 GHz, with a boost clock of 5.30 GHz, and it has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking. The cache hierarchy is substantial: 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and a shared 30 MB of L3 cache. It supports dual-channel DDR5 memory with ECC capability and a memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s.

The raw compute performance is exceptional. In Cinebench R23, the CPU scores 42,718 in multi-core and 6,030 in single-core. This multi-core score is a strong indicator for heavily threaded workloads like 3D rendering and video encoding. The single-core score demonstrates excellent responsiveness for everyday tasks and lightly threaded applications. The PassMark data further reinforces this: a multithread score of 50,146, a single-thread score of 4,698, and a floating-point math score of 159,824. The data encryption score of 41,292 and data compression score of 553,155 also show robust performance in data-centric tasks.

The average benchmark score for this CPU is 66,159, placing it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals are the Intel Core 9 273PQE (avg score 66,099, a 0.1% lead for the 250KF), the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D (avg score 65,914, a 0.4% lead), and the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus (avg score 66,855, a -1% delta). This places the 250KF Plus in the top tier of consumer processors, essentially matching the performance of the flagship AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D in aggregate benchmarks. For real-world workloads, this means the CPU is capable of handling the most demanding productivity suites, software compilation, and scientific computing without becoming a bottleneck.

Balance and Bottleneck

The fundamental issue with this build is the massive performance gap between the CPU and GPU. The CPU sits in the 93rd percentile, while the GPU is in the 44th. This creates a scenario where the CPU is almost never the limiting factor. In any graphics-intensive application, the Intel Arc A380 will be the primary constraint. The data suggests that the CPU has sufficient headroom to feed a much more powerful graphics card. For instance, the CPU’s single-thread score of 6,030 in Cinebench R23 indicates it can handle the game logic and physics calculations of modern titles, but the GPU’s low scores in DirectX 12 (35 in PassMark) will cap frame rates. This bottleneck is severe; the CPU may be waiting for the GPU to finish rendering frames, leaving its vast compute resources idle. The combined percentile for this pairing is 69, reflecting the drag the GPU has on the overall system capability. The CPU’s performance is so high that it will never limit the GPU, but the GPU will limit all aspects of visual performance.

FAQ

Q: What is the most significant performance difference between the CPU and GPU in this build?

A: The CPU is in the 93rd percentile, while the GPU is in the 44th percentile, indicating the CPU vastly outperforms the GPU in their respective categories. The CPU’s average benchmark score is 66,159, while the GPU’s is only 8,558.

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus compare to the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D?

A: The benchmark data shows they are essentially tied. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has an average score of 66,159, which is a 0.4% lead over the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D’s score of 65,914.

Q: Is the Intel Arc A380 suitable for modern gaming at high settings?

A: No. The GPU’s benchmark scores are very low. Its PassMark DirectX 12 score is 35, and its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 808. These numbers suggest it is only suitable for light gaming at low resolutions and settings, and it ranks below many mobile GPUs.

Q: What is the launch MSRP of the processor?

A: The launch MSRP of the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus is $184. The GPU’s launch MSRP is 149 USD.

Q: What kind of memory does this platform support?

A: The CPU supports dual-channel DDR5 memory with a maximum bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. It also supports ECC memory.

Q: Is the CPU overclockable?

A: Yes, the multiplier is unlocked, allowing for overclocking. The base clock is 4.20 GHz, and the boost clock is 5.30 GHz.

Q: Does the performance of the CPU depend on the graphics card?

A: In CPU-centric tasks like the Cinebench and PassMark benchmarks, no. However, in a complete system, the GPU will limit the frame rate in games, preventing the CPU from being fully utilized.

Gaming Performance

There are no measured FPS rows for this exact CPU+GPU combination; the FACT PACK contains no measuredFps data. Therefore, all FPS discussions are estimates derived from the benchmark scores. The Intel Arc A380’s performance is a significant limiting factor. With a PassMark G3D score of 6,252 and a DirectX 12 score of 35, it is positioned in the 44th percentile of all GPUs. This indicates that gaming performance will be modest. The GPU is likely to be the bottleneck at all resolutions. The CPU’s high single-core performance (4,698 in PassMark single-thread) means it can handle game logic, but the GPU will struggle to render frames.

For esports titles and older games, the system might achieve playable frame rates at 1080p with low to medium settings. However, for modern AAA titles, the expectation is that the graphics card will be overwhelmed. The estimated frame rates would be low even at 1080p with ultra settings, as the GPU’s low DirectX 12 score suggests it cannot handle the complex rendering pipelines of modern games. At 1440p or 4K, the performance would be even worse, making the gaming experience unsatisfactory. The data indicates this is not a gaming-focused build, but rather a system where the CPU dominates and the GPU provides basic display output and acceleration for light tasks.

Who Should Build It

This build is for a user who needs massive CPU compute power but has minimal graphics requirements. The primary target is a content creator or professional working with CPU-intensive tasks like software compilation, data analysis, or 3D rendering where the GPU is not heavily used. The CPU’s 42,718 Cinebench R23 multi-core score and 159,824 PassMark floating-point math score indicate it can handle complex simulations and rendering tasks. It is also suitable for a developer who needs to compile large codebases, where the 18 cores and 18 threads will provide a significant speedup. Students and small business workstations that run scientific or engineering applications would benefit from the CPU’s performance.

The Intel Arc A380 is sufficient for basic desktop acceleration, 2D design, and video playback, but it is not for high-end gaming or GPU-accelerated rendering. This is a workstation-oriented build. For a user who prioritizes CPU performance above all else and only needs a display output, this pairing makes sense. However, for gamers or professionals using GPU-accelerated software, the GPU would be a severe bottleneck, and a more powerful graphics card would be a necessary addition.

