SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 7 265 + NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation

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)

▼

97 Score

Top 3% Ranking

97 / 100

ULTIMATE READY

Apex Performer

Top 3% 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

99%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 7 265

64,640 Benchmark Score

Top 4% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation

135,218 Benchmark Score

Top 1% 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 NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation pairing represents a high-end desktop configuration aimed at professional workloads and serious content creation. The CPU, built on Intel’s Arrow Lake architecture, offers a unique 20-core/20-thread layout, while the GPU is a workstation-class Ada Lovelace card with 20 GB of VRAM. This analysis uses the provided benchmark data to explain what these components deliver, where they excel, and who should consider building around them. The data shows a system that prioritizes raw compute and memory capacity over gaming-specific features, making it a specialized tool rather than a general-purpose consumer box.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 is a 20-core, 20-thread processor using a 3 nm process from TSMC, housing 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. The architecture, codenamed Arrow Lake-S, runs with a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz, with a TDP of 65 W. This is a desktop part with a dual-channel DDR5 memory bus offering 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth and 20 PCIe Gen 5 lanes from the CPU. The cache layout includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and a shared 30 MB L3 pool. Notably, the multiplier is locked, and ECC memory is not supported, which shapes its intended market as a high-performance workstation rather than an overclocking enthusiast chip.

Benchmark results place this CPU at the 93rd percentile among all processors, with an average benchmark score of 64640. In Cinebench R23, the multi-core score of 42216 is substantial, indicating strong parallel performance, while the single-core score of 5960 suggests excellent per-thread responsiveness. The PassMark multi-thread score of 49682 and integer math score of 134773 further confirm its capability in heavily threaded tasks. However, the data shows a mixed picture: a PassMark single-thread score of 4689 is competitive, but the find prime numbers score of 418 is notably low, hinting that certain integer workloads may not scale as well as the core count suggests. The nearest rivals, such as the AMD EPYC 4464P (avgScore 64823, deltaPct -0.3) and the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F (avgScore 64438, deltaPct 0.3), show that this chip sits in a tight pack—within 0.7% of the EPYC 7343 and 0.7% above the EPYC 9124, meaning performance is nearly identical to several server-class parts.

For real workloads, these scores translate to a CPU that handles multi-threaded rendering (Cinebench R23 multi-core 42216) and data compression (PassMark 522983) with ease, while the single-core strength (Cinebench R20 single-core 884) ensures snappy UI interactions and moderate gaming performance. The 20 threads, rather than 40, suggest a design choice favoring higher clock speeds and lower power draw over extreme parallelism, which is evident in the 65 W TDP. This makes it a capable air-cooled option, but the locked multiplier and lack of ECC mean it is not built for tweaking or mission-critical data integrity.

Usage Scenarios

For high-refresh gaming, the CPU’s single-core performance is adequate, but the GPU’s professional focus limits frame rates. The Cinebench R20 single-core score of 884 and PassMark single-thread of 4689 indicate it will not bottleneck modern games, yet the RTX 4000 Ada’s workstation drivers and 20 GB VRAM are not optimized for 1080p/1440p esports titles, so expect competitive but not top-tier results.

Streaming benefits from the CPU’s multi-core strength. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 42216 provides headroom for encoding, but the lack of an unlocked multiplier and the 20-thread limit mean software x264 encoding will be solid, not extraordinary. The PassMark data encryption score of 40456 suggests secure streaming setups are feasible, though hardware encoders on the GPU would be preferable.

Video editing is a strong suit. The PassMark floating point math score of 172776 and integer math of 134773 accelerate timeline scrubbing and export tasks, while the 30 MB L3 cache helps with large file handling. The dual-channel DDR5 bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s is sufficient for 4K editing, though 8K workflows may feel constrained.

3D rendering leans heavily on the GPU, but the CPU contributes via the Cinebench R15 multi-core score of 4255, which is moderate. The RTX 4000 Ada’s 26.73 TFLOPS FP32 and 48 RT cores handle ray tracing, while the CPU’s 20 threads manage scene preparation. The data suggests a balanced approach where the CPU avoids being a bottleneck in most render engines.

Software development is where the CPU shines. The PassMark data compression score of 522983 and random string sorting of 63833 indicate fast compilation times and code analysis. The 20 cores handle parallel builds efficiently, and the single-core score of 4689 ensures quick IDE responsiveness, making this a practical choice for developers.

Student and office work is overkill but functional. The 65 W TDP and integrated Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 32EU provide a basic display output, while the multi-core scores crush spreadsheets and multitasking. However, the launch MSRP of $394 for the CPU alone suggests this is not a cost-effective option for basic tasks, and the data shows better-suited, cheaper parts exist.

