SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 7 256V + Intel Arc A550M

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)

▼

91 Score

Top 9% Ranking

91 / 100

ULTIMATE READY

Apex Performer

Top 9% 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

85%

GPU

96%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 7 256V

21,112 Benchmark Score

Top 15% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

Intel Arc A550M

49,737 Benchmark Score

Top 4% 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 7 256V and Intel Arc A550M represent a distinct laptop-class pairing that combines a highly efficient Lunar Lake processor with a dedicated Xe-HPG graphics solution. This analysis examines the benchmark data to understand what this combination offers across various workloads, its position relative to direct competitors, and the practical implications for potential users. The data reveals a system that sits in the upper quartile of CPU performance and the top tier of GPU performance, but with specific characteristics that define its strengths and limitations.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 7 256V is an 8-core, 8-thread processor built on the Lunar Lake architecture, manufactured on a 3 nm process by TSMC. It operates with a base clock of 2.20 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz, within a 17 W TDP envelope. This is a mobile-focused chip, indicated by its Intel BGA 2833 socket and the "Mobile" market segment classification. The cache hierarchy consists of 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and a shared 12 MB L3 cache. Notably, it supports PCIe Gen 5 with 4 lanes for the CPU, and it includes integrated Arc 140V graphics.

Benchmark results place this CPU at the 75th percentile of all processors, with an average benchmark score of 21112. This position is remarkably tight against its nearest rivals. The AMD Ryzen 5 7530U scores 21133, a mere 0.1% higher, while the AMD Ryzen 5 5600G scores 21088, 0.1% lower. The Intel Core i3-1220P is 0.2% behind at 21066, and the Intel Core Ultra 7 155U is 0.3% ahead at 21174. This clustering indicates that the 256V delivers performance that is effectively neck-and-neck with a broad swath of established mid-range processors, despite its ultra-low power design.

Single-threaded performance is a clear strength. The Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1877.5 and Geekbench single-core score of 1990 highlight strong per-core efficiency. This is supported by a Passmark single-thread score of 4029. These figures suggest excellent responsiveness in lightly-threaded tasks, a direct benefit of the high 4.80 GHz boost clock. Multi-threaded performance is respectable for the power class, with Cinebench R23 multi-core scoring 10399 and Geekbench multi-core scoring 8643. The Passmark multithread score of 19530 and physics score of 1595 provide additional context, indicating that while the 8-thread configuration is capable, it is not designed to compete with high-core-count workstation parts.

The specialized Passmark results reveal interesting characteristics. Data encryption scores 13998, and integer math scores 43358, while floating-point math is significantly higher at 58576. The extended instructions score of 15643 and find prime numbers score of 192 suggest that the processor handles a mix of workloads competently, with a notable strength in floating-point calculations. The data compression score of 184985 is exceptionally high, indicating robust performance in archiving and compression tasks. These scores collectively paint a picture of a CPU that is balanced but leans towards efficiency and single-thread responsiveness, making it well-suited for a range of everyday and professional applications.

Usage Scenarios

High-Refresh Gaming: The CPU’s strong single-core performance, evidenced by a Geekbench single-core score of 1990, is sufficient to feed a dedicated GPU in most gaming scenarios. However, the lack of measured gaming FPS data means estimates must be derived from the GPU’s compute scores, which are discussed later. The pairing should avoid major CPU bottlenecks at standard refresh rates, but the 8-thread limit may constrain performance in the most CPU-intensive titles.

Streaming: The CPU’s 17 W TDP and high efficiency make it a plausible candidate for streaming on the go. The integrated Arc 140V GPU is present, but the dedicated Arc A550M would handle the game rendering, leaving the CPU to manage encoding. The Passmark multithread score of 19530 suggests adequate headroom for software encoding at moderate bitrates, though dedicated hardware encoders would be more efficient and are not detailed in the data.