GPU Analysis

The Intel Arc A380 is an entry-level graphics card based on the Xe-HPG architecture, codenamed Alchemist. It is built on a 6 nm process by TSMC and features the DG2-128 chip. The GPU has 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 96-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 186.0 GB/s. The core clocks are 2000 MHz base and 2050 MHz boost. It has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. For ray tracing, it has 8 dedicated RT cores. Its compute capabilities are listed as 4.198 TFLOPS for FP32 and 8.397 TFLOPS for FP16.

The benchmark results show a weak performer. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 808, and its PassMark G3D score is 6,252. The PassMark GPU Compute score is 2,762, which is low. The GPU’s average benchmark score is 8,558, placing it in the 44th percentile. Its nearest rivals are the AMD FirePro W5170M (avg score 8,595, a -0.4% delta), the AMD Radeon HD 8870M (avg score 8,462, a 1.1% delta), and the NVIDIA GeForce MX330 (avg score 8,458, a 1.2% delta). This puts it in the same performance class as older mobile GPUs. The 8 RT cores are present, but the low overall performance suggests they will not be sufficient for modern ray-traced games. The GPU is best suited for light photo editing, video playback, and general desktop use, not for demanding 3D applications.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The platform is built around the Intel Socket 1851. The CPU supports DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, with a bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. It provides 20 PCIe Gen 5 lanes from the CPU itself. The GPU uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface. The CPU has a TDP of 125 W, while the GPU has a TDP of 75 W. The suggested PSU for this system is 250 W, which is very low, indicating headroom for a more powerful GPU, as adding a high-end card would necessitate a stronger power supply.

The most sensible next upgrade is to replace the Intel Arc A380 with a more powerful graphics card. The CPU’s high percentile (93rd) and its performance relative to the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D show it has the headroom to support a top-tier GPU. The PCIe Gen 5 support and the high CPU scores mean that a newer, faster GPU would not be bottlenecked by the processor. The 250 W PSU is a constraint, so upgrading the GPU would likely also require a PSU upgrade. The platform itself is current and supports the latest DDR5 memory, so the CPU and motherboard should remain relevant for several years. The CPU’s 30 MB of L3 cache and high clock speeds provide a solid foundation for future upgrades.

Build Overview

This is a desktop build pairing a top-tier 18-core processor with a low-end graphics card. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus is a flagship-class CPU for the mainstream desktop segment, scoring in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs. The Intel Arc A380 is an entry-level GPU, scoring in the 44th percentile. The combined percentile for this pairing is 69. The CPU is designed for heavy productivity and multi-threaded workloads, while the GPU is suited for basic display output and light multimedia acceleration. This is not a balanced gaming system; it is a compute-centric workstation where the graphics card is a secondary component.

Benchmark Performance

The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus delivers outstanding benchmark results. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score is 42,718, and its single-core score is 6,030. In PassMark, it scores 50,146 in multithread and 4,698 in single-thread. Its average benchmark score is 66,159. The Intel Arc A380 scores 808 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 and 6,252 in PassMark G3D. Its average benchmark score is 8,558. The CPU is 0.1% ahead of the Intel Core 9 273PQE and 0.4% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D. The GPU is 1.4% behind the AMD Radeon 880M. The combined picture is one of extreme CPU strength and significant GPU weakness. The system’s overall capability in gaming or GPU-accelerated tasks is firmly limited by the Arc A380, while its capability in CPU-bound tasks is exceptional.

Usage Scenarios

High-Refresh Gaming: Not recommended. The GPU’s low PassMark DirectX 12 score of 35 and 3DMark score of 808 indicate it cannot deliver high frame rates at high refresh rates, even at 1080p. The CPU would not be the limiting factor, but the GPU would prevent the system from reaching high FPS targets.

Streaming: The CPU’s 18 cores and high multi-thread score of 50,146 in PassMark can handle encoding and streaming workloads. However, the GPU’s weak performance means game capture and rendering would be poor. The system could stream CPU-light games or desktop content, but not modern games at good quality.

Video Editing: The CPU is excellent for this task. A Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 42,718 and a PassMark floating-point math score of 159,824 provide the power for fast video encoding and effects processing. The GPU can assist with some effects, but its low compute score of 2,762 in PassMark means it will not accelerate rendering significantly. The final render will be CPU-driven, which is a strength.

3D Rendering: Excellent for CPU-based rendering engines. The high core count and 42,718 Cinebench R23 multi-core score will provide fast render times. For GPU-accelerated renderers, the Arc A380 is too weak, with its FP32 performance of 4.198 TFLOPS being insufficient for complex scenes.

Software Development: This is a prime use case. The 18 cores and threads are ideal for compiling large projects. The PassMark data encryption score of 41,292 and integer math score of 123,030 also show strength in code execution and data processing tasks.

Student and Office Work: The CPU is overkill for this. Office applications and web browsing will run instantly, but the system’s cost is justified only if the student or office worker needs the CPU power for other tasks like engineering simulations or data analysis. The GPU is sufficient for 2D applications and general productivity.

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus + Intel Arc A380

Apex Performer

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus

Intel Arc A380

Market Position

Game Performance Benchmarks

Cyberpunk 2077

Red Dead Redemption 2

Microsoft Flight Simulator

Control

Call of Duty: Warzone

Fortnite

Performance Insights

Optimal Performance

4K Gaming Ready

Performance Tiers Explained

Ultimate

High-End

Mid-Range

Entry Level

Legacy

CPU Analysis

Balance and Bottleneck

FAQ

Gaming Performance

Who Should Build It

GPU Analysis

Upgrade Path and Platform

Build Overview

Benchmark Performance

Usage Scenarios

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