SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 7 265F + Intel Arc A380

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

91 / 100
ULTIMATE READY

Apex Performer

Top 9% 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
86%
PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 7 265F

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

Intel Arc A380

8,558 Benchmark Score
Top 14% 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

# Intel Core Ultra 7 265F + Intel Arc A380: A High-CPU, Entry-GPU Desktop Analysis

This pairing combines Intel’s 20-core Arrow Lake desktop processor with the company’s entry-level Alchemist graphics card. The data shows a profound performance imbalance: the CPU ranks in the 93rd percentile among all processors, while the GPU sits in the 44th percentile. This configuration is best understood as a productivity-first workstation that happens to include a display output, rather than a balanced gaming rig. No measured FPS rows exist for this exact combination, so all frame-rate discussion in this analysis is estimated from the benchmark scores of each component.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265F uses the Intel Socket 1851 platform, which is the foundation for Core Ultra Series 2 desktop processors. This socket supports DDR5 memory over a dual-channel memory bus, delivering a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. The platform also provides PCIe Gen 5 connectivity with 20 lanes from the CPU, which is essential for high-bandwidth storage devices and future graphics cards. The processor does not have integrated graphics, as indicated by "N/A" for its iGPU field, meaning a discrete GPU is mandatory for any display output.

The power delivery requirements are modest for a 20-core processor. The CPU has a TDP of 65 watts, while the Arc A380 GPU has a TDP of 75 watts. The suggested PSU for the GPU alone is 250 watts, which provides ample headroom for the entire system. This low overall power draw makes the platform suitable for compact builds or systems with modest power supply units, provided they have the necessary PCIe power connectors. The GPU requires a single 8-pin power connector, which is standard on most modern power supplies.

For a sensible next upgrade, the data points toward replacing the GPU rather than the CPU. The processor’s 93rd percentile ranking and 20 threads indicate it has years of relevant performance left. The PCIe Gen 5 x16 slot (via the CPU’s 20 lanes) is ready for a higher-tier graphics card. Users could move to a GPU with a higher percentile rank than the A380’s 44th to achieve a more balanced system. The platform’s DDR5 support and 65-watt TDP also suggest that a future GPU upgrade would not require a platform change. The memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s is sufficient for most current workloads, though a higher-end GPU might benefit from faster memory kits if the CPU supports them.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU’s benchmark scores are consistently strong. In Cinebench R23, it scores 41,980 in multi-core and 5,926 in single-core. The multi-core score places it in the top tier of desktop processors, with a 93rd percentile ranking among all CPUs. The average benchmark score of 64,438 confirms this position. Looking at its nearest rivals, the data shows a tight cluster: the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 scores 64,640 (0.3% higher), the AMD EPYC 7343 scores 64,202 (0.4% lower), the AMD EPYC 4464P scores 64,823 (0.6% higher), and the Intel Core i9-13900KS scores 64,051 (0.6% lower). The 265F effectively trades blows with these high-end parts, with deltas under 1% in all cases.

The GPU’s benchmark performance is far more modest. Its average benchmark score is 8,558, with a 44th percentile ranking among all GPUs. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test yields a score of 808, which is a low result indicative of entry-level rasterization performance. Geekbench scores show 38,224 in OpenCL and 36,736 in Vulkan, which are similarly low compared to modern discrete GPUs. The PassMark G3D score of 6,252 and GPU compute score of 2,762 reinforce the entry-level positioning. The nearest rivals for the A380 are all mobile or integrated parts: the AMD FirePro W5170M (8,595 average, 0.4% higher), the AMD Radeon HD 8870M (8,462, 1.1% lower), the NVIDIA GeForce MX330 (8,458, 1.2% lower), and the AMD Radeon 880M (8,436, 1.4% lower).

The combined picture is stark. The CPU outperforms its nearest rivals by a whisker while the GPU is competitive with laptop parts from previous generations. The combined percentile for the pairing is 69, which reflects the high CPU contribution pulling the average up. This is a system where the processor defines the experience, and the GPU merely enables basic graphical output.

GPU Analysis

The Intel Arc A380 is built on the Xe-HPG architecture with the DG2-128 chip, manufactured on a 6 nm process by TSMC. It packs 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die. The GPU has 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 96-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 186.0 GB/s. The memory clock runs at 1937 MHz, which translates to 15.5 Gbps effective. The core clocks are 2000 MHz base and 2050 MHz boost.

Compute resources are limited: 1,024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The GPU includes 8 ray tracing cores, which is notable for an entry-level part. The pixel rate is 65.60 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 131.2 GTexel/s. The FP32 performance is 4.198 TFLOPS, with FP16 at 8.397 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio). The GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, which means it has feature-level support for modern games, including hardware ray tracing and variable rate shading.

The benchmark scores for the GPU tell a story of low absolute performance. The 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 808 is a fraction of what mid-range GPUs achieve. PassMark DirectX 12 score of 35 and DirectX 11 score of 38 are exceptionally low, indicating that the GPU’s driver and hardware combination struggles with modern API workloads. The G2D score of 610 is also low, suggesting limited 2D acceleration performance. For rendering workloads, the FP32 throughput of 4.198 TFLOPS is adequate for light 3D modeling but will be slow for complex scenes. The 6 GB VRAM is sufficient for 1080p textures but may be a constraint for high-resolution textures or large datasets. The ray tracing cores are present, but their performance is not reflected in the benchmark results, which show no RT-specific scores.