Video Editing: The combination of a strong single-core score (Cinebench R23 single-core 1877.5) and a capable GPU for effects and rendering acceleration points to competent 1080p and possibly 1440p video editing. The high floating-point math score of 58576 is beneficial for color grading and processing filters. The 8 GB of VRAM on the GPU is a limiting factor for complex multi-layer timelines or high-resolution source material, but for standard projects, this system should handle timeline scrubbing and previews well.

3D Rendering: The 8-core CPU will render final frames slower than higher-core-count alternatives, but the GPU’s compute capabilities can accelerate viewport performance and certain render engines. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 10399 provides a baseline for CPU-only rendering, which is modest. The GPU’s 8.397 TFLOPS FP32 performance is a more significant contributor to GPU-accelerated rendering, though 8 GB VRAM will cap texture sizes and scene complexity.

Software Development: The high data compression score of 184985 and strong single-thread performance make this an efficient platform for compilation of smaller projects and general coding tasks. The 16 GB of unified memory (implied by the 256V’s architecture, though not explicitly stated) is a consideration for large builds or running multiple VMs. The Passmark integer math score of 43358 supports reasonable build times, but large-scale parallel compilation will not be a strength.

Student and Office Work: This is where the system shines. The low 17 W TDP implies excellent battery life potential, and the strong single-core score of 4029 on Passmark ensures snappy application launches and document handling. The 75th percentile CPU ranking means it will handle productivity suites, web browsing, and data analysis with ease, making it a premium option for mobile productivity.

Balance and Bottleneck

The balance between the CPU and GPU is heavily skewed towards the GPU in terms of raw compute potential. The CPU is at the 75th percentile, while the GPU is at the 86th percentile. This suggests that in GPU-bound scenarios, such as high-resolution gaming or GPU rendering, the Arc A550M will be the primary performance driver. The CPU’s 8 threads may become a limiting factor in heavily threaded CPU-bound tasks, but the data shows it is competitive with its direct rivals, which are all within 0.3% of its average score.

The GPU’s nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti (0.4% ahead), AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 (0.5% ahead), AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT (2.4% ahead), and AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT (2.6% behind). This indicates that the A550M is positioned in a performance tier that rivals some of the best discrete graphics cards of previous generations. However, the CPU’s lower percentile ranking suggests that it would bottleneck the GPU in scenarios where frame rates are very high and CPU overhead is significant. For example, at 1080p with low graphical settings, the CPU might not be able to feed the GPU enough frames to reach its full potential. Conversely, at higher resolutions or with maxed-out settings, the GPU will be the clear limiting factor, and the CPU’s performance will be sufficient.

The FPS scaling issue is further complicated by the lack of measured data. The data shows no measured FPS for this pairing, so estimates must be framed as qualitative. Given the GPU’s high percentile and the CPU’s mid-high percentile, the system is likely well-balanced for 1440p gaming, where the GPU is the primary driver. At 1080p, the balance could tip towards a CPU limitation in esports titles. The 17 W TDP of the CPU also indicates a design focus on power efficiency, which may lead to thermal throttling in sustained heavy loads, further affecting the CPU’s ability to maintain peak boost clocks.

Who Should Build It

This pairing targets users who need a highly mobile laptop with strong graphics capability for gaming and content creation, without sacrificing CPU efficiency for daily tasks. Gamers playing at 1440p resolution would be the primary audience, as the GPU’s performance tier is well-suited for that resolution, and the CPU should provide adequate support. Content creators working with video editing or 3D modeling that can leverage GPU acceleration would also benefit, provided their projects do not exceed the 8 GB VRAM limit. Software developers who value portability and a fast single-core experience for coding, combined with the ability to run local GPU-accelerated machine learning or testing, would find this setup appealing. Students and professionals seeking a premium office laptop that can also handle light gaming or creative work would find the efficiency and performance balance attractive. The system is less suited for professionals who require high-core-count CPUs for CPU-based rendering or heavy multi-threaded simulation work.

