SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 7 265 + NVIDIA RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation X2

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

85 / 100
HIGH-END

Power Build

Top 15% of systems. Excellent for 1440p Ultra or 4K High gaming.

1440p Ultra4K High

System Balance Analysis

CPU vs GPU performance ratio
GPU Bottleneck
CPU
96%
VS
GPU
74%

Your GPU is limiting system performance. Consider upgrading to a more powerful graphics card to better utilize your CPU.

PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 7 265

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

NVIDIA RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation X2

0 Benchmark Score
Top 26% 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.

Bottleneck Detected

GPU Bottleneck - Upgrading the weaker component will improve overall performance.

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 5000 Embedded Ada Generation X2 pairing represents a desktop configuration with a combined performance percentile of 72, placing it above the majority of all possible system builds. The CPU is a 20-core, 20-thread Arrow Lake-S part with a 5.30 GHz boost clock, while the GPU is an Ada Lovelace architecture professional mobile chip with 16 GB of GDDR6 memory. The benchmark data provides a clear picture of compute potential, though the absence of measured frame rates requires estimated gaming performance analysis.

Gaming Performance

No measured FPS rows exist for this exact CPU+GPU combination in the FACT PACK. The `measuredFpsUltraByGame` field is empty, and `dataIsMeasured` is false. Consequently, all gaming frame rate discussions are estimates derived from the benchmark scores and hardware specifications, not direct measurements.

The estimated gaming potential is anchored by the GPU's 50th percentile position among all GPUs and the CPU's 93rd percentile among all CPUs. The RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation X2 delivers 32.69 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 510.7 GTexel/s texture fill rate, which suggests strong 1440p performance and viable 4K capability at high settings, though the 150 W TDP and IGP slot width indicate a thermally constrained mobile-derived part. The 16 GB GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth provides ample capacity for modern titles at high resolutions, but the effective 18 Gbps memory speed is not exceptional for the current generation.

The CPU's single-thread strength, evidenced by a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 5960 and a Passmark single-thread score of 4689, ensures that frame pacing in CPU-bound scenarios will be smooth. The 20-core configuration with a 5.30 GHz boost clock means that even poorly optimized games that rely on fewer threads will have access to high per-core performance. For esports titles and competitive shooters, the combination of high single-core scores and the GPU’s compute capabilities should deliver high refresh rate performance at 1080p, though exact figures cannot be stated.

At 1440p, the GPU’s 32.69 TFLOPS and 188.2 GPixel/s pixel rate become the primary drivers. The RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation X2 includes 76 RT cores and 304 tensor cores, which provides hardware-accelerated ray tracing and DLSS support. Estimated frame rates in visually demanding titles would be lower than native resolution benchmarks due to ray tracing overhead, but the tensor cores can offset this through upscaling technologies. The 16 GB VRAM capacity is sufficient for ultra texture packs and high-resolution assets without exceeding memory limits.

At 4K, the 576.0 GB/s bandwidth and 16 GB capacity are adequate, but the 150 W power envelope suggests the GPU may throttle under sustained load. The data indicates the GPU sits at the 50th percentile, meaning half of all GPUs outperform it, so 4K ultra settings would likely require upscaling or reduced settings for playable frame rates. The CPU would not be the limiting factor at this resolution, as its 93rd percentile ranking indicates ample headroom.

FAQ

Q: What is the combined performance percentile of this CPU and GPU pairing?

A: The build has a combined percentile of 72, meaning it outperforms approximately 72% of all recorded system configurations in the database.

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The CPU is 0.3% slower than the AMD EPYC 4464P, 0.3% faster than the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F, 0.7% faster than the AMD EPYC 7343, and 0.7% slower than the AMD EPYC 9124 based on average benchmark scores.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of the RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation X2?

A: The GPU has 576.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth, achieved through a 256-bit bus with 16 GB of GDDR6 memory running at 18 Gbps effective speed.

Q: Does the CPU support ECC memory?

A: No, the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 does not support ECC memory. It supports dual-channel DDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s.

Q: What is the process node for each component?

A: The CPU is manufactured on a 3 nm process by TSMC, while the GPU uses a 5 nm process, also from TSMC.

Q: How many ray tracing cores does the GPU have?

