SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 7 164U + 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)

▼

88 Score

Top 12% Ranking

88 / 100

HIGH-END

Power Build

Top 12% of systems. Excellent for 1440p Ultra or 4K High gaming.

1440p Ultra4K High

System Balance Analysis

CPU vs GPU performance ratio

Well Balanced

CPU

83%

GPU

93%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 7 164U

17,074 Benchmark Score

Top 17% 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

Strong Performance

Excellent for 1440p gaming. Most games will run at high/ultra settings smoothly.

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 7 164U and Intel Arc A370M form a mobile pairing that targets efficiency and modest graphics capability, but the data shows this is not a high-performance gaming combination. No measured FPS rows exist for this exact CPU+GPU pairing in the FACT PACK, so all frame-rate discussion below is estimated from the benchmark scores, not from direct testing.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 7 164U is a 12-core, 14-thread processor built on Intel’s Meteor Lake architecture, fabricated on a 7 nm process. Its base clock is 1100.00 MHz, with a boost clock of 4.80 GHz, and it carries a TDP of just 9 watts—an extremely low power envelope that speaks to its intended role in thin-and-light laptops rather than performance-heavy desktops. The chip’s cache hierarchy includes 112 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache, which is modest for a 12-core part but consistent with a low-power mobile design.

Benchmark results reveal a processor that punches above its wattage in some areas but struggles in others. In Cinebench R23, the multicore score of 8766 and single-core score of 1590 indicate a chip that can handle everyday productivity tasks and light threaded workloads, but it will not compete with higher-TDP mobile or desktop parts. The Passmark multithread score of 13296 and single-thread score of 2996 place it in a mid-range tier. For real workloads, this means the 164U can breeze through web browsing, office suites, and coding sessions, but sustained all-core rendering or heavy compilation will show its limitations. The integer math score of 50387 and floating-point score of 33581 suggest reasonable number-crunching for a 9-watt chip, while the data compression score of 137133 points to solid file-handling performance.

The CPU’s percentile ranking against all CPUs is 71, meaning it outperforms roughly 71% of the processors in the benchmark database. Its average benchmark score of 17074 places it in close company with several very different parts: the AMD EPYC 7573X (average score 17070, deltaPct 0), the Intel Core i5-11400 (17067, 0), the AMD Ryzen 5 3600 (17035, 0.2% ahead), and the AMD EPYC 7H12 (17120, 0.3% behind). This is a striking grouping because it shows the 164U’s average score is statistically indistinguishable from a desktop gaming CPU like the Ryzen 5 3600 and a server part like the EPYC 7H12. However, the 164U achieves this parity at a fraction of the power draw, which is the defining characteristic of this chip.

Balance and Bottleneck

The balance between the Intel Core Ultra 7 164U and the Intel Arc A370M is heavily skewed by the CPU’s ultra-low 9-watt TDP. The GPU, with its 35-watt TDP, is more power-hungry than the CPU, which is unusual in a laptop pairing—typically the processor draws more. This indicates the A370M is likely the performance ceiling for graphics, while the CPU’s low power limit will constrain sustained CPU-bound workloads.

Benchmark percentiles show the CPU at the 71st percentile, while the GPU sits at the 74th percentile among all GPUs. These similar percentile positions suggest neither component is dramatically stronger than the other in their respective categories, but the nature of the workloads matters. For CPU-bound tasks like data encryption (Passmark score 8838), the 164U’s modest single-thread performance (Cinebench R23 single-core 1590) will be the limiting factor. For GPU-bound tasks like OpenCL compute (Geekbench OpenCL score 29676), the A370M’s relatively strong showing for its class suggests it can keep pace with the CPU in mixed workloads.

The lack of measured FPS data means we cannot confirm exact bottleneck behavior in games, but the benchmark scores imply that in most gaming scenarios, the GPU will be the primary constraint. The A370M’s 4 GB VRAM and 64-bit memory bus are entry-level specifications, while the CPU’s 12 cores and 14 threads are more than adequate for feeding frames to a GPU of this class. In CPU-heavy simulations or physics calculations, the Passmark physics score of 918 is low, indicating that the CPU could become the bottleneck in those specific workloads. The data suggests a balanced pairing for light tasks, but for gaming, the GPU’s limitations will dominate.

Benchmark Performance

The Intel Core Ultra 7 164U delivers an average benchmark score of 17074, placing it in the 71st percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals in the database are the AMD EPYC 7573X (17070, deltaPct 0), Intel Core i5-11400 (17067, 0), AMD Ryzen 5 3600 (17035, 0.2% ahead), and AMD EPYC 7H12 (17120, 0.3% behind). These deltaPct values show the 164U is essentially tied with all four rivals—differences of less than one percent are within noise. This is remarkable because the 164U achieves this with a 9-watt TDP, whereas the Ryzen 5 3600 is a 65-watt desktop part and the EPYC parts are server processors with much higher power envelopes.

