SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 5 338H + Intel Arc A370M

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)

▼

92 Score

Top 8% Ranking

92 / 100

ULTIMATE READY

Apex Performer

Top 8% 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

90%

GPU

93%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 5 338H

33,989 Benchmark Score

Top 10% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

Intel Arc A370M

29,175 Benchmark Score

Top 7% 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 338H and Intel Arc A370M form a laptop-class pairing that delivers a balanced, if not class-leading, mobile experience. The data places this combination at the 79th percentile overall, indicating a system that outperforms the majority of configurations in the database while remaining accessible in its performance tier. This analysis draws exclusively on the provided benchmark data to interpret the pairing's strengths, limitations, and ideal use cases.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The foundation of this build is the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H, a mobile processor using the Intel BGA 2540 socket. This is a soldered platform, meaning the CPU is not a user-upgradeable component in the traditional sense; the upgrade path for this system is therefore tied to the platform's other features rather than the processor socket itself. The CPU supports LPDDR5X memory over a Dual-channel bus, delivering a memory bandwidth of 136.5 GB/s. This memory configuration is fast enough to feed the processor's 12 cores and the integrated Arc B370 graphics without creating an obvious bandwidth bottleneck.

For expansion, the CPU provides PCIe Gen 5 with 4 Lanes (CPU only). This is a modest allocation of high-speed lanes, suitable for a primary NVMe SSD but not for multiple high-bandwidth expansion cards. The GPU, an Intel Arc A370M, connects via a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, which is adequate for its class and doesn't present a meaningful limitation for its performance envelope. The system's power delivery is characterized by a low CPU TDP of 25 W and a GPU TDP of 35 W. Without a suggested PSU figure in the data, the combined thermal and power footprint is clearly modest, making this an efficient platform that should not require an oversized power adapter for a laptop chassis.

The most sensible next upgrade for a user on this platform is not the processor or discrete GPU, which are typically fixed in mobile designs, but rather the system's memory and storage. Since the CPU's memory controller is limited to LPDDR5X, ensuring the system is configured with the maximum supported capacity is the most direct performance lever. Similarly, a fast PCIe Gen 5 SSD would take full advantage of the 4 lanes available from the CPU, reducing load times and improving system responsiveness. The iGPU, Arc B370, is present in the package, but the discrete Arc A370M is the primary graphics solution; thus, the upgrade path is about maximizing the supporting cast around a fixed CPU and GPU duo.

Balance and Bottleneck

The balance between the Core Ultra 5 338H and the Arc A370M is a study in complementary performance ceilings. The CPU's benchmark data shows a strong average score of 33989, placing it at the 84th percentile among all CPUs. This indicates a processor with substantial headroom for compute-heavy tasks. The GPU, with an average benchmark score of 29175, sits at the 74th percentile among all GPUs, a solid but lower standing than its CPU counterpart. This delta suggests that in many mixed workloads, the GPU is likely to be the limiting factor first.

In gaming scenarios, this imbalance is clear. The CPU is capable of high frame generation, but the GPU's 4 GB VRAM and 64-bit memory bus will constrain performance at higher resolutions and detail settings. The data suggests the CPU is the stronger component; therefore, in a gaming workload, the Arc A370M will hit its performance ceiling before the CPU is fully taxed. This is not a negative critique, but rather a definition of the system's character: it is a CPU-forward platform where the GPU provides a competent, entry-level graphics experience.

For productivity tasks like video encoding or 3D rendering, the balance shifts. The CPU's strong multi-threaded scores (e.g., 16331 in Cinebench R23 multicore) will dominate the workload, while the GPU's compute capabilities ( 4.198 TFLOPS FP32) can accelerate specific tasks like OpenCL-based effects. Here, the bottleneck is less pronounced, as the CPU can take the lead. The PassMark data supports this, with strong CPU scores in integer math (64934) and floating-point math (84067), indicating the processor is well-suited for complex calculations. The system is balanced for productivity, where the CPU leads, but gaming performance will be capped by the GPU's specifications.

