SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX + 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)

▼

94 Score

Top 6% Ranking

94 / 100

ULTIMATE READY

Apex Performer

Top 6% 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

92%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX

62,738 Benchmark Score

Top 4% 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

# Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX + Intel Arc A350M: A Mixed-Mobile Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX pairs a high-end 20-core Arrow Lake-HX processor with an entry-level Arc A350M discrete GPU, creating a laptop configuration with a stark performance disparity between CPU and graphics. This combination targets users who prioritize multi-threaded compute over gaming frame rates, as the data indicates a processor that ranks in the 93rd percentile among all CPUs, while the GPU sits in the 70th percentile among all GPUs. The following analysis breaks down what this pairing means for real-world workloads, upgrade potential, and usage scenarios.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The platform foundation for this configuration is the Intel BGA 2114 socket, which is a mobile-specific package. This means the Core Ultra 7 255HX is soldered to the motherboard, eliminating any possibility of a user-level CPU swap. The "upgrade path" here is therefore limited to what the laptop chassis allows: memory, storage, and potentially the GPU if the laptop uses a proprietary MXM or similar module, though the Arc A350M is listed as an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with slot width "IGP," suggesting it may be soldered as well.

Memory support is DDR5 with a dual-channel bus, providing a theoretical bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. This is a standard configuration for modern mobile platforms, and the bandwidth is sufficient to feed the 20-core CPU without creating a memory bottleneck in most workloads. ECC memory is not supported, which positions this platform firmly in the consumer and prosumer segment rather than enterprise mission-critical use. The CPU provides PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes, which is generous for a mobile part; this allows for a fast NVMe SSD and a discrete GPU to run at full bandwidth simultaneously. However, the Arc A350M itself uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, so the Gen 5 lanes are primarily for storage expansion and future peripherals.

Regarding power delivery, the CPU has a 55 W TDP, and the GPU has a 25 W TDP. Combined, these draw roughly 80 W of power for the core components, before accounting for memory, storage, and display. This is a relatively modest total for a laptop with a high-core-count CPU, meaning a 90 W or 100 W power adapter could suffice for light loads, but sustained multi-threaded CPU workloads alongside GPU activity would benefit from a higher-capacity adapter. The FACT PACK does not list a suggested PSU for the GPU, which is typical for mobile parts where the laptop's power brick and thermal solution dictate actual headroom. A sensible "next upgrade" for a user in this ecosystem is not a new CPU but rather maximizing the memory to the highest supported DDR5 speed and capacity, and ensuring the storage is PCIe Gen 5 to leverage the CPU's lane allocation.

Benchmark Performance

The Core Ultra 7 255HX delivers strong multi-threaded results across Cinebench versions. In Cinebench R23, the multi-core score is 32,612 points, while the single-core score is 2,163 points. For context, the CPU's average benchmark score across all tests is 62,738, which places it at the 93rd percentile of all CPUs. The nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185, scores 62,839, a delta of -0.2%, meaning the Intel part is statistically tied with that AMD chip. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX, a direct sibling, scores 63,173, putting the 255HX at -0.7% behind. This indicates that the 255HX is essentially at parity with its closest competitors, with differences well within a single percentage point.

The GPU side is more modest. The Intel Arc A350M achieves a Geekbench OpenCL score of 24,546 and a Vulkan score of 24,747, with an average benchmark score of 24,647. This places it at the 70th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 590, scores 24,744, a delta of -0.4%, while the NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile scores 24,763, a delta of -0.5%. The Arc A350M is also within 0.8% of the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT. These tight deltas suggest that the Arc A350M performs similarly to a mid-range desktop GPU from a previous generation, but not a modern high-end part.

The combined percentile for this CPU-GPU pair is 82, which reflects a system that is far stronger in CPU-bound tasks than GPU-bound tasks. The data shows a 32,612-point multi-core Cinebench R23 score against a 24,647-point average GPU score; this gap underscores that the processor is the dominant component. In tasks that rely heavily on the GPU, like gaming or 3D rendering with GPU acceleration, this system will likely underperform expectations based on the CPU alone.

GPU Analysis

The Intel Arc A350M is built on the Xe-HPG architecture, specifically the DG2-128 chip, manufactured on a 6 nm process at TSMC. It packs 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 24 raster operation units. The GPU has 6 ray tracing cores, though it lacks dedicated tensor cores; this means AI acceleration relies on the general-purpose shaders. The memory configuration is 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 112.0 GB/s. This is a narrow bus, which limits performance in memory-intensive scenarios like high-resolution textures and compute workloads that spill beyond the 4 GB frame buffer.

Clock speeds are a base of 1150 MHz and a boost of 2200 MHz, with memory clocked at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). The pixel rate is 52.80 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 105.6 GTexel/s. Floating-point performance is 3.379 TFLOPS in FP32 and 6.758 TFLOPS in FP16 (using a 2:1 ratio). These figures position the A350M as an entry-level discrete GPU, roughly comparable to a desktop RX 590 or GTX 1630 based on the nearest rival scores. The GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, meaning it is feature-complete for modern APIs, including hardware ray tracing and mesh shaders.

