SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 5 336H + Intel Arc A350M

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

91%

GPU

92%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 5 336H

34,485 Benchmark Score

Top 9% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

Intel Arc A350M

24,647 Benchmark Score

Top 8% 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 336H and Intel Arc A350M form a laptop pairing that targets efficient, mainstream computing. This analysis is based entirely on synthetic benchmark data, as no measured FPS rows exist for this exact combination. All discussion of gaming performance is therefore estimated from the CPU and GPU benchmark scores, not from direct frame rate measurements.

GPU Analysis — VRAM, bandwidth, clocks, RT/tensor hardware, what the benchmark scores mean for rendering

The Intel Arc A350M is a mobile GPU built on the Xe-HPG architecture, fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC. It uses the DG2-128 chip, which contains 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die. The GPU has 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 24 ROPs, with a base clock of 1150 MHz and a boost clock of 2200 MHz. Pixel rate is 52.80 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 105.6 GTexel/s, indicating a chip designed for efficient 1080p-class rendering rather than high-resolution brute force.

Memory configuration is a notable constraint. The A350M carries 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, with memory clocked at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective), yielding a bandwidth of 112.0 GB/s. This is a modest amount of VRAM by modern standards; texture-heavy scenes and high-resolution assets will likely exceed this capacity, causing the driver to fall back to system memory. The 64-bit bus also limits memory throughput, which can become a bottleneck in bandwidth-sensitive workloads. The GPU supports PCIe 4.0 x8, which is adequate for its class.

Ray tracing hardware is present in the form of 6 RT cores, and the GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. FP32 performance is 3.379 TFLOPS, with FP16 at 6.758 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio). These figures place the GPU in the entry-level discrete segment. Benchmark results show a Geekbench OpenCL score of 24546 and a Vulkan score of 24747, giving an average benchmark score of 24647. This places the GPU at the 70th percentile of all GPUs, which is surprisingly strong for a low-power part, though the percentile is influenced by the fact that many integrated and older GPUs score far lower.

In rendering terms, the data suggests the A350M is capable of handling light 3D work and hardware-accelerated effects, but the 4 GB VRAM and 64-bit bus will limit complex scenes. The nearest rivals are instructive: the AMD Radeon RX 590 scores 24744 (0.4% higher), the NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile scores 24763 (0.5% higher), the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT scores 24442 (0.8% lower), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 scores 24277 (1.5% lower). The A350M is effectively within 1.5% of all four rivals, meaning the GPU trades blows with a mix of older desktop cards and mobile workstation parts. For a 25 W mobile GPU, this is respectable, but it is not a high-performance part.

Upgrade Path and Platform — socket, memory support, PCIe, PSU headroom from suggestedPsu/tdp, what a sensible next upgrade looks like

The platform is built around the Intel Core Ultra 5 336H, which uses the Intel BGA 2540 socket. This is a soldered mobile package, so the CPU is not upgradeable in a traditional sense. The chip is part of the Panther Lake architecture, specifically the Panther Lake-H generation, built on Intel's 3 nm process. The production status is listed as Active, indicating this is a current-generation part.

Memory support includes DDR5 and LPDDR5X, running in dual-channel mode. The memory bandwidth is rated at 115.2 GB/s, which is typical for a mobile processor of this class. ECC memory is not supported. The CPU provides PCIe Gen 5 with 12 lanes (CPU only), which is a forward-looking feature, though the GPU itself uses PCIe 4.0 x8. The integrated graphics is Intel Xe3 Graphics, which provides a fallback display output and basic acceleration.

The TDP for both the CPU and GPU is 25 W each, which is low. There is no suggested PSU listed, but given the total power envelope of roughly 50 W for the two primary components, a laptop power adapter in the 65-100 W range would be typical. The lack of a suggested PSU in the data suggests this is a pre-configured laptop design, so the power delivery is fixed by the chassis.

A sensible next upgrade for this platform is not a CPU or GPU swap, as both are soldered. Instead, the upgrade path lies in memory and storage. Since the CPU supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, a user could potentially increase RAM capacity if the laptop allows it, though many ultraportables have soldered memory. For storage, the PCIe Gen 5 lanes on the CPU mean a fast NVMe SSD could be installed, though the actual slot availability depends on the specific laptop design. The GPU is end-of-life (production status), so there is no future driver or hardware support expected beyond what exists now. The platform is what it is: a fixed, efficient mobile package.

