SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 7 265F + AMD Radeon RX 6600

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

93 / 100
ULTIMATE READY

Apex Performer

Top 7% 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
91%
PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 7 265F

64,438 Benchmark Score
Top 4% Market Ranking
View Full Specs →
GRAPHICS CARD

AMD Radeon RX 6600

19,036 Benchmark Score
Top 9% 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 265F paired with the AMD Radeon RX 6600 is a desktop combination that pairs a top-tier CPU with a mid-range GPU, producing a combined percentile of 78 across tracked builds. The CPU sits in the 93rd percentile of all processors, while the GPU occupies the 63rd percentile — a clear asymmetry that shapes everything this pairing does well and everything it leaves on the table. No measured frame-rate data exists for this exact CPU+GPU combination in the database; all FPS discussion below is therefore estimated from the benchmark scores rather than drawn from recorded gameplay tests.

Balance and Bottleneck

The data shows an imbalanced build, and the imbalance runs in one direction: the processor outruns the graphics card by a wide margin. The Core Ultra 7 265F ranks in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 64438, placing it alongside parts like the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 (average score 64640, deltaPct -0.3), the AMD EPYC 7343 (64202, deltaPct 0.4), the AMD EPYC 4464P (64823, deltaPct -0.6), and the Intel Core i9-13900KS (64051, deltaPct 0.6). The Radeon RX 6600, by contrast, sits in the 63rd percentile of all GPUs with an average score of 19036, statistically level with the NVIDIA Quadro K6000 (19030, deltaPct 0), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile (19049, deltaPct -0.1), the NVIDIA Tesla K20m (19089, deltaPct -0.3), and the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation (18954, deltaPct 0.4).

What does that gap mean in practice? In GPU-bound scenarios — modern games at higher resolutions with ultra settings — the RX 6600 is the limiting component. Its PassMark G3D score of 15096 and 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1492 define the ceiling for frame rates, and no amount of CPU headroom raises it. In CPU-bound scenarios — high-refresh, lower-resolution gaming, simulation-heavy workloads, code compilation, compression, encryption — the Core Ultra 7 265F has ample reserve. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 41980 and PassMark multithread score of 49410 are both top-decile figures, while its single-thread score of 4750 keeps it competitive in lightly threaded tasks.

The practical conclusion: this build will feel bottlenecked by the GPU in demanding games and bottlenecked by nothing in productivity work. Users who buy this pairing for CPU-heavy tasks get full value; users who buy it primarily for gaming at ultra settings are leaving CPU performance unused.

Gaming Performance

As noted, the database contains no measured FPS rows for this exact combination, so the figures below are estimates derived from the benchmark scores rather than recorded results.

The RX 6600's PassMark G3D score of 15096 and its percentile position of 63 frame the expectations. Cards in this scoring band are classically 1080p-oriented performers: at 1080p with ultra settings, estimated frame rates in most mainstream titles should land in the high frame-rate territory suitable for standard or high-refresh 1080p displays, with the GPU's 8 GB of GDDR6 providing adequate capacity at that resolution in the majority of titles. At 1440p, expectations should be tempered — the 128-bit memory bus and 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth become the constraint, and settings reductions or upscaling techniques are the realistic path to smooth play. At 4K ultra, this class of card is generally out of its depth.

The CPU side of the ledger will not be the problem. With a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 5926 and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz, the Core Ultra 7 265F delivers frame pacing and draw-call throughput well beyond what the RX 6600 can consume. Esports-style and CPU-heavy simulation titles should run at very high estimated frame rates at 1080p, because in those cases the 93rd-percentile processor is doing the heavy lifting. Ray tracing deserves a caveat: the RX 6600 carries 28 RT cores, and while RDNA 2.0 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), ray-traced effects at ultra settings will pull estimated frame rates down meaningfully, especially beyond 1080p.

In short: estimated 1080p ultra performance is the sweet spot, 1440p is workable with adjustments, and the CPU is never the limiter in games.

Who Should Build It

This pairing suits three broad groups, defined strictly by the measured numbers.

First, content creators and developers who game secondarily. The Core Ultra 7 265F's 20 cores and 20 threads, 41980 Cinebench R23 multi-core score, and 49410 PassMark multithread score make it a genuine workstation-class performer for video editing, 3D rendering, and code compilation. For these users, the RX 6600 is a functional display and light-render adapter, and its OpenCL score of 28850 and Vulkan compute score of 67623 provide usable GPU acceleration in supported applications.

Second, high-refresh 1080p gamers. At 1080p, the GPU's G3D score of 15096 supports high estimated frame rates, and the 93rd-percentile CPU guarantees no processor-side ceiling. Gamers targeting 1080p — especially in competitive or esports titles — get a balanced experience at that resolution.

Third, small-business and office workstation builders. The CPU's 65 W TDP, DDR5 support with 102.4 GB/s of memory bandwidth, and strong PassMark productivity scores — 507018 in data compression, 39468 in encryption, 62439 in string sorting — make it a capable general-purpose desktop for sustained office and light-server workloads.

