SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 7 256V + Intel Arc A350M

Get a comprehensive performance analysis of your gaming rig with detailed benchmarks, bottleneck detection, and upgrade recommendations

89 / 100
HIGH-END

Power Build

Top 11% of systems. Excellent for 1440p Ultra or 4K High gaming.

1440p Ultra4K High

System Balance Analysis

CPU vs GPU performance ratio
Well Balanced
CPU
85%
VS
GPU
92%
PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 7 256V

21,112 Benchmark Score
Top 15% 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 256V and Intel Arc A350M form a laptop pairing that sits in a specific performance tier, targeting users who need a balance of CPU efficiency and entry-level discrete graphics capability. The data indicates a system that excels in single-threaded tasks and offers competent multi-threaded performance for its class, while the GPU provides a noticeable step up from integrated graphics. This analysis examines the benchmark results to determine what this combination means for real-world applications, from productivity to gaming.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 7 256V is a mobile processor built on the Lunar Lake architecture, manufactured on a 3 nm process by TSMC. This is a significant architectural shift for Intel, focusing on power efficiency without sacrificing core performance. The CPU features 8 cores and 8 threads, operating at a base clock of 2.20 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. With a 17 W TDP, it is clearly designed for thin-and-light laptops where thermal headroom is at a premium.

The cache hierarchy is substantial for a mobile part, with 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 2.5 MB of L2 cache per core, and a shared 12 MB of L3 cache. This large cache allocation helps mitigate the latency of accessing system memory and is a key factor in the CPU's strong single-threaded performance. The memory support is listed as dependent on the motherboard, but the memory bus is dual-channel, which is adequate for feeding the 8 cores and the integrated Arc 140V graphics.

Benchmark results show a processor that is well-balanced. In Cinebench R23, the CPU scores 10399 points in the multi-core test and 1877.5 points in the single-core test. The single-core score is particularly high, indicating excellent per-thread performance that benefits everyday responsiveness and lightly-threaded applications. The multi-core score, while not class-leading, is respectable for a 17 W part, suggesting it can handle moderate parallel workloads without significant thermal throttling.

Looking at PassMark results, the CPU demonstrates its strengths and weaknesses. The single-thread score of 4029 is very strong, reinforcing the single-core performance picture. The multi-thread score of 19530 is solid, but the data compression score of 184985 and encryption score of 13998 show where the architecture excels. The floating-point math score of 58576 is notably higher than the integer math score of 43358, which is an interesting characteristic that may favor certain scientific or media workloads over general-purpose computing. The physics score of 1595 is relatively low, hinting that heavy physics simulation in games or professional apps might be a bottleneck.

The CPU holds a 75th percentile ranking among all CPUs, placing it above the median. Its average benchmark score of 21112 puts it in a tight cluster with its nearest rivals. It is effectively tied with the AMD Ryzen 5 7530U, which shows a delta of -0.1%, and the AMD Ryzen 5 5600G, which shows a delta of +0.1%. It is also within 0.2% of the Intel Core i3-1220P. This indicates that the Ultra 7 256V is a competitive mid-range mobile processor, offering performance that is broadly similar to these established parts, but with a focus on a much lower power envelope.

Benchmark Performance

The overall performance picture for this laptop configuration is defined by the combined percentile of 73, which is a strong showing for a mobile platform. The CPU's average benchmark score of 21112 is the primary driver of this figure, placing the processor in the 75th percentile of all CPUs. This suggests that the processor is capable of handling a wide range of tasks, from demanding office productivity to more intensive content creation.

The GPU, an Intel Arc A350M, contributes an average benchmark score of 24647, placing it in the 70th percentile of all GPUs. This is a surprisingly strong result for an entry-level discrete GPU. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 590 with a delta of -0.4%, the NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile with a delta of -0.5%, and the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT with a delta of +0.8%. This puts the A350M in a performance class that is comparable to these desktop and high-end mobile parts, which is impressive for a 25 W chip.

The combined picture is one of a balanced system where both the CPU and GPU are in a similar performance tier. The CPU is not so powerful that it will be severely bottlenecked by the GPU in most tasks, and the GPU is not so weak that it will hold back the CPU in productivity applications. The Geekbench scores for the GPU (24546 for OpenCL and 24747 for Vulkan) are closely matched, indicating consistent compute performance across different APIs.