The Intel Arc A370M, meanwhile, posts an average benchmark score of 29175, placing it in the 74th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH (29197, deltaPct -0.1, meaning the A370M is 0.1% behind), the AMD FirePro W8000 (29211, -0.1), the AMD Radeon RX 470 (28996, 0.6% ahead), and the AMD Radeon RX 6800M (28874, 1% ahead). The last one is notable: the RX 6800M is a high-end laptop GPU, yet the A370M’s average benchmark score is 1% higher, which likely reflects the specific benchmark mix (OpenCL and Vulkan) rather than real-world gaming parity.

The combined picture shows a laptop pairing where both components sit in the mid-70th percentile range. The combined percentile for this build is 73, which is a reasonable indicator of overall capability. However, the data is unmeasured for gaming—there are no measured FPS rows for this combination—so the scores above are synthetic benchmarks that may not translate directly to frame rates.

Who Should Build It

The Intel Core Ultra 7 164U and Intel Arc A370M pairing is aimed at users who prioritize portability and efficiency over raw performance. The 9-watt CPU TDP and the GPU’s 35-watt TDP suggest a thin-and-light laptop design that can run on battery for extended periods. Students and office workers will find the CPU’s Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1590 and Passmark single-thread score of 2996 more than sufficient for document editing, spreadsheet work, and web-based applications. The data compression score of 137133 indicates that file archiving and extraction tasks will proceed quickly.

Content creators who work with light photo editing or casual video editing may find this pairing workable, but the GPU’s 4 GB VRAM and 112.0 GB/s bandwidth will limit complex effects or high-resolution timelines. Software developers can benefit from the 12 cores and 14 threads for compiling small-to-medium projects, and the Passmark integer math score of 50387 shows solid performance for algorithmic work. However, developers working with large codebases or running multiple virtual machines should look elsewhere, as the low TDP will throttle sustained loads.

Gamers at 1080p with low-to-medium settings and older titles may find the A370M acceptable, but the lack of measured FPS data means performance is speculative. The GPU’s percentile rank of 74 suggests it can handle esports titles and less demanding games, but the 4 GB VRAM will be a hard limit for modern AAA games with high-resolution textures. Small business workstations that run accounting software, inventory management, or customer relationship management tools will find this pairing more than adequate, given the CPU’s strong single-thread performance and the GPU’s ability to accelerate basic graphics tasks.

GPU Analysis

The Intel Arc A370M is built on the Xe-HPG architecture with the DG2-128 chip, fabricated by TSMC on a 6 nm process. The chip contains 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 45.9M per mm². The GPU has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, providing 112.0 GB/s of bandwidth—this is a narrow bus that will limit memory-intensive workloads like high-resolution texture streaming. The base clock is 1550 MHz with a boost clock of 2050 MHz, while the memory runs at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective).

Compute resources include 1024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 32 raster operation units. The GPU also features 8 ray tracing cores, which is notable for an entry-level mobile part, though the low overall compute throughput means ray tracing performance will be limited. The pixel rate is 65.60 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 131.2 GTexel/s, figures that are consistent with a 35-watt mobile GPU. FP32 performance is 4.198 TFLOPS, with FP16 at 8.397 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), indicating that the GPU can accelerate workloads that use reduced precision.

Geekbench OpenCL score of 29676 and Vulkan score of 28673 show that the A370M performs well in synthetic compute tests. Its percentile rank of 74 places it above the median GPU, and its average score of 29175 is within 1% of the AMD Radeon RX 6800M, a much higher-tier part in the same database. This is likely because the Geekbench tests favor the A370M’s architecture in compute tasks, but real-world gaming relies on rasterization and memory bandwidth, where the 64-bit bus and 4 GB VRAM will be significant drawbacks. For rendering tasks, the 8 RT cores can accelerate basic ray-traced effects in compatible applications, but the 4.198 TFLOPS of FP32 performance will not handle complex scenes.

FAQ

Q: Does the Intel Core Ultra 7 164U have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, it includes Arc Xe-LPG 64EU integrated graphics, which can handle basic display output and light graphics tasks without the discrete GPU.

Q: What is the TDP of the CPU and GPU?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 164U has a TDP of 9 watts, while the Intel Arc A370M has a TDP of 35 watts.

Q: How much VRAM does the Intel Arc A370M have?

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

Q: What is the combined percentile for this build?

A: The combined percentile for the Intel Core Ultra 7 164U and Intel Arc A370M pairing is 73.

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

A: No, the FACT PACK contains no measured FPS rows for this exact combination, so frame-rate performance is estimated from benchmark scores.

Q: What socket does the Intel Core Ultra 7 164U use?

A: It uses Intel BGA 2551, which is a soldered mobile socket, meaning the CPU is not upgradeable.

Q: Does the GPU support DirectX 12 Ultimate?