Who should not build it: 4K gamers and ray-tracing enthusiasts. The GPU's percentile position of 63 and its rival cluster around the 19000 average-score mark place it below the tier where 4K ultra play is realistic.

FAQ

Q: Is this build balanced?

A: No. The CPU sits in the 93rd percentile and the GPU in the 63rd, for a combined percentile of 78. The graphics card is the limiting component in every GPU-bound workload.

Q: What resolution should I target for gaming?

A: 1080p is the realistic ultra-settings target. The RX 6600's PassMark G3D score of 15096 and 224.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth support high estimated frame rates at 1080p; 1440p requires settings adjustments, and no measured FPS data exists for this pairing.

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

A: Its average score of 64438 is within a fraction of a percent of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 (deltaPct -0.3), the AMD EPYC 7343 (deltaPct 0.4), the AMD EPYC 4464P (deltaPct -0.6), and the Intel Core i9-13900KS (deltaPct 0.6) — effectively identical aggregate performance to all four.

Q: Can the RX 6600 handle ray tracing?

A: It has 28 RT cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), so hardware ray tracing works, but the benchmark scores indicate heavy RT workloads at ultra settings will reduce estimated frame rates significantly, particularly above 1080p.

Q: How much PSU headroom does this build need?

A: The GPU's suggested PSU is 300 W, and its TDP is 132 W. The CPU's TDP is 65 W, so a supply meeting the suggested figure covers both components comfortably.

Q: Is the CPU good for multitasking and streaming?

A: Yes. With 20 cores, 20 threads, a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 41980, and a PassMark physics score of 3172, the processor has substantial headroom to run a game and encode a stream simultaneously.

Q: Does the CPU have integrated graphics?

A: No — integrated graphics are listed as N/A for the 265F, so the RX 6600 (or another discrete card) is required for display output.

Benchmark Performance

The full picture starts with the CPU. Cinebench R15 returns 4231 multi-core and 597 single-core; Cinebench R20 returns 17631 multi-core and 2488 single-core; Cinebench R23 returns 41980 multi-core and 5926 single-core. The PassMark suite adds 507018 for data compression, 39468 for encryption, 39235 for extended instructions, 416 for prime finding, 173855 for floating-point math, 138078 for integer math, 62439 for string sorting, 3172 for physics, and 4750 for single-thread — an average of 64438 across all tests, placing the chip in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs.

The GPU's ledger: a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1492, Geekbench Metal at 88398, OpenCL at 28850, and Vulkan at 67623, plus PassMark G3D at 15096, GPU compute at 6554, G2D at 889, and DirectX subtests of 197 (DX9), 152 (DX11), 95 (DX10), and 51 (DX12). The average of 19036 puts the card in the 63rd percentile.

The combined reading is a build in the 78th percentile. That single number tells the story: strong overall, dragged upward by the processor, capped by the graphics card. Against its nearest rivals, the RX 6600 is statistically indistinguishable from the Quadro K6000, the RTX 4050 Mobile, the Tesla K20m, and the RTX 2000 Ada Generation — all within a deltaPct of one percent or less — while the 265F is similarly dead-even with the Core Ultra 7 265, EPYC 7343, EPYC 4464P, and i9-13900KS.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh 1080p gaming: The pairing's strongest gaming case. The GPU's G3D score of 15096 supports high estimated frame rates at 1080p, and the CPU's single-core strength (5926 in Cinebench R23, 4750 in PassMark single-thread) removes any processor-side cap. Above 1080p, the GPU's percentile position of 63 becomes the constraint.

Streaming: Well supported by the CPU side. Encoding while gaming draws on the 20-core, 20-thread configuration and the 49410 PassMark multithread score, meaning the stream workload runs alongside the game without competing for scarce threads. The GPU handles the render load at 1080p.

Video editing: A capable configuration. The 102.4 GB/s of dual-channel DDR5 bandwidth, the 30 MB of shared L3 cache, and the top-decile multi-core scores make timeline scrubbing and export fast, while the GPU's OpenCL score of 28850 provides usable acceleration in supported editors.

3D rendering: Strong on the CPU, modest on the GPU. CPU-based rendering benefits from the 41980 Cinebench R23 multi-core result and 173855 floating-point math score. GPU rendering is limited by the 8.928 TFLOPS FP32 figure and the absence of tensor cores, so the processor is the primary render engine.

Software development: Excellent. Compilation scales with cores and clocks, and the 265F's 5.30 GHz boost with 20 threads places it beside the i9-13900KS in aggregate score (deltaPct 0.6). Container workloads and virtual machines also fit comfortably within the 20-thread budget.

Student and office work: More than sufficient. Documents, browsing, and office suites barely register against the 93rd-percentile CPU, and the GPU's display outputs — one HDMI 2.1 and three DisplayPort 1.4a — support multi-monitor setups for productivity.