A: The RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation X2 has 76 RT cores and 304 tensor cores, supporting DirectX 12 Ultimate, Vulkan 1.4, and OpenGL 4.6.

Q: What is the launch MSRP of the CPU?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 has a launch MSRP of $394.

Benchmark Performance

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 demonstrates exceptional compute performance, ranking in the 93rd percentile among all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 64640. In Cinebench R23, the CPU scores 42216 in multi-core and 5960 in single-core tests. The multi-core result is particularly strong for a 65 W TDP part, indicating efficient power delivery across the 20 cores. The single-core score of 5960 places it among the top tier of desktop processors, suitable for latency-sensitive workloads.

The Passmark suite reveals specific strengths. The multi-thread score of 49682 and physics score of 2923 indicate robust parallel processing capability. Data compression performance is outstanding at 522983, while data encryption reaches 40456. Extended instructions score 41478, and floating-point math achieves 172776. Integer math scores 134773, and random string sorting hits 63833. The single-thread score of 4689 aligns with the Cinebench R23 single-core result, confirming consistent per-core performance. The find prime numbers score of 418 is notably lower, suggesting this workload is not optimized for the architecture.

The GPU has no benchmark scores in the FACT PACK, with an `avgBenchmarkScore` of 0 and an empty benchmarks array. Its percentile position of 50 places it at the median of all GPUs. This lack of direct benchmark data means the GPU’s performance must be interpreted through its specifications: 32.69 TFLOPS FP32, 510.7 GTexel/s texture rate, and 188.2 GPixel/s pixel rate. The combined picture shows a CPU that is far above average paired with a GPU that is exactly average, creating an imbalanced system where the processor significantly outclasses the graphics adapter.

The nearest rival comparisons for the CPU show negligible differences: the AMD EPYC 4464P is 0.3% faster, the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F is 0.3% slower, the AMD EPYC 7343 is 0.7% slower, and the AMD EPYC 9124 is 0.7% faster. These deltas are within measurement noise, meaning the Ultra 7 265 is statistically tied with these server-class processors in average benchmark scores, despite being a desktop part with a 65 W TDP.

Balance and Bottleneck

The performance asymmetry between the CPU and GPU is stark. The CPU’s 93rd percentile ranking versus the GPU’s 50th percentile creates a clear bottleneck scenario where the GPU will limit frame rates in gaming workloads. The CPU can feed frames far faster than the GPU can render them, meaning most gaming scenarios will be GPU-bound. Evidence from the FPS scaling, while estimated, supports this: at lower resolutions like 1080p, the CPU’s high single-core scores (5960 in Cinebench R23) would allow high frame rates, but the GPU’s median performance would cap maximum FPS.

In compute workloads, the balance shifts. The CPU’s 42216 multi-core Cinebench R23 score and 49682 Passmark multi-thread score dominate the GPU’s 32.69 TFLOPS for tasks that are not heavily parallelized on graphics hardware. However, for rendering tasks that leverage the GPU’s 9728 shading units, the GPU would be the limiting factor. The 150 W TDP of the GPU versus the 65 W TDP of the CPU indicates the power budget heavily favors the processor, reinforcing the CPU-centric nature of this build.

The memory subsystem also shows imbalance. The CPU supports dual-channel DDR5 with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth, while the GPU has 576.0 GB/s of dedicated GDDR6 bandwidth. In gaming, the GPU’s memory bandwidth is sufficient for its performance class, but the CPU’s memory bandwidth could become a constraint in heavily threaded workloads that saturate memory channels. The 30 MB shared L3 cache mitigates some of this, but the data suggests the CPU will wait on the GPU in graphics tasks and the GPU will wait on the CPU in physics or AI-heavy scenarios.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 is a 20-core, 20-thread desktop processor built on the Arrow Lake architecture with a 3 nm process from TSMC. It has a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz, with a 65 W TDP. The chip contains 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. The cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3 cache. Memory support is dual-channel DDR5 with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth, and the CPU provides PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes. Integrated graphics are provided by Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 32 execution units.

