SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 7 265 + AMD Radeon RX 6400

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

90 / 100
ULTIMATE READY

Apex Performer

Top 10% 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%
VS
GPU
83%
PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 7 265

64,640 Benchmark Score
Top 4% Market Ranking
View Full Specs →
GRAPHICS CARD

AMD Radeon RX 6400

6,001 Benchmark Score
Top 17% 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 7 265 and AMD Radeon RX 6400 represent a study in extreme asymmetry. The CPU is a high-end, 20-core desktop processor that sits in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, while the GPU is an entry-level, end-of-life graphics card in the 35th percentile. This pairing creates a system where the processor’s immense multi-threaded capability is effectively quarantined from the graphics pipeline, which operates at a fraction of the CPU’s performance class. The benchmark data shows a compute platform that excels at productivity and content creation, but one that is strictly limited to lightweight or legacy gaming scenarios.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 is built on the Arrow Lake architecture and manufactured on a 3 nm process by TSMC, containing 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. It features 20 cores and 20 threads, meaning there is no hyper-threading; each core is a physical core. The base clock is 2.40 GHz with a boost clock of 5.30 GHz, operating within a 65 W TDP. The cache hierarchy is substantial: 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3 cache. Memory support is limited to DDR5, running on a dual-channel bus with a bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. The platform uses Intel Socket 1851 and provides PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU.

Benchmark results place this processor in the 93rd percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 64,640. Its nearest rival, the AMD EPYC 4464P, scores 64,823, which is a 0.3% difference; the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F scores 64,438, a 0.3% delta in the opposite direction. This clustering indicates that the Ultra 7 265 sits at the top of a performance tier shared with server-class EPYC parts, though the Intel chip is a desktop segment product.

In multi-threaded workloads, the Cinebench R23 multicore score of 42,216 is a strong indicator of rendering capability. The single-core score of 5,960 in the same test shows excellent per-thread performance, which is critical for lightly-threaded applications. The Passmark data supports this dual strength: the multithread score is 49,682, while the single-thread score is 4,689. Data compression and encryption scores are 522,983 and 40,456, respectively, indicating robust throughput for archival and security tasks. Integer math scores 134,773, and floating point math scores 172,776, suggesting a balanced ALU/FPU design. The extended instructions score of 41,478 confirms strong SIMD performance for modern workloads.

The architecture is monolithic in design, with no chiplet layout indicated. The 3 nm process node offers efficiency, but the 65 W TDP is more indicative of a power-limited part rather than a maximal-performance one; the boost clock of 5.30 GHz is achievable within that envelope for short bursts. The lack of ECC memory support positions this CPU for consumer workstations rather than mission-critical servers. The integrated graphics, Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 32EU, are present but are not intended for gaming; they provide basic display output and media acceleration.

FAQ

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 compare to its closest rival, the AMD EPYC 4464P?

A: The average benchmark scores are nearly identical. The EPYC 4464P scores 64,823, while the Ultra 7 265 scores 64,640, a difference of only 0.3%. In practical terms, they perform at the same level, despite the EPYC being a server product.

Q: What is the significance of the 93rd percentile ranking for this CPU?

A: It means the processor outperforms 93% of all CPUs in the benchmark database. This places it in the top tier for desktop processors, suitable for demanding multi-threaded workloads like video rendering and software compilation.

Q: Does the CPU support overclocking?

A: No. The multiplier is locked, as indicated by the `multiplierUnlocked` field being false. Performance must be derived from the stock boost behavior of 5.30 GHz.

Q: What type of memory does this CPU require?

A: It requires DDR5 memory running on a dual-channel bus. The total memory bandwidth is 102.4 GB/s, which is typical for a dual-channel desktop platform.

Q: What is the GPU performance percentile, and what does it imply?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6400 is in the 35th percentile of all GPUs. This means it performs better than only 35% of GPUs, placing it in the entry-level segment, suited for 1080p gaming at low settings or esports titles.