Benchmark Performance

The combined performance picture is defined by the 81st percentile ranking for the build. This is a strong overall position, indicating that the pairing outperforms the majority of laptop configurations. The CPU’s average benchmark score is 21112, placing it at the 75th percentile. Its direct rivals are all within 0.3% of this score, showing that the 256V is a solid mid-to-high-range performer that trades blows with established AMD and Intel parts. The GPU’s average benchmark score is 49737, placing it at the 86th percentile. This is a significant performance tier, as its nearest rival, the RTX 5070 Ti, is only 0.4% faster, while the RX 6800 XT is 2.6% slower.

The combined picture suggests a system that is greater than the sum of its parts in specific workloads. The CPU’s high single-thread performance ensures that the GPU isn’t starved of data in most gaming scenarios, while the GPU’s raw compute power handles the heavy lifting for graphics and parallel workloads. The lack of measured FPS data is a notable gap, but the benchmark scores provide a strong foundation for estimating performance. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 49894 and Vulkan score of 49580 for the GPU are indicative of strong compute and graphics API performance, respectively. These scores, combined with the CPU’s single-core strength, point to a capable gaming machine, particularly at resolutions where the GPU is the bottleneck.

GPU Analysis

The Intel Arc A550M is a mobile graphics processor based on the Xe-HPG architecture, specifically the DG2-512 chip, manufactured on a 6 nm process by TSMC. It features 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU operates at a base clock of 900 MHz and a boost clock of 2050 MHz, with memory running at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). It has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, along with 16 dedicated ray tracing cores. The FP32 performance is rated at 8.397 TFLOPS, with FP16 at 16.79 TFLOPS (2:1). The GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The benchmark data shows a Geekbench OpenCL score of 49894 and a Vulkan score of 49580, which are nearly identical, suggesting consistent performance across different compute APIs. This places the GPU at the 86th percentile, a strong position. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti, scores 49957, which is only 0.4% higher. This is an astonishing result, as the RTX 5070 Ti is a desktop-class card, while the A550M is a mobile part. The AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 is 0.5% ahead, and the RX 6900 XT is 2.4% ahead, while the RX 6800 XT is 2.6% behind. This indicates that the A550M delivers performance that rivals high-end desktop GPUs from previous generations.

For rendering, the 8.397 TFLOPS FP32 performance and 262.4 GTexel/s texture rate suggest strong rasterization performance. The 16 ray tracing cores provide hardware-accelerated ray tracing, a feature that is becoming increasingly important in modern games. The 224.0 GB/s memory bandwidth is adequate for the GPU’s compute capabilities, though it may be a limiting factor at very high resolutions or with heavy texture loads. The 8 GB VRAM capacity is sufficient for 1080p and 1440p gaming with high settings, but it is a constraint for 4K textures or complex 3D rendering scenes. The GPU’s 60 W TDP is relatively modest for a dedicated part, indicating good performance-per-watt.

FAQ

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 7 256V compare to 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, a difference of only 0.1%. This means they are effectively tied in overall CPU performance.

Q: What is the performance tier of the Intel Arc A550M relative to other GPUs?

A: The Arc A550M sits at the 86th percentile of all GPUs. Its average benchmark score of 49737 is only 0.4% lower than the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti and 2.6% higher than the AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT, placing it in a very high-performance tier.

Q: How much L3 cache does the CPU have, and why does it matter?

A: The CPU has 12 MB of shared L3 cache. This cache helps reduce latency for frequently accessed data, which is beneficial for gaming and productivity tasks that rely on data reuse.

Q: What are the key specifications of the GPU’s memory?

A: The GPU has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth. This memory configuration is suitable for 1080p and 1440p gaming but may limit performance at 4K.

Q: Is this CPU or GPU better suited for single-threaded tasks?

A: The CPU excels at single-threaded tasks, with a Geekbench single-core score of 1990 and a Passmark single-thread score of 4029. The GPU’s performance is more relevant to parallel workloads, with its FP32 compute of 8.397 TFLOPS.

Q: What is the combined performance percentile of this build?

A: The build has a combined percentile of 81, indicating that it outperforms 81% of all systems in the benchmark database. This is a strong overall ranking.

Q: Does the GPU support modern graphics APIs?

