SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 7 265 + Intel Arc A310

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
85%
PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 7 265

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

Intel Arc A310

7,550 Benchmark Score
Top 15% 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 Intel Arc A310 pairing is a study in contrast: a high-end desktop CPU built for heavy multi-threaded work paired with an entry-level graphics card designed for basic display output and light gaming. The CPU sits at the 93rd percentile among all processors, while the GPU rests at the 40th percentile among all graphics cards, creating a combined system percentile of 67. This is not a balanced gaming rig; it is a workstation-oriented platform with integrated-graphics-class discrete GPU performance.

FAQ

Q: What is the Intel Core Ultra 7 265's performance percentile among all CPUs?

A: The Core Ultra 7 265 sits at the 93rd percentile, indicating it outperforms 93% of all CPUs in the benchmark database. Its average benchmark score is 64,640, placing it within 1% of the AMD EPYC 4464P and AMD EPYC 9124.

Q: How does the Intel Arc A310 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Arc A310's average benchmark score of 7,550 puts it at the 40th percentile. It performs within 1% of the AMD Radeon R7 250 and AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100, and is 1% faster than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650.

Q: What is the CPU's core and thread configuration?

A: The Core Ultra 7 265 has 20 cores and 20 threads, meaning it does not support simultaneous multithreading. It features a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz.

Q: What memory type does the CPU support?

A: The CPU supports DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, offering a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. It does not support ECC memory.

Q: What is the GPU's memory capacity and type?

A: The Intel Arc A310 comes with 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 124.0 GB/s. Its memory clock runs at 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective).

Q: What is the power draw of the GPU and what PSU is suggested?

A: The Arc A310 has a TDP of 30 W and requires no power connectors. Intel suggests a 200 W power supply for a system using this GPU.

Q: Does the CPU have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, the Core Ultra 7 265 includes integrated Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 32 execution units. This provides a fallback display output and basic acceleration even without a discrete GPU.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The platform is built around Intel's Socket 1851, which is specific to the Core Ultra Series 2 processors built on the Arrow Lake architecture. This is a desktop-class platform, and the CPU itself is marked as "Active" in production status, meaning it is a current, supported product. The CPU's process node is 3 nm, fabricated by TSMC, with a die size of 243 mm² and 17,800 million transistors.

The Core Ultra 7 265 supports DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus, which is standard for modern high-end desktop platforms. The memory bandwidth is rated at 102.4 GB/s, a figure that will be relevant for memory-intensive workloads like data compression and encryption. The CPU provides 20 PCIe Gen 5 lanes directly from the processor, enabling fast connectivity for NVMe storage and add-in cards. ECC memory is not supported, which is a consideration for users seeking error-correcting memory for long-running compute tasks.

The integrated Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 32 EUs means the system can operate without a discrete GPU. This is a sensible starting point for a workstation that can be upgraded later. The discrete Intel Arc A310, however, has a TDP of just 30 W and requires no auxiliary power connectors. The suggested PSU for the GPU is 200 W, which is extremely low. Even a modest power supply can handle this CPU and GPU combination, as the CPU's TDP is 65 W. The upgrade path here is clear: the CPU has substantial headroom for a far more powerful GPU, as the 20-lane PCIe Gen 5 interface and the 93rd-percentile CPU performance will not bottleneck modern graphics cards.

A sensible next upgrade for this platform would be a more capable discrete GPU, as the current Arc A310 is the limiting factor in gaming scenarios. The CPU's 93rd percentile ranking and high multi-core scores suggest it can feed even top-tier graphics cards without becoming a bottleneck. The motherboard socket, memory support, and PCIe lanes are all current-generation, so the platform should support future GPU upgrades without requiring a CPU change.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 is a 20-core, 20-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, which is part of the Core Ultra Series 2. It is manufactured on a 3 nm process by TSMC, a current-generation node that contributes to its 65 W TDP. The base clock of 2.40 GHz and boost clock of 5.30 GHz indicate a wide frequency range, allowing the CPU to scale from power-efficient multi-threaded workloads to high-frequency single-thread tasks.

The cache hierarchy is substantial: 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3 cache. This large cache pool helps keep frequently accessed data close to the cores, reducing latency and improving performance in workloads that exhibit data locality. The CPU is not multiplier-unlocked, meaning overclocking is not officially supported, but the boost clock of 5.30 GHz is already high.