Q: Is the CPU bottlenecking the GPU in gaming?

A: No, the opposite is true. The CPU’s single-thread score of 4,689 in Passmark is far above the GPU’s needs. The GPU’s low compute throughput (3.565 TFLOPS FP32) is the limiting factor in any graphics workload.

Q: What is the combined percentile of this build?

A: The combined percentile is 64. This reflects the average of the CPU’s high performance and the GPU’s low performance, resulting in a mid-tier overall score that is dragged down by the graphics card.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU benchmarks are consistently strong. In Cinebench R15, the multicore score is 4,255 and single-core is 600. In R20, the scores are 6,268 and 884 for multi and single-core, respectively. The R23 results show a multicore score of 42,216 and a single-core of 5,960. These scores reveal a processor that scales well with thread count, achieving a multicore-to-single-core ratio of roughly 7:1 in R23, which is expected for a 20-core part without SMT.

The Passmark suite shows a multithread score of 49,682 and a single-thread score of 4,689. The physics score of 2,923 is relatively low compared to other metrics, but this is a specific test that may not favor the architecture. The CPU’s average benchmark score of 64,640 is within 0.7% of the AMD EPYC 9124, which scores 65,104. This indicates that the Ultra 7 265 is competitive with dual-socket server parts in aggregate performance, despite being a single-socket desktop chip.

On the GPU side, the numbers are starkly different. The Radeon RX 6400 scores 7,673 in Passmark G3D, which is 35th percentile. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M, scores 6,000, a 0% delta, which is an odd statistical tie. The RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server scores 5,996, a 0.1% difference. These comparisons are misleading because the RX 6400 is a desktop card while the others are mobile or server parts, but the data shows they cluster in the same low-performance tier.

The GPU’s compute scores are weak: Passmark GPU Compute is 2,812, and Geekbench OpenCL is 32,011. The Vulkan score is 16,372. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 176, which is very low, indicating poor modern API performance. The combined picture is a CPU that excels in productivity and a GPU that struggles with any 3D acceleration. The combined percentile of 64 reflects this mismatch, showing that the system’s overall benchmark position is lower than the CPU’s individual rank.

Who Should Build It

This build targets users who require extreme CPU processing power but have minimal or no 3D graphics demands. The primary audience is content creators and developers who work with CPU-bound tasks: video encoding, software compilation, data analysis, and virtual machine hosting. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 42,216 makes it suitable for 3D rendering in CPU-based engines, though the lack of a strong GPU means GPU-accelerated rendering in applications like Blender or Octane will be severely hampered.

Students in engineering or computer science fields would benefit from the CPU’s 20 cores for compilation and simulation tasks, but they would need to pair this with a different GPU if they intend to do any CAD or machine learning work. Small business workstations that run database servers or financial modeling software would see strong performance, given the Passmark data encryption score of 40,456 and integer math score of 134,773.

Gamers are not the target audience, as the RX 6400’s 35th percentile ranking makes it unsuitable for modern gaming at high settings. However, esports players who prioritize CPU frame rates in titles like Counter-Strike or League of Legends might find the single-core score of 5,960 in R23 beneficial, provided they lower resolution and graphical settings to match the GPU’s limits. The build is a poor fit for any user who needs balanced performance, as the GPU will bottleneck nearly every interactive task.

Usage Scenarios

High-Refresh Gaming: This scenario is not viable with the current GPU. The RX 6400’s low texture rate of 111.4 GTexel/s and pixel rate of 74.27 GPixel/s will cap frame rates well below what the CPU’s single-thread performance could support. The CPU can handle the physics and game logic, but the GPU will limit output to low settings at 1080p.

Streaming: The CPU’s 20 cores can handle x264 encoding without issue, as the Cinebench R23 multicore score of 42,216 provides ample headroom. However, the GPU’s lack of a hardware encoder based on the low compute scores means the CPU must do all the work, which is feasible but will consume cores that could otherwise run the game.