The 93rd percentile ranking among all CPUs confirms this is a high-end desktop processor. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 42216 is exceptional for a 65 W part, indicating the 3 nm process delivers excellent performance-per-watt. The single-core score of 5960 demonstrates that the 5.30 GHz boost clock is effective for lightly threaded workloads. The Passmark data compression score of 522983 suggests strong memory and cache performance, while the encryption score of 40456 indicates the presence of AES-NI instructions that are well-optimized.

The lack of a 3D V-Cache and the absence of ECC memory support position this as a consumer-focused chip. The 20 threads equal the core count, meaning no Hyper-Threading, which is characteristic of Arrow Lake’s hybrid design. The nearest rivals being server-class EPYC processors underscores the unusual performance tier of this desktop chip. The 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die yields a high density, consistent with the 3 nm process. The 30 MB L3 cache is modest compared to some competitors, but the fast L2 cache per core compensates in many workloads.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: The CPU’s single-core performance (5960 Cinebench R23) is more than sufficient for high-refresh gaming, but the GPU’s 50th percentile ranking will limit maximum frame rates. At 1080p, the CPU can drive high FPS, but the GPU will likely cap performance below what competitive gamers desire. At 1440p, the GPU becomes the clear bottleneck, and high-refresh (144Hz+) performance is unlikely in demanding titles without reduced settings.

Streaming: The 20-core CPU provides ample headroom for encoding while gaming. The Passmark multi-thread score of 49682 indicates the CPU can handle simultaneous game rendering and software encoding without significant performance degradation. The GPU’s 304 tensor cores could also accelerate AI-based encoding features, but the CPU alone is sufficient for most streaming workloads.

Video editing: The CPU’s 42216 Cinebench R23 multi-core score and 172776 floating-point math score make it well-suited for video editing timelines and exports. The GPU’s 16 GB VRAM and 32.69 TFLOPS can accelerate effects and color grading, but the 50th percentile GPU performance means it will not be the primary accelerator. The 576.0 GB/s memory bandwidth helps with large video files, but the CPU will carry most of the workload.

3D rendering: The GPU’s 76 RT cores and 304 tensor cores provide hardware acceleration for ray-traced rendering, and the 16 GB VRAM is sufficient for complex scenes. However, the GPU’s median performance tier means render times will be average. The CPU’s 20 cores will assist with scene preparation and physics simulations, but the GPU’s 32.69 TFLOPS is the limiting factor for final frame rendering.

Software development: The CPU excels here with a 93rd percentile ranking. Compilation tasks benefit from 20 cores and the 522983 data compression score suggests fast I/O processing. The 5.30 GHz boost clock speeds up single-threaded build steps. The lack of ECC memory may be a concern for mission-critical development, but for general software engineering, this is a strong platform.

Student and office work: This configuration is overkill for typical student or office tasks. The CPU’s performance is far beyond what word processing or spreadsheet workloads require. The integrated Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 32 EU could handle basic display output, but the discrete GPU’s 150 W TDP makes this an inefficient choice for battery-powered or low-power scenarios. The 65 W CPU TDP is reasonable, but the overall system is more suited to content creation than administrative work.

Who Should Build It

This build targets users who prioritize CPU compute performance above GPU graphics capability. Gamers at 1080p or 1440p with moderate settings will find the CPU provides smooth frame pacing, but those seeking maximum FPS at 4K should look elsewhere given the GPU’s 50th percentile ranking. Content creators who work primarily with CPU-intensive tasks like video encoding, software compilation, or data processing will benefit most, as the 93rd percentile CPU excels in these areas.

Software developers building large codebases will appreciate the 20-core configuration and high single-thread performance. Students in computer science or engineering fields who run simulations or compile code will find the CPU exceeds their needs, though the GPU is underutilized in these workloads. Small business workstations requiring reliable multi-threaded performance for financial modeling or database operations would benefit from the CPU, but the 150 W GPU is unnecessary for such tasks.

The absence of measured gaming FPS data means potential buyers should rely on the percentile rankings: the CPU is in the top 7% of all processors, while the GPU is exactly average. This makes the build suitable for professionals who need a powerful CPU and have occasional GPU needs, rather than enthusiasts seeking top-tier gaming performance. The 16 GB GPU VRAM does offer future-proofing for AI workloads, and the 304 tensor cores provide machine learning acceleration that could appeal to researchers.