For rendering workloads, the 3.379 TFLOPS of FP32 performance is adequate for light 3D modeling and basic GPU-accelerated rendering, but it will be slow for complex scenes. The 4 GB VRAM is a significant constraint for modern rendering, as large textures and high-poly models can easily exceed that capacity, forcing the GPU to spill to system memory over the PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, which is slower than the on-card GDDR6. The 112.0 GB/s bandwidth is also a limiting factor; for comparison, the CPU's memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s is nearly as high, suggesting that the GPU is not the primary data mover in this system. The benchmark scores (OpenCL 24,546, Vulkan 24,747) indicate that the GPU is best suited for 1080p gaming at medium settings and light compute tasks, not for professional-grade rendering or high-refresh gaming.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: The Arc A350M is not suited for high-refresh gaming at 1080p with ultra settings. Its 3.379 TFLOPS and 4 GB VRAM will likely produce frame rates well below 100 FPS in most modern titles, and the 70th percentile GPU score places it below the median of discrete GPUs available today. Users seeking 144 Hz or higher refresh rates should look elsewhere.

Streaming: The lack of dedicated tensor cores means that AI-based upscaling (e.g., XeSS) will rely on shader-based shaders, which is less efficient. However, the CPU's 20 cores and 20 threads provide ample headroom for software encoding via the CPU, which can offload the GPU from streaming tasks. The 55 W TDP CPU can handle x264 encoding at reasonable quality, making this a viable laptop for streaming at 1080p60, provided the game itself is not too demanding on the GPU.

Video editing: The CPU's multi-threaded strength shines here. A Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 32,612 means timeline scrubbing, effects rendering, and export tasks that use CPU-based encoding will be fast. The GPU can assist with effects and transitions that are GPU-accelerated, but the 4 GB VRAM may limit the use of large 4K timelines with heavy color grading. The 102.4 GB/s system memory bandwidth helps with large media files.

3D rendering: For CPU-based rendering (e.g., Blender's Cycles with CPU), the 20 cores will deliver strong performance, consistent with the 93rd percentile CPU rank. For GPU-based rendering, the Arc A350M's 3.379 TFLOPS and 6 ray tracing cores provide a modest boost, but the 4 GB VRAM is a hard limit for complex scenes. The GPU will be the bottleneck in hybrid CPU-GPU render pipelines.

Software development: Compilation and code analysis are heavily multi-threaded tasks, and the Core Ultra 7 255HX excels here. The PassMark multi-thread score of 48,234 and integer math score of 127,126 indicate fast code compilation and unit testing. The GPU is largely irrelevant for most development tasks, except for shader compilation or running local ML models, where the 4 GB VRAM is limiting.

Student and office work: This configuration is overkill for typical office tasks (word processing, spreadsheets, web browsing). The single-thread score of 2,163 in Cinebench R23 ensures snappy responsiveness, and the 20-core CPU provides future-proofing for any compute-heavy academic work, such as simulations or data analysis. The Arc A350M is more than adequate for dual 4K displays or light photo editing, but the 4 GB VRAM is not a concern for these tasks.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX is a 20-core, 20-thread processor (no Hyper-Threading) based on the Arrow Lake-HX architecture, built on a 3 nm process at TSMC. It has a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz. The cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3 cache. The chip contains 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. The CPU's memory support is DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and a maximum bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. It also includes integrated graphics in the form of Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units, which can serve as a fallback if the discrete GPU is disabled or for power-saving modes.

The benchmark data shows a processor that is competitive with the best mobile CPUs. In Cinebench R20, the multi-core score is 17,187, and in R15, it is 4,916. Single-core scores are 2,426 (R20) and 327 (R15), which are strong but not class-leading. The PassMark results reveal specific strengths: data compression scores 515,143, floating-point math scores 160,624, and integer math scores 127,126. The multi-thread score of 48,234 confirms the CPU's parallel processing capability. The 93rd percentile ranking among all CPUs means this is faster than the vast majority of processors on the market, including most desktop parts.

The nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185, scores 62,839 versus the Intel's 62,738, a delta of -0.2%, which is a statistical dead heat. The Intel Core i7-13790F scores 63,080, a delta of -0.5%, and the Core Ultra 7 265HX scores 63,173, a delta of -0.7%. These results suggest that the 255HX is not a performance outlier; it is a well-executed mobile CPU that matches its peers. For real workloads, the 20 cores handle multi-threaded tasks like video encoding, 3D rendering, and code compilation with ease. The 5.20 GHz boost clock ensures that single-threaded tasks, such as legacy applications or database queries, remain responsive. The lack of ECC support is a minor drawback for professional workstations, but for consumer and prosumer laptops, it is not a concern.