GPU Analysis

The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation is a workstation GPU built on the Ada Lovelace architecture with a 5 nm process, containing 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die. It features 20 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 160-bit bus, delivering 360.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock runs at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective), while the base clock is 1500 MHz and boost is 2175 MHz. The GPU has 6144 shading units, 192 TMUs, 64 ROPs, 48 RT cores, and 192 tensor cores, with a pixel rate of 139.2 GPixel/s and texture rate of 417.6 GTexel/s. FP32 and FP16 performance are both 26.73 TFLOPS, indicating a 1:1 ratio. The TDP is 130 W with a suggested PSU of 300 W, fitting a single-slot design with a 16-pin power connector and PCIe 4.0 x16 interface.

Benchmark results place the GPU at the 95th percentile among all GPUs, with an average score of 135218. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 146593, and in Vulkan, 123842. Compared to nearest rivals, it is virtually identical to the NVIDIA A10M (avgScore 135230, deltaPct 0) and 0.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon PRO W6800 (avgScore 135396, deltaPct -0.1), with slightly larger gaps to the Radeon Pro W6800X Duo (-0.4%) and Radeon PRO V620 (-0.9%). This places it in a performance class where it trades blows with previous-generation server and workstation cards.

For rendering, the 20 GB VRAM is the standout feature, allowing large textures and scenes to fit in memory without spilling to disk. The 360.0 GB/s bandwidth is modest for the capacity, meaning data-heavy workloads like 8K video or massive 3D scenes may see bandwidth throttling. The 48 RT cores enable hardware-accelerated ray tracing, and the 192 tensor cores support AI denoising and DLSS, but the 1:1 FP16/FP32 ratio suggests it prioritizes compute precision over mixed-precision speed. The single-slot form factor and 130 W TDP make it easy to install in multi-GPU workstations, but the 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs limit display options.

Who Should Build It

This system targets professionals who need 20 GB of VRAM for GPU-accelerated rendering, AI inference, or large dataset processing. The CPU’s 93rd percentile and GPU’s 95th percentile mean it outpaces most consumer hardware, making it suitable for 3D artists using Blender or Maya, video editors working with 4K/8K timelines, and data scientists running CUDA-based models. The 20 cores handle simulation and preprocessing, while the 48 RT cores and 20 GB VRAM handle final render passes.

Gamers at 1440p or 4K who prioritize ray tracing could benefit, but the workstation drivers and lack of gaming-specific features (like high refresh rate optimizations) make it a suboptimal choice unless they also do professional work. Content creators using Adobe Premiere or DaVinci Resolve will find the GPU’s 26.73 TFLOPS accelerate effects, while the CPU’s PassMark multithread score of 49682 ensures smooth timeline performance. Software developers working on large codebases will appreciate the 20 threads for parallel builds and the 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth for database operations.

Students in engineering or computer science programs could use this for CAD and simulation, but the cost and power are beyond typical academic needs. Small business workstations handling financial modeling or video conferencing would be overserved, though the 65 W CPU TDP keeps energy bills reasonable. The data does not support a pure-gaming or budget build; it is a purpose-built workstation for compute-heavy fields.

Benchmark Performance

The combined percentile for this CPU-GPU pair is 94, indicating it outperforms 94% of all tested combinations. The CPU’s average benchmark score of 64640 is matched by the GPU’s 135218, but the individual scores tell a more nuanced story. In Cinebench R23, the CPU’s 42216 multi-core and 5960 single-core scores are strong, but the GPU’s Geekbench scores (146593 OpenCL, 123842 Vulkan) reveal a card that excels in compute but not necessarily gaming. The CPU’s nearest rival, the AMD EPYC 4464P, is only 0.3% faster, while the GPU’s rival, the NVIDIA A10M, is exactly 0% different, meaning this pairing offers no unique performance advantage over similar alternatives.

The PassMark scores for the CPU highlight its strengths: floating point math (172776) and integer math (134773) are high, but extended instructions (41478) and physics (2923) are lower, suggesting variability across workload types. The GPU’s percentile of 95 is higher than the CPU’s 93, indicating the GPU is the more exceptional component relative to its peers. Together, the system excels in mixed CPU+GPU workloads like rendering, where the CPU prepares data and the GPU processes it, but it underperforms in single-threaded or low-VRAM scenarios.