Build Overview

This is a desktop-class build combining the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 (Arrow Lake-S) with the NVIDIA RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation X2. The overall tier from the percentiles is solidly mid-to-upper range, with a combined percentile of 72. However, the composition is unusual: the CPU ranks in the 93rd percentile while the GPU ranks in the 50th percentile, creating a system that is far stronger in processor-bound tasks than graphics-bound tasks.

The CPU is a mainstream desktop part with a 65 W TDP, designed for Socket 1851 with DDR5 memory support. The GPU is an embedded mobile-derived part with a 150 W TDP and an IGP slot width, indicating it is not a standard desktop card. This pairing suggests a workstation or compact system where power efficiency was prioritized over raw graphics performance. The combined percentile of 72 means the system outperforms 72% of all builds, but the GPU drags down what could be a top-tier configuration.

The architecture mismatch is notable: the CPU uses the latest Arrow Lake design on 3 nm, while the GPU uses Ada Lovelace on 5 nm, which was released earlier. The CPU’s 17,800 million transistors versus the GPU’s 45,900 million transistors shows where the silicon budget was allocated. This build would be better characterized as a CPU-first system with graphics capability as a secondary consideration.

GPU Analysis

The NVIDIA RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation X2 is an Ada Lovelace architecture chip (AD103) manufactured on a 5 nm process by TSMC. It contains 45,900 million transistors on a 379 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 121.1 million per mm². The GPU has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing 576.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth with an effective 18 Gbps memory speed. The base clock is 930 MHz with a boost clock of 1680 MHz.

Compute resources include 9728 shading units, 304 TMUs, 112 ROPs, 76 RT cores, and 304 tensor cores. The FP32 performance is 32.69 TFLOPS, with FP16 performance also at 32.69 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio). Pixel rate is 188.2 GPixel/s and texture rate is 510.7 GTexel/s. The 150 W TDP with no power connectors and an IGP slot width indicates this is a mobile or embedded part, not a standard desktop GPU. The bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x16, and display outputs are portable device dependent.

The 50th percentile ranking means this GPU is exactly average among all GPUs in the database. Despite the 32.69 TFLOPS compute and 16 GB VRAM, the lack of benchmark scores in the FACT PACK prevents direct performance comparisons. The 76 RT cores provide hardware ray tracing, and the 304 tensor cores enable DLSS and AI workloads. The 576.0 GB/s bandwidth is adequate for the compute capability, but the 150 W power limit suggests thermal throttling under sustained load is possible. For rendering, the 510.7 GTexel/s texture rate and 188.2 GPixel/s pixel rate indicate solid rasterization performance, but the average percentile position means it will not outperform other mid-range GPUs.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 uses Intel Socket 1851, which is the LGA 1851 platform for Arrow Lake processors. The CPU supports dual-channel DDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s, and ECC memory is not supported. PCIe Gen 5 is provided with 20 lanes from the CPU, allowing for high-speed NVMe storage and future GPU upgrades. The GPU uses PCIe 4.0 x16, which is backward compatible with the CPU’s PCIe Gen 5 slots, so a newer GPU could be installed without changing the motherboard.

The CPU has no unlockable multiplier, meaning overclocking is not supported, but the 5.30 GHz boost clock is already high. The power delivery requirements are modest given the 65 W TDP, so the existing PSU headroom is likely sufficient for a GPU upgrade. The suggested PSU for the GPU is not provided in the FACT PACK, but the 150 W GPU TDP combined with the 65 W CPU TDP totals 215 W, leaving ample room for a higher-power graphics card in most systems.

A sensible next upgrade would be replacing the RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation X2 with a higher-performance GPU. The CPU’s 93rd percentile ranking means it could support a GPU in the 90th percentile or above without becoming a bottleneck. The PCIe Gen 5 CPU lanes ensure that future GPUs will have full bandwidth available. The 30 MB L3 cache and 20 cores provide sufficient headroom for more demanding graphics workloads. Alternatively, increasing memory capacity beyond the dual-channel configuration is not possible, but faster DDR5 modules could improve the 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. The 16 GB GPU VRAM is already substantial, so memory capacity on the graphics side is unlikely to be a limiting factor for most upgrades.