This balance suggests that the system is well-suited for users who need a machine that can do a little bit of everything. It will handle coding, web browsing, and office suite tasks with ease, while also providing enough graphics horsepower for light gaming, video playback, and some GPU-accelerated rendering. The data shows a system that is greater than the sum of its parts, offering a cohesive experience that avoids the severe bottlenecks often seen in budget laptops. The 73rd combined percentile reflects a configuration that is positioned well above entry-level, offering a taste of high-performance computing in a mobile form factor.

Gaming Performance

No measured FPS rows exist for this exact CPU and GPU combination in the database. The FACT PACK contains no measuredFps data for this pairing. Therefore, all FPS discussions are estimates derived from the individual benchmark scores of the CPU and GPU, and the figures should be treated as approximations of expected performance rather than verified results.

Based on the benchmark scores, this system should provide a playable experience at 1080p with medium to high settings in many modern titles, but it will not be a high-refresh-rate powerhouse. The GPU's performance, as indicated by its 70th percentile ranking and similarity to the AMD Radeon RX 590, suggests it is capable of delivering around 60 FPS in less demanding games like esports titles (e.g., Valorant, CS:GO, League of Legends) at 1080p with high settings. For more demanding AAA games, users should expect to lower settings to medium or high to maintain a smooth 60 FPS frame rate, or potentially drop to 900p in the most graphically intensive scenes.

The CPU's strong single-core performance, with a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1877.5 and a PassMark single-thread score of 4029, is excellent for gaming. Most games are still heavily reliant on single-thread performance, and this CPU will not be the limiting factor in most scenarios. It can easily keep up with the GPU's frame output, ensuring that the graphics card is the primary bottleneck.

The combination of a fast CPU and a mid-tier GPU suggests that frame rates will be consistent and stable, with fewer dips and stutters than a system with a weaker processor. The 17 W TDP of the CPU also means it will not generate excessive heat that could cause thermal throttling during extended gaming sessions, potentially allowing the GPU to maintain its boost clock of 2200 MHz for longer periods. For 1440p gaming, the GPU will likely be too weak to provide a consistently smooth experience at high settings, and users should stick to 1080p for the best balance of visual fidelity and performance.

FAQ

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 7 256V compare to its closest rival, the AMD Ryzen 5 7530U?

A: The average benchmark scores are nearly identical. The Intel Core Ultra 7 256V scores 21112, while the AMD Ryzen 5 7530U scores 21133, resulting in a performance delta of only -0.1%. This indicates they are effectively tied in overall CPU performance.

Q: What is the performance class of the Intel Arc A350M GPU?

A: The GPU sits in the 70th percentile of all GPUs. Its average benchmark score of 24647 is within 0.8% of the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT and 0.4% of the AMD Radeon RX 590, placing it in a similar performance tier as these older desktop cards.

Q: Is this laptop configuration suitable for gaming?

A: The data suggests it is suitable for 1080p gaming. The CPU's strong single-core score of 4029 in PassMark will handle game logic well, and the GPU's 70th percentile ranking indicates it can deliver playable frame rates in most titles at medium to high settings. However, no measured FPS data exists, so these are estimates.

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

A: The CPU is built on Intel's Lunar Lake architecture, using a 3 nm process. It has 8 cores and 8 threads, with a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. It also includes a substantial 12 MB of shared L3 cache to improve performance.

Q: How does the GPU's compute performance compare across different APIs?

A: The GPU achieves a Geekbench OpenCL score of 24546 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 24747. The scores are very close, indicating that the graphics card provides consistent compute performance whether using the OpenCL or Vulkan API.

Q: What is the CPU's multi-threaded performance like for productivity tasks?

A: The CPU scores 6958 in Cinebench R20 multi-core and 10399 in Cinebench R23 multi-core. These scores indicate it can handle moderate parallel workloads, such as video editing and software compilation, but it is not a high-end workstation processor.

Q: What is the thermal design power of the CPU and GPU?