Benchmark Performance

The Core Ultra 5 338H delivers a robust benchmark profile. In Cinebench R23, it scores 16331 points in the multicore test and 2044 points in the single-core test. These figures point to a processor that handles both heavily threaded workloads and responsive single-threaded tasks with equal aplomb. The R20 results mirror this, with a multicore score of 10213 and a single-core score of 1441. Further validating its position, the CPU's average benchmark score of 33989 places it directly in competition with the Intel Core Ultra 7 165H, which averages 34083, a negligible -0.3% difference. It also edges out the Intel Core i7-12800HX, which scores 33875, by 0.3%.

The GPU's benchmark performance is anchored by its Geekbench results. It scores 29676 in OpenCL and 28673 in Vulkan, averaging 29175 overall. This places it in the same performance tier as the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH (29197, -0.1% delta) and the AMD Radeon RX 470 (28996, 0.6% delta). The data shows the Arc A370M is a capable entry-level discrete GPU, but its scores are significantly lower than the CPU's, reinforcing the notion that the processor is the star of this show.

The combined picture is one of a system that excels at CPU-intensive tasks while providing competent, mid-tier graphics. The CPU's performance is exceptional for its class, sitting just below the top-tier mobile chips, while the GPU performs admirably for its segment. The combinedPercentile of 79 reflects this synergy, placing the entire platform well above the median performance of all builds in the database.

Who Should Build It

This platform is ideally suited for users who prioritize CPU performance in a mobile form factor. Gamers playing at 1080p with medium settings will find the Arc A370M sufficient for many titles, but they should be aware that the GPU is the limiting factor. The CPU's high single-thread score of 2044 in Cinebench R23 ensures fast game logic and physics calculations, but the GPU's 4 GB VRAM and 112.0 GB/s bandwidth will restrict texture quality and resolution.

Content creators, particularly those working with video editing or software development, will benefit most from this pairing. The CPU's 12 cores and 18 MB of shared L3 cache provide substantial multi-threaded power for rendering timelines or compiling code. The PassMark data compression score of 276539 and encryption score of 21367 further indicate strong performance in data-intensive tasks. For students and small business workstations, this system offers a compelling mix of responsiveness for office applications and the capability to handle occasional heavier compute jobs, such as photo editing or running virtual machines, without the need for a high-power desktop setup.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H is a 12-core, 12-thread processor based on the Panther Lake architecture, built on Intel's 3 nm process node. It operates with a base clock of 1.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz, a wide frequency range that allows for both efficient idle operation and bursty high-performance tasks. The cache hierarchy is substantial, with 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. This large cache pool helps keep data close to the cores, reducing latency and improving throughput in complex workloads.

The benchmark scores confirm the processor's strength. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 16331 is a strong indicator of rendering and scientific computing capability. The single-core score of 2044 is equally important, ensuring that legacy applications and lightly-threaded tasks remain snappy. The PassMark results paint a detailed picture: a high integer math score of 64934 suggests strong general-purpose processing, while the floating-point math score of 84067 indicates robust scientific and engineering calculations. The data encryption score of 21367 and extended instructions score of 23906 highlight its ability to handle security and SIMD workloads effectively.

With a TDP of 25 W, this is a highly efficient processor, making it suitable for thin-and-light laptops where thermal management is a challenge. Its performance, at -0.3% compared to the Intel Core Ultra 7 165H, shows that it offers near-top-tier performance without the associated higher power draw. For real workloads, this translates to a laptop that can sustain high clock speeds under load and deliver desktop-like responsiveness in a portable package.

GPU Analysis

The Intel Arc A370M is a discrete mobile GPU built on the Xe-HPG architecture, specifically the Alchemist generation for Arc 3 Mobile. It is manufactured on a 6 nm process at TSMC, with a die size of 157 mm² containing 7,200 million transistors. The GPU is equipped with 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 112.0 GB/s. This memory configuration is the most significant constraint on performance, limiting the resolution and texture detail the GPU can handle smoothly.

Clock speeds are set at 1550 MHz base and 2050 MHz boost, with memory running at 1750 MHz ( 14 Gbps effective). The GPU has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, alongside 8 dedicated ray tracing cores. This hardware enables a pixel rate of 65.60 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 131.2 GTexel/s. The compute power is rated at 4.198 TFLOPS for FP32 and 8.397 TFLOPS for FP16 (2:1). It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) , OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, ensuring compatibility with modern game APIs.