CPU Analysis — cores, clocks, architecture, what the benchmark scores mean for real workloads

The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H is a 16-core, 16-thread processor. This is a notable configuration: 16 cores with no hyperthreading, meaning the thread count equals the core count. Base clock is 1.90 GHz, with a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. The architecture is Panther Lake, built on a 3 nm process at Intel. Cache hierarchy includes 192 KB L1 per core, 2.5 MB L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The chip is part of the Core Ultra Series 3, which is a lower-tier stack compared to the Core Ultra 5/7/9 series.

Benchmark scores are strong for a 25 W mobile part. In Cinebench, the CPU scores 2418 in R15 multicore and 341 in R15 single-core, 10076 in R20 multicore and 1422 in R20 single-core, and 23991 in R23 multicore and 3387 in R23 single-core. The single-core scores are particularly impressive, with an R23 single-core score of 3387 indicating high IPC from the Panther Lake architecture. Multicore performance scales well with the 16 cores, yielding an R23 multicore score of 23991, which is competitive with desktop processors from a few generations ago.

PassMark results paint a detailed picture. The CPU scores 280340 in data compression, 21291 in data encryption, 24542 in extended instructions, 299 in find prime numbers, 82415 in floating point math, 62070 in integer math, 28545 in multithread, 2682 in physics, 34402 in random string sorting, and 4013 in single-thread. The integer and floating-point scores are healthy, indicating solid general-purpose performance. The encryption score of 21291 is moderate, which matters for VPN and disk encryption workloads. The find prime numbers score of 299 is low, but that is a specific test that heavily favors certain architectures.

The average benchmark score is 34485, placing the CPU at the 84th percentile of all CPUs. This is a high placement for a mobile part. Nearest rivals show a tight cluster: the Intel Core i7-13700HX scores 34554 (0.2% higher), the Intel Core i5-13450HX scores 34333 (0.4% lower), the AMD Ryzen 7 3700X scores 34260 (0.7% lower), and the AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 scores 34222 (0.8% lower). The 336H is essentially tied with these parts, meaning a laptop with this CPU will perform comparably to a previous-generation gaming laptop HX chip or a desktop Ryzen 7 3700X in multi-threaded workloads. For a 25 W part, this is exceptional efficiency.

Balance and Bottleneck — which component limits which workload, using percentiles and FPS scaling as evidence

The balance between the Core Ultra 5 336H and the Arc A350M is heavily skewed toward the CPU. The CPU sits at the 84th percentile of all CPUs, while the GPU sits at the 70th percentile of all GPUs. This 14-percentile gap indicates that the GPU is the limiting factor in most graphics-intensive workloads. The CPU has enough headroom to feed a much faster GPU, which means the A350M will be the bottleneck in gaming and 3D rendering.

In gaming, the estimated frame rate will be constrained by the GPU's 3.379 TFLOPS and 4 GB VRAM. The CPU's high single-core score (4013 in PassMark single-thread, 3387 in Cinebench R23 single-core) is more than sufficient for most game engines, which typically rely on one to four threads for game logic. The GPU will saturate before the CPU does, meaning that lowering resolution or graphics settings will not yield proportional FPS gains beyond the GPU's limits; the CPU will simply wait for the GPU to finish frames.

For CPU-bound workloads like software compilation, data compression, or video encoding, the balance reverses. The CPU is the star, and the GPU is mostly idle. In these cases, the GPU's lower percentile does not matter because the workload is purely computational. The 16 cores and 18 MB of L3 cache will handle multi-threaded tasks effectively, as evidenced by the Cinebench R23 multicore score of 23991.

The memory bandwidth is another consideration. The CPU has 115.2 GB/s of bandwidth, while the GPU has 112.0 GB/s. These are close, but the CPU's bandwidth is shared with the GPU in some configurations, which could cause contention in mixed workloads. The 4 GB VRAM on the GPU is the most likely bottleneck in modern games, as 4 GB is below the 6-8 GB that many current titles expect.

Benchmark Performance — exact CPU and GPU scores, percentile positions, and what the combined picture is

The combined percentile for this build is 77, indicating a system that outperforms 77% of all tested configurations. This is a strong result for a laptop pairing, driven primarily by the CPU's high percentile.