A: Yes, the Intel Arc A370M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), along with OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The Intel Core Ultra 7 164U is soldered to the motherboard via the Intel BGA 2551 socket, meaning there is no CPU upgrade path—the processor is permanently attached. The system uses DDR5 memory with dual-channel support, but the FACT PACK notes that memory support depends on the motherboard, so the maximum capacity and speed will vary by laptop model. The CPU supports PCIe Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only), which provides adequate bandwidth for the Arc A370M’s PCIe 4.0 x8 interface.

The GPU has a TDP of 35 watts, and the CPU has a TDP of 9 watts, for a combined thermal envelope of 44 watts. There is no suggested PSU value in the FACT PACK, but this is a laptop build, so power delivery is handled by the system’s battery and charger rather than a desktop PSU. The GPU’s production status is end-of-life, meaning Intel has ceased production of the A370M, so future laptop models will not feature this GPU. The CPU, however, is still marked as active production.

A sensible next upgrade for this platform would require a new laptop entirely, since both the CPU and GPU are non-removable. Users seeking more graphics performance would need to look at systems with higher-TDP GPUs, while those needing more CPU throughput would require a processor with a higher TDP than 9 watts. The PCIe Gen 4 x8 connection for the GPU is sufficient for this class of graphics card, but any future discrete GPU would likely demand a wider bus or newer PCIe standard.

Build Overview

This build pairs the Intel Core Ultra 7 164U with the Intel Arc A370M in a laptop form factor, as indicated by the buildClass field. The CPU is a 12-core, 14-thread Meteor Lake part with a 9-watt TDP, positioned in the 71st percentile of all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 17074. The GPU is an Arc A370M with 4 GB VRAM, 1024 shading units, and 8 RT cores, sitting in the 74th percentile of all GPUs with an average benchmark score of 29175.

The combined percentile of 73 places this pairing in the upper-midrange of the database, but this number masks the significant power efficiency advantage. The CPU matches the average benchmark scores of desktop parts like the Intel Core i5-11400 and AMD Ryzen 5 3600 while consuming a fraction of the power. The GPU similarly matches or exceeds the average scores of GPUs like the AMD Radeon RX 470 and even the RX 6800M in synthetic compute tests, though real-world gaming will be constrained by the 4 GB VRAM and 64-bit memory bus.

This is not a gaming laptop in the traditional sense; it is an ultraportable with discrete graphics that can handle light gaming and accelerated compute tasks. The overall tier from the percentiles is midrange, with the CPU and GPU both performing near the 71-74th percentile marks. The lack of measured FPS data means the gaming verdict is tentative, but the synthetic scores suggest a system that is capable but not exceptional.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: The Intel Arc A370M’s 4 GB VRAM and 112.0 GB/s bandwidth will limit high-refresh gaming at 1080p. With a 74th percentile GPU score, esports titles at low settings may approach 60 FPS, but modern AAA games will struggle to maintain high frame rates. The CPU’s single-thread score of 1590 in Cinebench R23 is sufficient to feed the GPU, so the bottleneck will be the graphics card.

Streaming: The CPU’s 12 cores and 14 threads provide enough headroom for software encoding at modest bitrates, but the 9-watt TDP will limit sustained encoding performance. The GPU’s 8 RT cores and 4.198 TFLOPS of FP32 can accelerate some encoding tasks, but the overall streaming experience will be best at 720p or low-bitrate 1080p.

Video editing: The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 8766 and Passmark multithread score of 13296 indicate the CPU can handle 1080p video editing timelines with light effects. The GPU’s 4 GB VRAM will limit timeline previews with heavy color grading or motion graphics, and the 64-bit bus will slow down the transfer of large video buffers.

3D rendering: The CPU’s 12 cores will render scenes in CPU-based renderers like Blender’s Cycles, but the 9-watt TDP means render times will be long. The GPU’s 8 RT cores support hardware-accelerated ray tracing, but the 4.198 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput is low, so GPU rendering will be slow for complex scenes.

Software development: The Passmark integer math score of 50387 and data encryption score of 8838 show solid performance for compilation and cryptographic operations. The 12 cores and 14 threads handle parallel builds well, and the single-thread score of 2996 in Passmark ensures responsive IDE interactions. Developers will find this adequate for small-to-medium projects.

Student and office work: The CPU’s 71st percentile ranking and low 9-watt TDP make this ideal for battery-efficient productivity. The Passmark single-thread score of 2996 and data compression score of 137133 ensure snappy document handling and file operations. The GPU’s 4 GB VRAM is more than enough for office graphics, and the combined 73rd percentile indicates a system that exceeds the requirements for typical student workloads.

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 7 164U + Intel Arc A370M

Power Build

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core Ultra 7 164U

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

Strong Performance

Performance Tiers Explained

Ultimate

High-End

Mid-Range

Entry Level

Legacy

CPU Analysis

Balance and Bottleneck

Benchmark Performance

Who Should Build It

GPU Analysis

FAQ

Upgrade Path and Platform

Build Overview

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