SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 7 165U + 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)

▼

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

84%

GPU

92%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 7 165U

20,249 Benchmark Score

Top 16% 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

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 165U and Intel Arc A350M pairing represents a specific slice of the mobile market: a low-power processor designed for thin-and-light laptops, combined with a discrete entry-level GPU. This analysis examines the benchmark data for this combination, focusing on what the numbers indicate for real-world workloads, platform capabilities, and the balance between the two components. The data shows a system that prioritizes efficiency and everyday responsiveness over raw performance, with the CPU holding a stronger position in the performance percentile ranking than the GPU. All figures cited below are drawn directly from the provided fact pack, and the performance characteristics are interpreted strictly from those values.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 7 165U is a 12-core, 14-thread processor built on the Meteor Lake architecture, manufactured on Intel’s 7 nm process node. Its base clock is 1700 MHz, with a boost clock of 4.90 GHz, and it operates within a 15 W TDP. This is a mobile-class chip designed for power efficiency, and the benchmark scores reflect a processor that handles bursts of activity well but is not intended for sustained heavy workloads. The cache hierarchy includes 112 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and a shared 12 MB of L3 cache. Memory support is dual-channel DDR5, with a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, and the CPU provides 12 PCIe Gen 4 lanes.

Benchmark results show a multicore strength that is competitive with older desktop parts. In Cinebench R23, the CPU scores 10226 points in multicore and 1662 points in single-core. The Geekbench scores are 7329 for multicore and 1450 for single-core. The PassMark multithread score is 17101, with a single-thread score of 3357. The CPU’s average benchmark score is 20249, placing it at the 74th percentile of all CPUs. This percentile position is notable because it places the 165U ahead of a significant majority of processors, despite its low TDP. The nearest rivals are all desktop or server parts: the Intel Core i7-9700K (average score 20271, delta -0.1%), the AMD Ryzen 3 30 (20137, delta 0.6%), the AMD EPYC 7713 (20363, delta -0.6%), and the AMD EPYC 9454P (20422, delta -0.8%). These deltas are all within one percent, meaning the 165U’s aggregate performance is statistically indistinguishable from those much higher-power chips in these specific benchmarks.

For real workloads, the single-core performance is the standout feature. A Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1662 indicates strong responsiveness for everyday tasks like web browsing, office applications, and light coding. The boost clock of 4.90 GHz is high for a 15 W part, and the data suggests that short bursts of single-threaded activity will be handled briskly. The multicore scores are adequate for occasional video encoding or 3D rendering, but the 15 W TDP will limit sustained performance, as thermal and power constraints will cause the clocks to drop over time. The PassMark integer math score of 57785 and floating-point math score of 40775 indicate solid number-crunching capabilities for a mobile chip, while the data encryption score of 11896 and extended instructions score of 10610 show competence in security-related tasks and vectorized code. The random string sorting score of 21258 is reasonable for data processing tasks.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The platform is defined by the socket and memory support. The CPU uses the Intel BGA 2049 socket, which is a soldered, non-upgradeable connection. This is a laptop-class part, and the build class confirms it is a laptop system. The memory support is DDR5, with the note that it depends on the motherboard, meaning the specific capacity and speed will vary by laptop model. The memory bus is dual-channel, and the bandwidth is 89.6 GB/s. The PCIe support is Gen 4 with 12 lanes from the CPU, which is sufficient for a discrete GPU like the Arc A350M, which uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface. The CPU’s integrated graphics are the Arc Xe-LPG 64EU, which provides a fallback display output and basic acceleration if the discrete GPU is not in use.

The TDP for the CPU is 15 W, and the GPU TDP is 25 W. There is no suggested PSU figure in the fact pack, so power supply requirements are not quantified here. However, the combined TDP of 40 W is low, indicating that a modest power adapter is sufficient for this laptop. The production status of the CPU is active, meaning it is still in production, while the GPU is marked as end-of-life. For a sensible next upgrade, the data suggests that a user would need to replace the entire laptop, as the CPU is soldered. The PCIe Gen 4 lanes are sufficient for current storage and GPU options, but the 12-lane allocation means a user cannot add multiple high-bandwidth devices simultaneously. The platform is what it is: a fixed, efficient mobile design with no meaningful upgrade path beyond what is already installed.