CPU performance is anchored by an average benchmark score of 34485, with the 84th percentile ranking. The Cinebench R23 scores of 23991 multicore and 3387 single-core are the headline numbers. The R23 multicore score places the CPU in the same league as desktop parts like the AMD Ryzen 7 3700X (34260 average score, 0.7% lower) and the Intel Core i5-13450HX (34333 average score, 0.4% lower). The R23 single-core score of 3387 is a strong indicator of responsive day-to-day use and gaming performance.

GPU performance is anchored by an average benchmark score of 24647, with the 70th percentile ranking. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 24546 and Vulkan score of 24747 are the only two GPU benchmarks available. The GPU is within 1.5% of the AMD Radeon RX 590, NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile, AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT, and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630. This means the A350M performs like a mid-range desktop GPU from a few years ago, but with significantly lower power consumption.

The combined picture is a system where the CPU is the dominant component. The 14-percentile gap between CPU and GPU means that any workload that uses both will be limited by the GPU. This is not a bad thing for a laptop, as it keeps power draw low and battery life reasonable. The system is well-suited for CPU-heavy tasks and moderate gaming.

Usage Scenarios — grounded in the scores: high-refresh gaming, streaming, video editing, 3D rendering, software development, student and office work. One short paragraph per scenario, citing the numbers that support the verdict

High-refresh gaming: The Arc A350M is not suited for high-refresh gaming at 1080p. With an FP32 performance of 3.379 TFLOPS and 4 GB VRAM, the GPU will struggle to maintain frame rates above 60 FPS in modern titles at medium settings. The CPU is not the issue, as its 84th percentile ranking and single-core score of 4013 in PassMark indicate sufficient headroom. Estimated FPS will be limited by the GPU, so a 144 Hz display would be wasted on this pairing; a 60 Hz panel is the realistic target.

Streaming: The CPU's 16 cores and 16 threads provide enough grunt for software encoding. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 23991 suggests that streaming at 1080p60 with x264 encoding on the CPU is feasible, though the GPU's lack of dedicated encoding hardware (no tensor cores listed) means NVENC-style offloading is not available. The system can handle streaming, but it will tax the CPU, which may impact game performance if the game is also CPU-heavy.

Video editing: The CPU is the strong point here. The PassMark floating-point score of 82415 and integer score of 62070 indicate solid performance for video codecs and effects. The GPU's 4 GB VRAM is a limitation for timeline previews with heavy effects, but basic 1080p editing on a single track is plausible. The 70th percentile GPU ranking means hardware acceleration in editing software will work, but it will not be fast.

3D rendering: The CPU is excellent for rendering. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 23991 is comparable to desktop parts from a few generations ago, meaning CPU-based rendering in Blender or similar will be productive. However, GPU rendering using the A350M is limited by its 3.379 TFLOPS and 4 GB VRAM; scenes that fit in 4 GB will render, but slowly compared to a desktop GPU.

Software development: The CPU is the clear winner here. The 16 cores and 18 MB of L3 cache handle compilation tasks efficiently, and the PassMark data compression score of 280340 indicates fast I/O processing. The single-thread score of 4013 ensures quick IDE responsiveness and fast build times for single-threaded tooling. The GPU is irrelevant for most development tasks, making this an ideal budget developer laptop.

Student and office work: This pairing is more than adequate for productivity. The CPU's 84th percentile means word processing, spreadsheets, and web browsing will be snappy. The GPU's 70th percentile is overkill for office tasks, but it enables light photo editing or casual gaming. The 25 W TDP for both components means long battery life, which is critical for students.

Who Should Build It — target users and industries (gamers at specific resolutions, content creators, developers, students, small business workstations) tied strictly to the measured performance

This build targets users who prioritize CPU performance over GPU performance. Gamers should be at 1080p or lower, and should expect to play at medium settings or lower in modern titles. The GPU's 70th percentile and 4 GB VRAM mean it is not a high-refresh or high-detail gaming platform. Casual gamers who play older titles or esports games at low settings will find it acceptable, but anyone expecting AAA gaming at high settings should look elsewhere.