Benchmark results show a processor that excels in multi-threaded workloads. In Cinebench R23, the CPU scores 42,216 points in multi-core and 5,960 points in single-core. The multi-core score is roughly 7 times the single-core score, which is consistent with a chip that scales well across its 20 cores. The Cinebench R20 multi-core score of 6,268 and single-core score of 884 follow a similar pattern, confirming strong scaling.

PassMark results further illustrate the CPU's character. The multi-thread score is 49,682, while the single-thread score is 4,689. The data compression score of 522,983 is particularly high, indicating excellent performance for archiving and file handling. Data encryption scores 40,456, and extended instructions score 41,478, showing solid throughput for cryptographic and SIMD workloads. Floating-point math scores 172,776, while integer math scores 134,773, suggesting the CPU is stronger at floating-point operations, which is beneficial for scientific and rendering tasks.

The CPU's closest rivals are server-class AMD EPYC processors, which underscores its high multi-threaded performance. It performs 0.3% below the AMD EPYC 4464P and 0.7% above the AMD EPYC 7343. Against the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F, which is the same chip without integrated graphics, it is 0.3% faster, likely due to minor thermal or power differences. This places the Core Ultra 7 265 firmly in the upper echelon of desktop CPUs, competitive with entry-level server chips in raw throughput.

Balance and Bottleneck

The data presents a clear bottleneck scenario: the CPU is vastly more capable than the GPU. The Core Ultra 7 265 sits at the 93rd percentile, while the Arc A310 sits at the 40th percentile. In gaming workloads, the GPU will be the limiting factor. The Arc A310's PassMark G3D score of 5,433 and DirectX 12 score of 29 suggest it is only suitable for light or older titles at low settings.

The CPU's high scores in physics (PassMark physics: 2,923) and integer math (134,773) mean it can handle game logic and AI calculations without breaking a sweat. However, the GPU's 2.688 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 4 GB of memory will cap frame rates well below what the CPU could otherwise support. The CPU is not the bottleneck in any gaming scenario; the GPU is.

In non-gaming workloads, the balance shifts. The CPU's multi-threaded performance is the star, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 42,216. The GPU's compute score is 2,157 in PassMark, which is low, but for tasks that are CPU-bound—such as data compression, encryption, and software compilation—the GPU's weakness is irrelevant. The system is well-balanced for CPU-intensive productivity, but severely imbalanced for graphics-intensive tasks.

The PCIe Gen 5 x20 interface from the CPU provides ample bandwidth for the Arc A310, which uses PCIe 4.0 x8. This means the GPU is not bandwidth-limited, but its own compute capabilities are the constraint. For a user who primarily plays games, the Arc A310 will hold back the system significantly. For a user who primarily renders video or compiles code, the CPU will deliver near-maximum performance, and the GPU is only needed for display output.

Who Should Build It

This system targets users who need extreme CPU performance but have minimal graphics requirements. The 93rd-percentile CPU makes it ideal for professionals working with CPU-bound workloads: software developers compiling large codebases, researchers running simulations, and analysts processing large datasets. The high data compression score of 522,983 and encryption score of 40,456 make it suitable for database management and secure file handling.

Gamers at 1080p with high-refresh monitors should avoid this pairing, as the Arc A310's 40th-percentile ranking will not deliver competitive frame rates. However, students and office workers who need a responsive system for coding, document editing, and web browsing will find the CPU's single-thread score of 4,689 more than sufficient. Small business workstations that run accounting software or inventory management systems—tasks that rely on CPU throughput rather than graphics—will benefit from the high multi-thread performance.

Content creators who work primarily with audio or text will also find value, as these tasks are CPU-bound. Video editors who rely on GPU acceleration for effects and rendering will be disappointed by the Arc A310, but editors who use CPU-based encoding may still see good performance. The CPU's Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 42,216 indicates strong rendering capability for CPU-based 3D rendering, though the GPU will not assist in this process.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: This scenario is not viable with the Arc A310. The GPU's PassMark G3D score of 5,433 is a fraction of what modern gaming GPUs achieve, and its 4 GB memory capacity will limit texture detail. The CPU will not be the constraint; the GPU will fail to reach high frame rates at any resolution.

Streaming: The CPU's 20 cores and high multi-thread score of 49,682 in PassMark make it excellent for software encoding of video streams. The Arc A310 can handle display output, but the CPU will do the heavy lifting for encoding, delivering a smooth streaming experience for the CPU side, though game performance will be poor.

Video editing: CPU-based effects and timeline scrubbing will be very fast, given the Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 42,216. However, GPU-accelerated effects will be slow or unusable, as the Arc A310's OpenCL score of 30,607 is modest and its DirectX 12 score of 29 is very low. Users should expect a CPU-centric editing workflow.