Balance and Bottleneck

The balance between the CPU and GPU is uneven, as indicated by their respective percentile positions. The CPU sits at the 74th percentile of all CPUs, while the GPU sits at the 70th percentile of all GPUs. The combined percentile for the build is 72, which is lower than the CPU’s individual percentile, suggesting the GPU pulls the overall score down slightly. For CPU-bound workloads, such as software compilation, spreadsheet calculations, or single-threaded productivity tasks, the 165U’s 74th percentile position means it will not be the limiting factor in most cases. The single-core score of 1662 in Cinebench R23 is competitive with many desktop parts, so tasks that rely on a few fast cores will perform well.

For GPU-bound workloads, such as gaming at high settings or 3D rendering with ray tracing, the Arc A350M will be the primary bottleneck. The GPU’s average benchmark score is 24647, with a Geekbench OpenCL score of 24546 and a Vulkan score of 24747. These scores place it near the AMD Radeon RX 590 (average score 24744, delta -0.4%), the NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile (24763, delta -0.5%), the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT (24442, delta 0.8%), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 (24277, delta 1.5%). All these deltas are within 1.5%, meaning the GPU is comparable to those parts in aggregate benchmarks. In gaming, this means that at lower resolutions and settings, the CPU can keep up, but at higher resolutions or with demanding effects, the GPU’s 4 GB VRAM and 64-bit memory bus will limit frame rates. The CPU’s 74th percentile suggests it is not the bottleneck in most scenarios; the GPU’s lower relative standing indicates it will limit performance in graphically intensive tasks.

Who Should Build It

This is a laptop build, so the target user is someone who needs a portable machine for a mix of everyday and moderately demanding tasks. The CPU’s 74th percentile and the GPU’s 70th percentile suggest a system that can handle a broad range of activities, but not at the highest performance levels. Gamers who play at 1080p with medium settings will find the Arc A350M sufficient for many titles, based on its benchmark parity with the GTX 1630 and RX 590. Content creators who work with photos or light video editing will benefit from the CPU’s strong single-core performance, but the 4 GB GPU memory will limit complex 3D scenes or high-resolution video work. Software developers will appreciate the 12 cores and 14 threads for compilation tasks, as well as the fast single-thread speed for code editing and running local servers. Students and office workers will find this system more than adequate for document creation, web browsing, and spreadsheet analysis, given the CPU’s high percentile ranking. Small business workstations that require portability and moderate compute capability would also fit, as the data shows the CPU can handle typical office workloads without issue. The 74th percentile CPU ranking means this is not a low-end part by any measure, even if it is not a high-performance desktop replacement.

Benchmark Performance

The exact benchmark scores for the CPU are as follows: Cinebench R15 multicore is 1605, single-core is 231; Cinebench R20 multicore is 5943, single-core is 839; Cinebench R23 multicore is 10226, single-core is 1662; Geekbench multicore is 7329, single-core is 1450; PassMark multithread is 17101, single-thread is 3357. The PassMark sub-scores include data compression at 188105, data encryption at 11896, extended instructions at 10610, find prime numbers at 66, floating-point math at 40775, integer math at 57785, physics at 1141, and random string sorting at 21258. The CPU’s average benchmark score is 20249, placing it at the 74th percentile.

The GPU scores are: Geekbench OpenCL at 24546, Geekbench Vulkan at 24747, with an average benchmark score of 24647, placing it at the 70th percentile. The combined picture is a system where the CPU outperforms its rivals in aggregate by a slight margin, as shown by the nearest rivals’ deltas. The CPU is within 0.8% of the AMD Ryzen 3 30, and within 0.1% of the Intel Core i7-9700K, meaning it trades blows with those parts. The GPU is within 1.5% of the GTX 1630, indicating very similar performance. The CPU’s 74th percentile versus the GPU’s 70th percentile shows a small gap, but both are solidly mid-range. The combined percentile of 72 reflects a balanced system where neither component is drastically weaker than the other, though the CPU is the stronger of the two.