Video Editing: The CPU excels here. The Passmark multithread score of 49,682 and the data compression score of 522,983 indicate fast timeline scrubbing and export times in software like Premiere Pro, provided the edits are not heavily GPU-accelerated. The GPU’s 4 GB VRAM is insufficient for complex effects.

3D Rendering: CPU rendering in Blender or V-Ray will be very fast, leveraging the 42,216 R23 multicore score. GPU rendering is not recommended, as the RX 6400’s 3.565 TFLOPS FP32 is an order of magnitude too slow for production work.

Software Development: Compilation is a major strength. The 20 cores and high integer math score of 134,773 will reduce build times significantly. The single-thread score of 4,689 ensures fast IDE responsiveness.

Student and Office Work: This is overkill for the CPU and underpowered for the GPU. Office tasks will be instantaneous, but the system is unbalanced for any visual work. The 65 W TDP and single-slot GPU make it a low-power system, but the CPU cost is unjustified for basic tasks.

GPU Analysis

The AMD Radeon RX 6400 is built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture with the Navi 24 chip, manufactured on a 6 nm process by TSMC. It contains 5,400 million transistors on a 107 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 50.5M per mm². The GPU has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. It includes 12 RT cores but no tensor cores, indicating limited ray tracing capability and no AI acceleration hardware.

The memory subsystem consists of 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 128.0 GB/s. The memory clock is 2000 MHz, which is 16 Gbps effective. This narrow bus and small VRAM capacity are the primary bottlenecks for modern games, which often require more than 4 GB at 1080p with high textures. The GPU clocks are a base of 1923 MHz, a game clock of 2039 MHz, and a boost of 2321 MHz. The pixel rate is 74.27 GPixel/s and the texture rate is 111.4 GTexel/s. The FP32 performance is 3.565 TFLOPS, with FP16 at 7.130 TFLOPS via a 2:1 ratio.

The benchmark scores confirm its entry-level status. The Passmark G3D score is 7,673, which is 35th percentile. The DirectX 12 score is 30, which is catastrophically low, suggesting poor driver optimization or hardware capability for modern APIs. The DirectX 11 score is 70, and DirectX 10 is 54, while DirectX 9 is 93. This pattern shows that the GPU performs relatively better on legacy APIs, which aligns with its use case for older games. The G2D score of 722 is fine for desktop use. The GPU’s TDP is 53 W, and it requires no power connectors, drawing power solely from the PCIe slot. The suggested PSU is 250 W, which is very low.

The nearest rivals are the GTX 770M and RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server, with delta percentages of 0% and 0.1%, respectively. This is a statistical anomaly, as the RTX PRO 6000 is a professional server card, but the average scores are within 0.3% of the RX 6400. The GPU is end-of-life, with a production status of "End-of-life", and its successor is Navi III. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, but the hardware is not capable of fully utilizing these APIs.

Balance and Bottleneck

The bottleneck analysis is unambiguous. The CPU is in the 93rd percentile, while the GPU is in the 35th percentile. This is a disparity of 58 percentile points, meaning the GPU is the limiting component in any workload that involves graphics rendering. In gaming, the RX 6400 will be at 100% utilization while the Ultra 7 265 idles, waiting for the GPU to produce frames. The CPU’s single-thread score of 4,689 is more than sufficient to feed the GPU’s frame output, so there is no CPU bottleneck.

In productivity workloads, the CPU is the star. The GPU’s compute score of 2,812 in Passmark means it will not accelerate CUDA or OpenCL tasks effectively. For video encoding, the CPU’s 20 cores will handle x264 or x265 in software, but the GPU’s lack of a dedicated encoder (inferred from the low compute scores) means hardware encoding is not a viable option. The memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s on the CPU side is adequate for the CPU’s needs, but the GPU’s 128.0 GB/s bandwidth is low for its class, which limits texture streaming in games.