Who Should Build It

This configuration is best suited for users who need heavy CPU compute in a laptop but do not require high-end graphics. The target audience includes software developers who compile large codebases, data scientists running simulations or machine learning training on CPU (given the 20 cores and 93rd percentile rank), and video editors who work with 4K footage and rely on CPU-based encoding. For these users, the Arc A350M is a secondary component that handles display output and light GPU acceleration.

Gamers at 1080p with medium settings are a potential audience, but the GPU's 70th percentile score means they should temper expectations. Content creators who use GPU-accelerated effects in Adobe Premiere or After Effects will find the 4 GB VRAM limiting, but the CPU will handle most of the heavy lifting. Students in engineering or science fields who run MATLAB, Python, or CAD software will benefit from the CPU's multi-threaded power. Small business workstations that run accounting software, virtual machines, or database servers will find the 20 cores and 30 MB L3 cache provide excellent responsiveness. The 55 W TDP makes this a moderately power-hungry chip, so thin-and-light laptops may struggle to sustain full performance; this is better suited for a larger chassis with robust cooling.

Balance and Bottleneck

The performance asymmetry between the CPU and GPU is the defining characteristic of this pairing. The CPU ranks at the 93rd percentile, while the GPU ranks at the 70th percentile. In CPU-bound workloads like compilation, rendering (CPU-based), and multi-threaded productivity, the system performs exceptionally well, with Cinebench R23 multi-core at 32,612 points. In GPU-bound workloads like gaming, the Arc A350M's 24,647 average score is the limiting factor, and the CPU will often be idle waiting for the GPU to render frames.

The bottleneck analysis is clear: the GPU is the limiting component in graphics-intensive tasks. For example, in gaming, the CPU's 20 cores and 5.20 GHz boost clock can easily generate frames faster than the GPU can render them, leading to a situation where the CPU utilization is low and the GPU is pegged at 100%. Conversely, in tasks like file compression (PassMark data compression score of 515,143), the GPU is irrelevant, and the CPU is the sole performance driver. The memory bandwidth is also a factor: the CPU's 102.4 GB/s and the GPU's 112.0 GB/s are close, meaning that data transfer between the two components over PCIe 4.0 x8 is not a major bottleneck, but the GPU's 64-bit memory bus is a clear constraint for its own performance. The combined percentile of 82 is lower than the CPU's 93rd percentile, confirming that the GPU drags down the overall system rating.

FAQ

Q: What is the CPU's socket type?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX uses the Intel BGA 2114 socket, which is a soldered mobile package, so it cannot be upgraded.

Q: Does the CPU support ECC memory?

A: No, ECC memory is not supported. The system uses dual-channel DDR5 memory with a maximum bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s.

Q: What is the GPU's ray tracing capability?

A: The Intel Arc A350M has 6 dedicated ray tracing cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, which includes hardware ray tracing, but its overall performance is modest at 3.379 TFLOPS FP32.

Q: How does the CPU compare to the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX scores 62,738 on average, while the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 scores 62,839, a delta of -0.2%, meaning they are effectively tied.

Q: How much VRAM does the GPU have?

A: The Intel Arc A350M has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, providing 112.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Is the CPU good for gaming?

A: The CPU is excellent for gaming (93rd percentile), but the GPU is the limiting factor; the Arc A350M's 70th percentile score means it is only suitable for 1080p medium settings in most titles.

Q: What is the combined system percentile?

A: The combined percentile for this CPU-GPU pair is 82, reflecting the CPU's dominance and the GPU's relative weakness.

Gaming Performance

The FACT PACK contains no measured FPS data for this exact CPU-GPU combination. There are no rows in the measuredFpsUltraByGame field, and the dataIsMeasured flag is false. Therefore, all FPS figures discussed here are estimates based on the benchmark scores of the individual components.

Based on the Arc A350M's average benchmark score of 24,647 (70th percentile) and its nearest rival being the AMD Radeon RX 590 (a 2018 desktop card), this GPU is expected to deliver playable frame rates at 1080p with medium to low settings in modern AAA titles. For esports titles like Counter-Strike 2 or Valorant, which are CPU-bound and light on GPU load, the Core Ultra 7 255HX's strong single-thread score (2,163 in Cinebench R23) could push frame rates to 100-150 FPS at 1080p with competitive settings. However, for graphically demanding games like Cyberpunk 2077 or Alan Wake 2, the 4 GB VRAM and 3.379 TFLOPS will likely result in 30-50 FPS at 1080p with low settings, and enabling ray tracing will severely impact performance despite the 6 RT cores. At 1440p, the GPU will struggle to maintain 30 FPS in most titles, and at 4K, it is not viable for gaming. The CPU will never be the bottleneck in gaming scenarios; the GPU will consistently hold the system back. Users should treat this configuration as a productivity laptop with light gaming capability, not a gaming machine.

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX + Intel Arc A350M

Apex Performer

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX

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

Upgrade Path and Platform

Benchmark Performance

GPU Analysis

Usage Scenarios

CPU Analysis

Who Should Build It

Balance and Bottleneck

FAQ

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