Content creators who work primarily with CPU-based tools will benefit. Video editors using software encoding, 3D artists using CPU rendering, and data analysts running heavy compute workloads will appreciate the 84th percentile CPU ranking. The GPU is a secondary consideration; it provides acceleration but is not the main driver of performance.

Software developers are a natural fit. The 16 cores handle parallel builds, and the high single-thread score ensures fast interactive development. The low TDP means the laptop can run for extended periods without thermal throttling, which is critical for long compile sessions.

Students and office workers will find this build sufficient. The CPU's high percentile ensures responsive productivity apps, and the GPU's 70th percentile is more than enough for video playback and basic graphics. The 25 W TDP suggests a thin-and-light chassis with good battery life, which is ideal for carrying between classes or meetings.

Small business workstations that run CPU-intensive applications like accounting software, inventory management, or custom database tools will perform well. The PassMark multithread score of 28545 and data encryption score of 21291 indicate the CPU can handle business workloads without breaking a sweat. The GPU is adequate for dual-monitor setups and office graphics.

Build Overview — what this CPU+GPU pairing is, its class (desktop/laptop from buildClass), and overall tier from the percentiles

This is a laptop build (buildClass: laptop) pairing the Intel Core Ultra 5 336H with the Intel Arc A350M. The CPU is a 16-core, 16-thread Panther Lake-H part with a 25 W TDP, while the GPU is a 25 W Alchemist mobile part with 4 GB GDDR6. Both components are designed for efficiency, with the CPU being the clear performance leader.

The combined percentile is 77, which places this system in the upper-middle tier of all tested configurations. The CPU's 84th percentile is the primary driver, while the GPU's 70th percentile is the limiting factor. This is not a high-end gaming system, but it is a capable all-around laptop that excels at CPU-bound tasks.

The pairing is interesting because it is unbalanced: the CPU is significantly stronger than the GPU. This makes sense for a laptop where the CPU handles most workloads and the GPU provides occasional acceleration. The production status of the CPU is Active, meaning it is a current part, while the GPU is end-of-life, suggesting the A350M is a legacy component that is being phased out.

FAQ

Q: What is the combined performance percentile of this build?

A: The combined percentile is 77, meaning it outperforms 77% of all tested configurations.

Q: How does the CPU compare to the Intel Core i7-13700HX?

A: The Core Ultra 5 336H has an average benchmark score of 34485, while the Core i7-13700HX scores 34554, a difference of 0.2% in favor of the i7.

Q: Is the GPU capable of ray tracing?

A: Yes, the Intel Arc A350M has 6 RT cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), which includes ray tracing features.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of the GPU?

A: The GPU has a memory bandwidth of 112.0 GB/s, using 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus.

Q: Can the CPU handle video editing?

A: Yes, the CPU's PassMark floating-point score of 82415 and Cinebench R23 multicore score of 23991 indicate it can handle video editing workloads, though the GPU's 4 GB VRAM may limit heavy effects.

Q: Is there measured FPS data for this CPU+GPU combination?

A: No, there is no measured FPS data for this exact combination; all gaming performance discussion is estimated from the benchmark scores.

Q: What is the process node for the CPU?

A: The CPU is built on Intel's 3 nm process, while the GPU is built on TSMC's 6 nm process.

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 5 336H + Intel Arc A350M

Apex Performer

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core Ultra 5 336H

Intel Arc A350M

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

GPU Analysis — VRAM, bandwidth, clocks, RT/tensor hardware, what the benchmark scores mean for rendering

Upgrade Path and Platform — socket, memory support, PCIe, PSU headroom from suggestedPsu/tdp, what a sensible next upgrade looks like

CPU Analysis — cores, clocks, architecture, what the benchmark scores mean for real workloads

Balance and Bottleneck — which component limits which workload, using percentiles and FPS scaling as evidence

Benchmark Performance — exact CPU and GPU scores, percentile positions, and what the combined picture is

Usage Scenarios — grounded in the scores: high-refresh gaming, streaming, video editing, 3D rendering, software development, student and office work. One short paragraph per scenario, citing the numbers that support the verdict

Who Should Build It — target users and industries (gamers at specific resolutions, content creators, developers, students, small business workstations) tied strictly to the measured performance

Build Overview — what this CPU+GPU pairing is, its class (desktop/laptop from buildClass), and overall tier from the percentiles

FAQ

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