A: The CPU has a TDP of 17 W, which is very low for a performance-oriented processor. The GPU has a TDP of 25 W. This combined 42 W power envelope is ideal for thin-and-light laptops with limited cooling solutions.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: This is a marginal scenario. The GPU's performance, while in the 70th percentile, is not in the top tier required for high-refresh-rate (144Hz+) gaming at high settings. Users would likely need to play esports titles at 1080p with lowered settings to approach such frame rates. The CPU is capable, but the GPU will be the limiting factor.

Streaming: The CPU's 8 cores and 8 threads, combined with a strong PassMark multi-thread score of 19530, can handle the encoding workload for a stream. However, the lack of hyper-threading (8 cores, 8 threads) means there are limited spare threads. Software encoding will impact gaming performance, while hardware encoding via the GPU could be a viable alternative, though the GPU is already under load.

Video editing: This is a strong use case. The CPU's balanced multi-core performance (Cinebench R23 score of 10399) will handle timeline editing and rendering, while the GPU's compute performance (Geekbench OpenCL score of 24546) can accelerate effects and export tasks. This pairing should provide a smooth 1080p editing experience.

3D rendering: The CPU and GPU can both contribute to rendering tasks. The CPU's multi-thread score is adequate for CPU-based rendering, and the GPU's 3.379 TFLOPS of FP32 performance can be used for GPU-accelerated rendering. However, the 4 GB VRAM of the GPU is a significant limitation for complex scenes, and the CPU is not a multi-threaded powerhouse.

Software development: The CPU is excellent for this task. The high single-core score of 4029 ensures fast compilation of smaller projects and a responsive IDE. The multi-core score of 19530 will also speed up larger build processes. The efficient 17 W TDP means the laptop will remain cool and quiet during long coding sessions.

Student and office work: This system is more than capable for this scenario. The high single-threaded performance makes web browsing, document editing, and spreadsheet work feel instant. The efficient design ensures long battery life, and the GPU can handle external displays and hardware acceleration for video conferencing and presentations.

GPU Analysis

The Intel Arc A350M is an entry-level discrete GPU based on the Xe-HPG architecture, built on a 6 nm process. It is part of the Arc 3 Mobile generation, known as Alchemist. Despite its low power envelope of 25 W, the GPU includes a full suite of modern features, supporting DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. This ensures compatibility with the latest gaming and professional graphics APIs.

The GPU is equipped with 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 112.0 GB/s. While the memory capacity is on the lower side for modern games, the bandwidth is sufficient for the GPU's compute capabilities. The chip, DG2-128, contains 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 24 raster output units. It also features 6 dedicated ray tracing cores, which is a notable inclusion for an entry-level part, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing effects in supported games, albeit at a performance cost.

The clock speeds are respectable, with a base clock of 1150 MHz and a boost clock of 2200 MHz. This high boost clock helps the GPU achieve a pixel rate of 52.80 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 105.6 GTexel/s. The raw compute performance is 3.379 TFLOPS for FP32 operations and 6.758 TFLOPS for FP16 operations, which is solid for a 25 W part.

Benchmark data shows the GPU performs well above its class. Its average benchmark score of 24647 places it in the 70th percentile of all GPUs, a remarkable feat for an entry-level mobile chip. The Geekbench scores of 24546 for OpenCL and 24747 for Vulkan confirm that this performance is consistent across different compute workloads. The nearest rival data is telling: it is within 0.5% of the NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile and 0.8% of the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT. This suggests that the A350M offers performance comparable to much larger and more power-hungry desktop and mobile GPUs, making it an excellent choice for users who need dedicated graphics in a thin-and-light laptop.

Balance and Bottleneck

The benchmark data reveals a system that is well-balanced for its target market, but there are clear workload-dependent bottlenecks. In CPU-intensive tasks like software compilation, data processing, and general productivity, the CPU is the primary engine. Its 75th percentile ranking means it is faster than most CPUs, and it will not be a bottleneck. The GPU is secondary in these tasks, providing acceleration for specific operations like video encoding or UI rendering.

In GPU-intensive workloads, such as gaming and 3D rendering, the GPU becomes the limiting factor. Its 70th percentile ranking, while strong, is lower than the CPU's 75th percentile. This means that in a gaming scenario, the CPU can easily feed the GPU with data, but the GPU may not be able to render frames fast enough to keep up with the CPU's potential. This creates a GPU bottleneck, which is generally considered the ideal scenario for gaming, as it results in more consistent frame times.