Gaming Performance

There are no measured FPS rows for this exact combination in the fact pack. The dataIsMeasured field is false, so all FPS figures below are estimates derived from the benchmark scores. The GPU’s performance is comparable to the AMD Radeon RX 590 and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630, based on the average benchmark score deltas. Those are older desktop cards that can handle 1080p gaming at medium to high settings in many titles, but they struggle with modern AAA games at high settings or with ray tracing enabled. The Arc A350M has 4 GB of GDDR6 VRAM on a 64-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 112.0 GB/s, which will be a limiting factor for textures and resolution. The GPU’s FP32 performance is 3.379 TFLOPS, and it has 6 ray tracing cores, so it can technically handle ray-traced effects, but the low memory bandwidth will reduce performance. For esports titles like CS:GO or League of Legends, the CPU’s strong single-core score of 1662 in Cinebench R23 suggests frame rates above 60 FPS at 1080p with high settings, as those games are CPU-bound. For more demanding titles like Cyberpunk 2077 or Assassin’s Creed, the 4 GB VRAM and 64-bit bus will likely force lower settings or resolutions to maintain playable frame rates. The GPU’s Vulkan score of 24747 is decent, but it is not a high-end part, so expect medium settings at 1080p for most games, and lower settings for the most demanding releases. These are estimates, not measured data, and actual performance will vary by game and driver optimization.

FAQ

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

A: The combined percentile is 72, which is between the CPU’s individual percentile of 74 and the GPU’s individual percentile of 70.

Q: How does the CPU compare to the Intel Core i7-9700K?

A: The CPU has an average benchmark score of 20249, while the Intel Core i7-9700K has an average score of 20271, resulting in a delta of -0.1%, meaning they are effectively tied.

Q: What is the GPU’s memory size and bus width?

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

Q: Is this a desktop or laptop build?

A: The build class is listed as “laptop,” and the CPU uses the Intel BGA 2049 socket, which is a soldered mobile socket.

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

A: The CPU has a TDP of 15 W, and the GPU has a TDP of 25 W.

Q: Does this system have measured FPS data for games?

A: No, the fact pack contains no measured FPS rows for this combination, so all gaming performance figures are estimates from benchmark scores.

Q: What is the CPU’s architecture and process node?

A: The CPU is based on the Meteor Lake architecture, using a 7 nm process node from Intel.

Build Overview

This build consists of the Intel Core Ultra 7 165U CPU paired with the Intel Arc A350M GPU, in a laptop form factor. The CPU is from the Core Ultra Series 1, with a Meteor Lake architecture, and the GPU is from the Alchemist generation (Arc 3 Mobile), using the Xe-HPG architecture. The CPU’s average benchmark score of 20249 places it at the 74th percentile of all CPUs, while the GPU’s average score of 24647 places it at the 70th percentile of all GPUs. The combined percentile is 72. This places the system in the upper-mid range of laptop performance, with the CPU being the stronger component. The GPU is comparable to desktop parts like the RX 590 and GTX 1630, making it suitable for 1080p gaming at medium settings. The CPU’s 12 cores and 14 threads, with a boost clock of 4.90 GHz, provide strong single-thread and moderate multi-thread performance for a 15 W part. This is not a high-end gaming laptop, but it is a capable all-rounder for productivity and light gaming.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: This scenario is limited by the GPU. The Arc A350M’s 4 GB VRAM and 64-bit bus will not sustain high frame rates at 1080p in demanding titles. For esports games, the CPU’s single-core score of 1662 in Cinebench R23 can drive frame rates above 144 FPS in some titles, but the GPU will cap performance in most cases. Expect 60-90 FPS in esports at 1080p low-to-medium settings, and 30-60 FPS in AAA games at medium settings, based on the GPU’s parity with the GTX 1630.