GPU Analysis

The Radeon RX 6600 is a Navi 23 chip on the RDNA 2.0 architecture, manufactured by TSMC on a 7 nm process, with 11,060 million transistors packed into a 237 mm² die at a density of 46.7M per mm². Its clock profile is a 1626 MHz base, a 2491 MHz boost, and a 2044 MHz game clock, with memory running at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective).

The memory subsystem is the card's defining characteristic — and its main constraint. Eight gigabytes of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus yields 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth, a figure that explains why the card benchmarks as a 1080p-class part. The rasterization engine is more respectable than the memory: 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 64 ROPs produce a pixel rate of 159.4 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 279.0 GTexel/s. Compute output is 8.928 TFLOPS FP32 and 17.86 TFLOPS FP16 at a 2:1 ratio. Ray tracing hardware exists — 28 RT cores — but the benchmark scores indicate RT is a secondary capability, not a primary one. There are no tensor cores.

For rendering work, the compute-oriented numbers matter most: Geekbench Metal at 88398, Vulkan at 67623, and OpenCL at 28850, alongside a PassMark GPU compute score of 6554. These figures place the card in the mid-tier for GPU compute, adequate for hardware-accelerated effects and viewport work but not for serious GPU-path production rendering, where its rival cluster — the Quadro K6000, Tesla K20m, and RTX 2000 Ada Generation — defines a professional-adjacent but modest tier. The card is dual-slot, 190 mm long, powered by a single 8-pin connector, and connects over PCIe 4.0 x8. Its production status is end-of-life.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The platform story is modern and forward-looking on the CPU side. The Core Ultra 7 265F uses Intel Socket 1851, supports DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration with 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth, and offers PCIe Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes. That lane budget and generation support give the build genuine upgrade headroom: a future GPU with a wider bus interface would not be constrained by the platform, even though the current RX 6600 itself uses only PCIe 4.0 x8.

Power headroom is generous. The CPU carries a 65 W TDP and the GPU a 132 W TDP with a suggested PSU of 300 W. That suggested figure reflects the card in isolation, but the combined load of both components remains modest, and the single 8-pin GPU connector underlines how undemanding the graphics side is. ECC memory is not supported, and the multiplier is locked, so memory and platform tuning are the only levers — the chip cannot be overclocked via the multiplier.

The sensible next upgrade is unambiguous: the graphics card. Because the CPU sits 30 percentile points above the GPU, a substantially faster GPU could be added without touching the processor, the socket, or the memory, and the PCIe Gen 5, 20-lane platform would feed it properly. Note that the 265F has no integrated graphics, so the RX 6600 cannot be removed without losing display output entirely.

CPU Analysis

The Core Ultra 7 265F is an Arrow Lake-S desktop processor from Intel's Core Ultra Series 2, built on TSMC's 3 nm process with 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. It carries 20 cores and 20 threads — one thread per core, no SMT-style doubling — with a 2.40 GHz base clock and a 5.30 GHz boost. Cache allocation is 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3. It launched at an MSRP of $379 and remains in active production.

The benchmark scores translate directly into workload capability. The Cinebench progression — 4231 in R15, 17631 in R20, and 41980 in R23 multi-core — shows sustained all-core throughput in the top decile, while single-core results of 597, 2488, and 5926 across the three Cinebench versions confirm that lightly threaded applications also run at an elite level. The PassMark suite reinforces the split: 138078 integer and 173855 floating-point math scores indicate strong numerical throughput, 507018 in compression and 39468 in encryption show excellent throughput-oriented performance, and the 3172 physics score is relevant for game-simulation and physics-bound scenarios.

Against its rivals, the 265F is essentially tied with everything in its neighborhood: the Core Ultra 7 265 within 0.3 percent, the EPYC 7343 within 0.4 percent, the EPYC 4464P within 0.6 percent, and the i9-13900KS within 0.6 percent. The practical takeaway is that this chip delivers aggregate performance comparable to server-branded EPYC parts and a former flagship i9, at a 65 W TDP — an efficiency-focused profile that relaxes cooling demands.

Build Overview

This is a desktop build — buildClass confirms it — defined by a top-decile CPU and a mid-tier GPU. The Core Ultra 7 265F contributes a 93rd-percentile ranking with an average benchmark score of 64438; the RX 6600 contributes a 63rd-percentile ranking with an average of 19036; and the combination lands at a combined percentile of 78. The launch MSRPs were $379 for the CPU and 329 USD for the GPU.

The tier verdict follows directly from those percentiles. As a productivity machine, this pairing is upper-tier: the processor's 20-thread Arrow Lake architecture, 3 nm process, and near-flagship benchmark results make it suitable for rendering, compilation, and sustained multi-threaded work. As a gaming machine, it is a mid-tier 1080p performer whose ceiling is set entirely by the graphics card, whose rival cluster — the Quadro K6000, RTX 4050 Mobile, Tesla K20m, and RTX 2000 Ada Generation — tells you exactly where the frame rates will land. The build's future is on the GPU side: the Socket 1851 platform, PCIe Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes, and DDR5 support are all ready for a faster card whenever the GPU tier needs to rise to meet the CPU that has been waiting for it.