In benchmark results, the GPU's Geekbench OpenCL score of 29676 and Vulkan score of 28673 place it in a competitive position. It is -0.1% behind the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH and 1% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6800M, though those deltas are small and could be within run-to-run variance. For rendering, the FP32 performance is sufficient for basic 3D modeling and video effects, though the 4 GB VRAM will be a limiting factor for complex scenes or high-resolution textures. The ray tracing cores are present, but their performance is constrained by the overall GPU size, making ray-traced effects a novelty rather than a standard feature at playable frame rates.

FAQ

Q: What is the overall performance tier of this CPU and GPU combination?

A: The platform achieves a combinedPercentile of 79, placing it in the upper tier of all systems in the database. The CPU is at the 84th percentile, while the GPU is at the 74th percentile.

Q: How does the Core Ultra 5 338H compare to its closest rivals?

A: The CPU's average benchmark score is 33989. This is -0.3% behind the Intel Core Ultra 7 165H ( 34083 ) and 0.3% ahead of the Intel Core i7-12800HX ( 33875 ).

Q: What is the memory bandwidth and capacity of the GPU?

A: The Arc A370M has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 112.0 GB/s.

Q: Does the CPU support ECC memory?

A: No, the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H does not support ECC memory.

Q: What are the key architectural details of the CPU?

A: It is based on the Panther Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process node, with 12 cores and 12 threads. It has a base clock of 1.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz.

Q: What is the expected gaming performance, given the absence of measured FPS data?

A: Since no measured FPS data exists for this exact combination, all gaming performance figures are estimates. The CPU's strong single-thread performance suggests high frame rates in CPU-bound scenarios, but the GPU's 4 GB VRAM and 64-bit bus will limit settings and resolution. Expect playable frame rates at 1080p with medium details, but not high or ultra settings.

Q: What is the production status of the GPU?

A: The Intel Arc A370M is listed as End-of-life, with a release date of 2022-03-29.

Build Overview

This build is a laptop-class system pairing the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H processor with the Intel Arc A370M discrete GPU. The CPU, a 12-core Panther Lake part, is the dominant component, delivering performance that rivals the Intel Core Ultra 7 165H. The GPU, an Alchemist-based Arc 3 Mobile chip, provides an entry-level discrete graphics experience, sufficient for 1080p gaming at moderate settings and light creative work. The combined benchmark data places this system at the 79th percentile overall, signifying a well-above-average configuration. It is a CPU-first platform, ideal for users who need strong multi-threaded processing power in a portable, power-efficient package.

Gaming Performance

No measured FPS data exists for this exact CPU+GPU combination. The following frame rate expectations are estimated purely from the benchmark scores and component specifications, and should be treated as qualitative indicators rather than precise figures.

The gaming potential of this system is dictated by the balance between the strong CPU and the modest GPU. The Core Ultra 5 338H’s high single-core performance (Cinebench R23 score of 2044) ensures that game logic and physics calculations are handled with ease, preventing the CPU from being a bottleneck at lower resolutions. However, the Arc A370M’s hardware limits—specifically its 4 GB VRAM and 112.0 GB/s memory bandwidth—will cap the visual experience.

At 1080p with low-to-medium settings, the GPU’s 4.198 TFLOPS of FP32 compute is adequate for many esports titles and older AAA games, potentially delivering playable frame rates above 60 FPS. For more demanding modern games, the 4 GB VRAM will likely become a constraint, requiring reduced texture quality to avoid stuttering. The GPU’s Vulkan score of 28673 suggests good API utilization, which could benefit DX12 and Vulkan titles. At 1440p, the system would struggle, as the GPU’s bandwidth and memory capacity are not sufficient for high-resolution textures. The general expectation is a system capable of 1080p gaming at medium settings, with the CPU ensuring that frame dips are rare, but the GPU preventing the system from ever reaching high or ultra settings at smooth frame rates.

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 5 338H + Intel Arc A370M

Apex Performer

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core Ultra 5 338H

Intel Arc A370M

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

Upgrade Path and Platform

Balance and Bottleneck

Benchmark Performance

Who Should Build It

CPU Analysis

GPU Analysis

FAQ

Build Overview

Gaming Performance

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