The FPS scaling, which is estimated due to lack of measured data, would show that in less demanding games, the GPU can achieve high frame rates, but in more demanding titles, the frame rate will drop as the GPU reaches its compute limits. The CPU would not be a contributing factor to these drops, as its performance headroom is sufficient. The combined percentile of 73 is a strong indicator that this is not a mismatched pairing. The slight difference in percentiles suggests the system is balanced, with the GPU being the more likely source of performance limits in graphics-heavy scenarios, while the CPU is more than capable of handling the rest. This balance is ideal for a general-purpose laptop, ensuring that no single component severely hampers the overall experience.

Build Overview

This is a laptop-class build, as indicated by the buildClass field. The pairing of the Intel Core Ultra 7 256V and the Intel Arc A350M represents a mid-range mobile platform, targeted at users who require more graphics performance than integrated graphics can provide. The combined percentile of 73 places this system in the upper echelon of laptop configurations, indicating it is a capable machine for a wide range of tasks.

The CPU is a high-efficiency part, with a 17 W TDP, designed for portability and battery life. The GPU, with a 25 W TDP, adds significant graphics and compute power without pushing the total system power draw to levels that would require a large, heavy chassis. This makes the pairing ideal for thin-and-light laptops that still want to offer a discrete GPU option.

The overall tier of this system is above entry-level, offering a taste of high-performance features like ray tracing support on the GPU and a high IPC architecture on the CPU. It is not a top-tier gaming rig or a workstation-class machine, but it is a very competent general-purpose laptop that can handle gaming, content creation, and productivity with ease. The data shows a cohesive platform that punches above its weight in terms of performance per watt.

Who Should Build It

This CPU and GPU pairing is best suited for users who need a single laptop for a variety of tasks and want a step up in graphics performance without compromising on portability or battery life. It is an excellent choice for gamers who primarily play at 1080p and are willing to adjust settings to medium or high to achieve smooth frame rates. The CPU's strong single-core performance ensures that even in CPU-bound games, the experience will be responsive.

Content creators who work with 1080p video editing, photo manipulation, or light 3D modeling will find this system capable. The CPU's multi-threaded performance is sufficient for rendering, and the GPU can accelerate effects and exports. Software developers will appreciate the fast compilation times and responsive system, while the efficient design allows for long coding sessions away from a power outlet.

Students and professionals in business environments are also a target audience. The system handles office applications, web browsing, and video conferencing with ease. The GPU can drive multiple external monitors and provides hardware acceleration for media playback. For small business workstations, this pairing offers a balance of performance and efficiency, making it a versatile tool for a wide range of job functions, from data analysis to graphic design. The 70th percentile GPU is a key differentiator, allowing this system to be used for tasks that are impossible on integrated graphics, such as moderate gaming and GPU-accelerated rendering.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The platform is based on the Intel BGA 2833 socket, which means the CPU is soldered to the motherboard. This effectively eliminates the possibility of a CPU upgrade in the future. The memory support is dependent on the motherboard, but it is likely soldered as well, meaning the system configuration is fixed at the time of purchase. The CPU provides PCIe Gen 5 with 4 lanes, while the GPU uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, ensuring both components have sufficient bandwidth for their respective needs.

The power delivery is efficient, with the CPU TDP at 17 W and the GPU TDP at 25 W. This low combined power draw means that a laptop's internal power supply is likely sufficient, and there is no suggested PSU for a desktop build, as this is a mobile platform. The low power requirements also mean that thermal management is less of a concern, allowing for thinner and quieter laptops.

Given the soldered nature of the components, a sensible next upgrade would not involve replacing the CPU or GPU. Instead, the focus should be on the peripherals and the user experience. The platform supports a fast NVMe SSD, and upgrading to a larger or faster drive is a practical way to improve system responsiveness. Additionally, since the memory is likely soldered, users should ensure they purchase a configuration with sufficient RAM from the outset. The upgrade path here is about maximizing the potential of the fixed hardware, such as adding an external GPU enclosure via a Thunderbolt port (if supported by the motherboard), which could significantly enhance gaming and rendering performance beyond what the integrated Arc A350M can provide.