Gaming Performance

No measured FPS rows exist for this exact combination—the FACT PACK contains no measuredFps data. Consequently, all frame rates discussed here are estimates derived from the benchmark scores, not actual measurements. The CPU’s single-core performance (Cinebench R23 single-core 5960) is sufficient for 1080p gaming, but the GPU’s workstation orientation means it is not optimized for rasterization or high refresh rates.

At 1080p, the GPU’s 26.73 TFLOPS FP32 suggests it can handle most titles at high settings, but the 160-bit memory bus and 360.0 GB/s bandwidth limit texture streaming. Expect 100+ FPS in esports titles but 60-80 FPS in AAA games. At 1440p, the 20 GB VRAM eliminates memory bottlenecks, but the bandwidth becomes a constraint, likely yielding 60-100 FPS depending on the game. At 4K, the GPU’s 139.2 GPixel/s pixel rate supports 4K output, but ray tracing with 48 RT cores would drop frame rates to 30-50 FPS without DLSS.

The lack of gaming-specific features like high clock boosts or GDDR6X memory means this is not a gaming card. The data indicates it is a compute-first GPU, so gamers should temper expectations. The CPU’s 20 threads do not help gaming beyond 8-16 threads, so the system is balanced for work, not play.

Balance and Bottleneck

In CPU-bound workloads, the processor’s 93rd percentile ensures it rarely limits the GPU. For example, in Cinebench R23 multi-core (42216), the CPU handles 3D rendering scene preprocessing, while the GPU’s 26.73 TFLOPS accelerates the render. However, in gaming, the CPU’s single-core score (5960) is adequate but not exceptional, so the GPU becomes the bottleneck due to its bandwidth and driver overhead. The FPS scaling from benchmark scores suggests that at 1080p, the CPU may hold back the GPU in CPU-heavy games, but at 4K, the GPU’s pixel rate and VRAM are the limiting factors.

For data-intensive tasks like video editing, the CPU’s 30 MB L3 cache and 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth prevent bottlenecks, but the GPU’s 360.0 GB/s bandwidth is lower than the CPU’s, meaning GPU-accelerated effects may stall. The PassMark data compression score of 522983 shows the CPU handles compression tasks, but the GPU’s lack of dedicated video encoder information means streaming is CPU-bound. Overall, the system is balanced for multi-threaded compute, but the GPU’s workstation design creates a bottleneck in latency-sensitive applications.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The CPU uses the Intel Socket 1851 platform, which supports DDR5 memory in dual-channel mode, with a maximum memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. The platform offers 20 PCIe Gen 5 lanes from the CPU, but the GPU uses PCIe 4.0 x16, so a future upgrade to a PCIe 5.0 GPU would require a motherboard with that support. The TDP of 65 W means the CPU can be cooled by a capable air cooler, and the suggested PSU for the GPU is 300 W, leaving headroom for a more powerful GPU later.

Sensible next upgrades include adding more DDR5 memory (up to the motherboard’s capacity) or swapping the GPU for a higher-tier Ada Lovelace card, though the 130 W GPU TDP and single-slot design limit options. The CPU’s locked multiplier prevents overclocking, so platform longevity depends on future Arrow Lake-S parts. The 20 GB VRAM is future-proof for 4K textures, but the 160-bit bus may become a bottleneck for next-gen games. The integrated Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 32EU provides fallback display, but it is not suitable for gaming. The PCIe Gen 5 lanes can support fast NVMe SSDs, which would benefit the PassMark data compression workload.

FAQ

Q: What is the CPU’s core and thread count?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 has 20 cores and 20 threads, with a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz.

Q: How much VRAM does the RTX 4000 Ada have, and what type?

A: It has 20 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 160-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 360.0 GB/s.

Q: Does this system support ECC memory?

A: No, the CPU does not support ECC memory, despite its workstation-class GPU.

Q: What is the GPU’s percentile ranking among all GPUs?

A: The RTX 4000 Ada Generation is at the 95th percentile, with an average benchmark score of 135218.

Q: Are there any measured FPS data for this combination?

A: No, the data contains no measured FPS rows; all gaming performance is estimated from benchmark scores.

Q: What is the CPU’s TDP and socket type?

A: The CPU has a 65 W TDP and uses the Intel Socket 1851 platform.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rival, the AMD EPYC 4464P?

A: The AMD EPYC 4464P has an average score of 64823, which is 0.3% higher than the Core Ultra 7 265’s 64640.

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 7 265 + NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation

Apex Performer

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core Ultra 7 265

NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation

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

GPU Analysis

Who Should Build It

Benchmark Performance

Gaming Performance

Balance and Bottleneck

Upgrade Path and Platform

FAQ

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