The FPS scaling is directly tied to the GPU’s limits. At 1080p, the RX 6400 might achieve playable frame rates in esports titles at low settings, but the CPU will not be the constraint. The combined percentile of 64 reflects this imbalance, showing that the system is dragged down by the GPU. A user upgrading the GPU would see a dramatic increase in system performance, while upgrading the CPU would yield no benefit in graphics workloads.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The platform is based on Intel Socket 1851, which is specific to the Core Ultra Series 2. The CPU supports DDR5 memory on a dual-channel bus, with a bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. The PCIe interface is Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU. This provides a modern foundation for storage and expansion, but the GPU’s bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x4, which is a significant limitation. The x4 link width halves the bandwidth compared to a standard x16 slot, but given the GPU’s low memory bandwidth, this is not the primary bottleneck.

The suggested PSU for the GPU is 250 W, and the CPU TDP is 65 W. This means the total system power draw is low, likely under 200 W under load. This allows for a small form factor build with a modest power supply. The upgrade path is straightforward: replace the RX 6400 with a higher-tier GPU. The CPU has enough PCIe Gen 5 lanes to support a modern high-end graphics card, and the 65 W TDP leaves ample power headroom for a GPU that draws 200-300 W.

A sensible next upgrade would be a GPU with at least 8 GB of VRAM and a better performance percentile, as the current GPU’s 4 GB VRAM and 35th percentile are the system’s weakest links. The CPU does not need an upgrade for several generations, as it is already in the 93rd percentile. The memory is DDR5, which is current, and the socket is new, so there is no immediate need to change the motherboard. The integrated graphics on the CPU can serve as a fallback if the discrete GPU is removed.

Build Overview

This build is a desktop-class system pairing the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 with the AMD Radeon RX 6400. The CPU is a top-tier processor, scoring in the 93rd percentile, while the GPU is an entry-level card in the 35th percentile. The combined percentile is 64, which places the system in the mid-range overall, but this is a misleading statistic. The system is not balanced; it is a high-end CPU with a placeholder GPU.

The build class is desktop, and the form factor is likely a standard tower or SFF case, given the GPU’s single-slot design and low power requirements. The CPU’s 20 cores and 5.30 GHz boost clock make it a workstation-class processor, but the GPU limits the system to basic display output. The data suggests this is a temporary configuration, possibly a stopgap for a user who needs CPU power immediately and plans to install a better GPU later. The overall tier is upper-midrange due to the CPU, but the user experience in graphics-intensive tasks will be entry-level.

Gaming Performance

No measured FPS data exists for this exact combination. The FACT PACK contains no measuredFps rows for the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and AMD Radeon RX 6400 pairing, so all frame rate figures below are estimates derived from the benchmark scores and should be treated as approximations.

Based on the GPU’s Passmark G3D score of 7,673 and its 35th percentile ranking, gaming performance is expected to be limited to 1080p at low to medium settings. The GPU’s 3.565 TFLOPS FP32 and 4 GB VRAM are insufficient for modern AAA titles at high settings, which typically require more than 4 GB of VRAM and 8+ TFLOPS. For esports titles like Counter-Strike 2 or Valorant, the CPU’s single-thread score of 5,960 in R23 could push frame rates to 100+ FPS at 1080p low, but the GPU’s pixel rate of 74.27 GPixel/s will cap this.

In DirectX 12 games, the GPU’s 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 176 and Passmark DX12 score of 30 indicate severe performance issues. These games will likely run at sub-30 FPS even at low settings. DirectX 11 games are slightly better, with a score of 70, but still below playable thresholds for modern titles. Older DirectX 9 games, with a score of 93, may run at playable frame rates, as the GPU’s architecture is better suited to legacy APIs. The CPU will not be the limiting factor in any of these scenarios; the GPU will govern all frame output. The 128.0 GB/s memory bandwidth will also cause texture pop-in and stuttering in games that require high bandwidth. Overall, this is not a gaming build, and users should expect to lower resolution to 720p for any moderate gaming, with the understanding that the system is primarily a productivity machine.