Streaming: The CPU’s 12 cores and 14 threads, with a PassMark multithread score of 17101, can handle software encoding for streaming, though the 15 W TDP will limit sustained load. The GPU does not have a dedicated encoder listed in the fact pack, so streaming will rely on the CPU. This is feasible for 720p or 1080p streams, but the CPU’s performance will degrade if both gaming and encoding run simultaneously, given the power constraints.

Video editing: The CPU’s Cinebench R23 multicore score of 10226 is adequate for 1080p video editing, with the single-core score of 1662 ensuring a responsive timeline. The GPU’s 4 GB VRAM is sufficient for basic effects and color grading, but large 4K projects will exceed the memory, causing slowdowns. The PassMark floating-point math score of 40775 supports this assessment.

3D rendering: This is a mixed scenario. The CPU’s multicore score of 10226 in Cinebench R23 is decent for CPU-based rendering, but the 15 W TDP means render times will be longer than a desktop part with the same score. The GPU’s 3.379 TFLOPS FP32 performance and 6 ray tracing cores can accelerate some workloads, but the 4 GB VRAM limits scene complexity. The GPU’s Geekbench OpenCL score of 24546 shows it is not a primary rendering tool.

Software development: The CPU is well-suited for this. The 12 cores and 14 threads accelerate compilation, and the single-core score of 1662 ensures fast IDE responsiveness. The PassMark integer math score of 57785 indicates strong performance for typical developer workloads. The 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth is sufficient for most build processes.

Student and office work: This is the strongest scenario. The CPU’s 74th percentile ranking means it outperforms most CPUs in general tasks. The single-core score of 1662 in Cinebench R23 handles web browsers, office suites, and PDF viewers with ease. The 15 W TDP ensures long battery life, and the integrated Arc Xe-LPG 64EU provides a fallback for display output. The GPU is unnecessary for this workload but present for occasional light gaming.

GPU Analysis

The Intel Arc A350M is a mobile GPU based on the Xe-HPG architecture, using the DG2-128 chip manufactured on a 6 nm process from TSMC. It has 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 24 raster output units. The GPU includes 6 ray tracing cores, though the tensor cores are listed as null, meaning there is no dedicated AI hardware in the fact pack. The clock speeds are a base of 1150 MHz and a boost of 2200 MHz, with memory running at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). The memory configuration is 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 112.0 GB/s. The pixel rate is 52.80 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 105.6 GTexel/s. The FP32 performance is 3.379 TFLOPS, and FP16 is 6.758 TFLOPS (2:1). The TDP is 25 W, and the bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x8.

Benchmark scores show a Geekbench OpenCL score of 24546 and a Vulkan score of 24747, with an average benchmark score of 24647. This places the GPU at the 70th percentile of all GPUs. The nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon RX 590 (average score 24744, delta -0.4%), the NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile (24763, delta -0.5%), the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT (24442, delta 0.8%), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 (24277, delta 1.5%). These deltas indicate the Arc A350M is essentially equivalent to those parts in aggregate performance. For rendering, the 64-bit memory bus is the primary limitation, as it halves the bandwidth compared to wider-bus GPUs. The 4 GB VRAM is also restrictive for modern games and 3D applications that require more memory for high-resolution textures. The ray tracing cores are present, but the low FP32 throughput and memory bandwidth mean ray-traced effects will run at reduced performance. The Vulkan score of 24747 is solid, suggesting good driver support for that API, but the lack of tensor cores means no DLSS-like upscaling technology is available from the fact pack. Overall, this is an entry-level discrete GPU, capable of 1080p gaming at medium settings, but not suited for high-end rendering or high-refresh gaming.

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 7 165U + Intel Arc A350M

Power Build

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core Ultra 7 165U

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

Strong Performance

Performance Tiers Explained

Ultimate

High-End

Mid-Range

Entry Level

Legacy

CPU Analysis

Upgrade Path and Platform

Balance and Bottleneck

Who Should Build It

Benchmark Performance

Gaming Performance

FAQ

Build Overview

Usage Scenarios

GPU Analysis

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