A: Yes, the GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. This ensures compatibility with the latest games and graphics features, including ray tracing via its 16 dedicated RT cores.

Build Overview

This build pairs the Intel Core Ultra 7 256V with the Intel Arc A550M in a laptop form factor, as indicated by the build class. The CPU is a high-efficiency Lunar Lake part designed for mobile use, with a 17 W TDP and 8 cores. The GPU is a dedicated mobile graphics solution from Intel’s Arc Alchemist generation, with a 60 W TDP and 8 GB of VRAM. The combined percentile of 81 places this system in the upper echelon of performance, though it is important to note the CPU’s 75th percentile and the GPU’s 86th percentile are distinct.

The overall tier is a high-performance laptop that prioritizes a balance of CPU efficiency and GPU compute. The CPU’s performance is closely matched with several mid-range rivals, while the GPU’s performance is exceptional, rivaling high-end desktop parts. This makes the system a unique proposition: a power-efficient mobile CPU paired with a graphics solution that offers desktop-class compute performance. The lack of measured FPS data means that real-world gaming performance is estimated, but the benchmark scores suggest a system that is capable of high-refresh gaming at 1440p and solid performance at 1080p.

Gaming Performance

There are no measured FPS rows for this exact CPU+GPU combination in the FACT PACK. Therefore, all gaming performance figures discussed here are estimates based on the benchmark scores provided. The dataIsMeasured flag is false, so these are qualitative expectations. The GPU’s Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan scores of 49894 and 49580, respectively, are extremely high, suggesting that the GPU has substantial raw compute power. This would translate to high frame rates in most games, particularly at 1080p and 1440p resolutions.

The CPU’s single-core performance, with a Geekbench score of 1990, is sufficient to avoid being a major bottleneck in most titles. However, the 8-thread limit could be a factor in games that are heavily CPU-bound, such as strategy games or large multiplayer battles. At 1080p with ultra settings, the GPU is likely the limiting factor, but it should still deliver playable frame rates in the vast majority of titles. At 1440p, the GPU’s workload increases, and the system is likely to be more balanced, with the GPU being the primary determinant of performance. The 8 GB VRAM may be a constraint for games with very high-resolution textures, potentially requiring settings to be lowered. Overall, the estimated gaming performance is strong, but users should expect to adjust settings for the most demanding titles or at higher resolutions.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The CPU is socketed on Intel BGA 2833, which is a soldered mobile platform. This means the CPU is not upgradeable. The GPU is also a mobile part, likely soldered to the motherboard, and is not upgradeable. Therefore, the upgrade path for this laptop is limited to other components, such as storage and memory, though the memory support is listed as "unknown" and depends on the motherboard. The CPU supports PCIe Gen 5 with 4 lanes, which is a modern interface for fast SSDs, but the GPU is connected via PCIe 4.0 x16. The CPU’s TDP is 17 W, and the GPU’s TDP is 60 W, suggesting a combined power draw of around 77 W for these components. The suggested PSU for the GPU is not listed, but the low TDP of both parts implies that a modest power supply would be sufficient for a desktop equivalent, though this is a laptop and power is delivered via the charger.

A sensible next upgrade for this system would be to maximize the RAM, if the motherboard supports it, and to ensure the fastest possible NVMe SSD is installed to take advantage of the PCIe Gen 5 lanes. Given that the CPU and GPU are not upgradeable, the system’s lifespan is tied to the performance of these components. The CPU’s performance is competitive with its peers, and the GPU is a high performer, so the system should remain capable for several years. The primary limitations will be the 8 GB VRAM for future games and the 8-thread CPU for future multi-threaded applications. Upgrading to a larger or faster SSD is the most practical path to improving system responsiveness and load times.

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 7 256V + Intel Arc A550M

Apex Performer

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core Ultra 7 256V

Intel Arc A550M

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

CPU Analysis

Usage Scenarios

Balance and Bottleneck

Who Should Build It

Benchmark Performance

GPU Analysis

FAQ

Build Overview

Gaming Performance

Upgrade Path and Platform

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