3D rendering: CPU rendering in applications like Blender or Cinema 4D will benefit from the 20-core configuration, with the Cinebench R23 score indicating strong performance. GPU rendering on the Arc A310 is not practical due to its low compute performance (2,157 in PassMark GPU compute).

Software development: Compilation and testing will be extremely fast. The CPU's integer math score of 134,773 and data compression score of 522,983 speed up build times and package management. The GPU is sufficient for basic IDE rendering and multiple monitors.

Student and office work: The system is overkill for this scenario, but it will handle any productivity task with ease. The CPU's single-thread score of 4,689 ensures snappy application launches and responsive spreadsheets, while the GPU's low power draw (30 W) keeps the system quiet and cool.

Gaming Performance

No measured FPS data exists for the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 combined with the Intel Arc A310. The FACT PACK contains no measuredFps rows for this exact combination. All frame rate discussions below are estimates based on the benchmark scores of each component.

The Arc A310's gaming performance is best understood through its DirectX benchmarks: DirectX 9 scores 69, DirectX 10 scores 31, DirectX 11 scores 33, and DirectX 12 scores 29. These scores are extremely low, indicating that even older DirectX 9 titles will be challenging. The GPU's Pixel Rate of 28.00 GPixel/s and Texture Rate of 56.00 GTexel/s are entry-level figures.

At 1080p with ultra settings, this system will struggle to maintain 30 frames per second in most modern titles. In esports titles like Counter-Strike 2 or Valorant, which are CPU-bound and lighter on the GPU, the Core Ultra 7 265's high single-thread performance may push frame rates to playable levels, but the GPU's low fill rate will still cap performance. At 1440p or 4K, the GPU's 4 GB memory and 64-bit bus will cause severe stuttering and texture pop-in. The GPU's nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650, is 1% slower in average benchmark score, which gives a reference point: the GTX 1650 is a 1080p low-to-medium settings card for modern games, and the Arc A310 is in that same performance class.

Gamers should treat this as an office PC that can occasionally play older or less demanding games at low settings. The CPU will never be the bottleneck; the GPU will be the sole determinant of gaming performance.

Build Overview

This is a desktop-class build pairing the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 with the Intel Arc A310. The CPU is a 20-core Arrow Lake processor on Socket 1851, released in January 2025 with a launch MSRP of $394. The GPU is an Intel Arc A310, based on the Xe-HPG architecture (Alchemist generation), released in October 2022 and now marked as end-of-life.

The combined system percentile is 67, which is pulled down significantly by the GPU. The CPU's 93rd percentile ranking indicates a top-tier processor, while the GPU's 40th percentile ranking indicates an entry-level graphics solution. This is a workstation-oriented build where the CPU is the primary investment and the GPU is an afterthought for basic display output.

The Arc A310 is a single-slot card with no power connectors, a 30 W TDP, and a suggested PSU of 200 W. It has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, 768 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, and offers four mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs. This is a card designed for multi-display office setups or as a basic video output solution, not for gaming.

Benchmark Performance

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 achieves an average benchmark score of 64,640, ranking at the 93rd percentile of all CPUs. Its single-core Cinebench R23 score is 5,960, and its multi-core score is 42,216. In PassMark, it scores 4,689 in single-thread and 49,682 in multi-thread. The CPU's nearest rival is the AMD EPYC 4464P, which scores 64,823 (0.3% higher), and the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F, which scores 64,438 (0.3% lower). This places the 265 squarely in server-class territory for multi-threaded performance.

The Intel Arc A310 achieves an average benchmark score of 7,550, ranking at the 40th percentile of all GPUs. Its best results are in Geekbench OpenCL with 30,607 and Vulkan with 28,964. In PassMark, it scores 5,433 in G3D and 2,157 in GPU compute. Its nearest rival is the AMD Radeon R7 250, which scores 7,557 (0.1% higher), and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100, which scores 7,580 (0.4% higher). The Arc A310 is 1% faster than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650, which scores 7,472.

The combined picture is a system where the CPU dominates the GPU in relative performance by a wide margin. The CPU's Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 42,216 is a massive number, indicating it can handle the most demanding CPU workloads, while the GPU's DirectX 12 score of 29 is a tiny fraction of what a modern gaming GPU would achieve. This is a system built for CPU-centric productivity, not for graphics-intensive applications. The data shows that the CPU is the clear star, and the GPU is a placeholder for basic display functionality.