Balance and Bottleneck

The data reveals a severe bottleneck imbalance. The CPU’s 93rd percentile ranking versus the GPU’s 44th percentile means the GPU will be the limiting factor in almost all graphics-intensive workloads. In gaming, the A380 will saturate its compute and memory bandwidth long before the 265F breaks a sweat. The CPU’s Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 41,980 suggests it can feed even the most powerful GPUs available, so the A380 is the clear constraint.

For CPU-bound workloads like video encoding, 3D rendering, or software compilation, the bottleneck reverses. The GPU has little to contribute in these tasks, and the CPU’s 20 threads will dominate. The PassMark multithread score of 49,410 and data compression score of 507,018 indicate the CPU is a workhorse. The data encryption score of 39,468 and extended instructions score of 39,235 show strong integer and cryptographic performance.

The FPS scaling evidence is absent since no measured FPS data exists for this pairing. However, the benchmark scores imply that in gaming, the GPU will dictate frame rates, and the CPU will have significant headroom. In productivity tasks, the CPU will dictate performance, and the GPU will be idle. This is not a balanced system; it is a CPU-centric build with a placeholder GPU. The combined percentile of 69 is misleading if interpreted as a gaming score, as it averages a high CPU score with a low GPU score.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: This pairing is not suited for high-refresh gaming. The GPU’s 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 808 and PassMark G3D score of 6,252 indicate it will struggle to maintain high frame rates at 1080p, let alone 1440p or 4K. The CPU can easily support a high-refresh monitor, but the GPU will be the limiting factor, likely producing sub-60 FPS in demanding titles.

Streaming: The CPU’s 20 threads and 65-watt TDP make it excellent for streaming. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 41,980 suggests it can handle game capture and encoding simultaneously. However, the GPU’s low performance means the game itself will run poorly, making the streaming experience unsatisfactory. The GPU’s AV1 encoding support (implied by Arc architecture) is not verified by the benchmark data.

Video editing: The CPU excels here. The PassMark floating point math score of 173,855 and integer math score of 138,078 indicate strong computational throughput for effects and transitions. The GPU’s 6 GB VRAM and 4.198 TFLOPS FP32 performance can accelerate some effects, but the overall experience will be limited by the GPU’s low compute density. For 1080p editing, this is workable; for 4K, the GPU will struggle.

3D rendering: The CPU’s Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 41,980 is excellent for CPU-based rendering in applications like Blender or V-Ray. The GPU’s 4.198 TFLOPS FP32 performance is low for GPU rendering, so expect slow viewport performance and minimal GPU-accelerated rendering benefits.

Software development: The CPU is a development powerhouse. The PassMark data compression score of 507,018 and random string sorting score of 62,439 indicate fast compilation and data processing. The GPU’s low performance is irrelevant for most development tasks. The platform’s DDR5 support and PCIe Gen 5 lanes are ideal for fast NVMe storage, which is a common bottleneck in large codebases.

Student and office work: This is overkill for office tasks. The CPU’s single-thread score of 5,926 in Cinebench R23 ensures snappy application response. The GPU’s G2D score of 610 is low, but it suffices for basic desktop rendering and web browsing. The system uses more power than necessary for such tasks, but it will handle any office workload with ease.

Who Should Build It

This build targets users who prioritize CPU performance above all else and need a basic display output. The primary audience is content creators and professionals who work in CPU-bound applications like video encoding, software compilation, or scientific computing. The 93rd percentile CPU ranking makes this an excellent workstation processor.

Gamers at 1080p with low graphical demands might consider this, but the GPU’s 44th percentile ranking means they would need to lower settings significantly. The A380 is more appropriate for light gaming or eSports titles at 1080p with reduced detail. Users in this category should reconsider the GPU choice.

Software developers and data analysts will benefit from the CPU’s 20 threads and high instruction throughput. Students in engineering or computer science fields will find the CPU useful for compilation and simulation tasks. Small business workstations that run multi-threaded applications like database management or financial modeling will see strong performance, provided the GPU requirements are minimal.

Industries that rely on CPU rendering, such as architectural visualization or product design, will appreciate the Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 41,980. The GPU can handle light viewport rendering, but heavy GPU compute tasks are not advisable. The platform’s upgrade path to a better GPU is clear, making this a sensible foundation for future expansion.

Gaming Performance

As noted, no measured FPS data exists for the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F with the Intel Arc A380. All frame-rate figures here are estimates derived from the benchmark scores. The GPU’s 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 808 and PassMark DirectX 11 score of 38 indicate that at 1080p with ultra settings, most modern games will run at 30-45 FPS. The 6 GB VRAM and 186.0 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient for 1080p textures, but high-resolution textures may cause stuttering due to memory pressure.

At 1440p, the performance will drop below playable thresholds for most games, likely in the 20-30 FPS range. The GPU’s pixel rate of 65.60 GPixel/s and texture rate of 131.2 GTexel/s are low enough that resolution scaling will be severely limited. At 4K, the A380 is not viable for gaming, as the FP32 throughput of 4.198 TFLOPS is insufficient for modern game engines.

Older or less demanding games, such as eSports titles, will run better. The PassMark DirectX 9 score of 73 suggests that legacy titles may run at 60 FPS at 1080p. However, the DirectX 12 score of 35 indicates that newer games using DX12 will see significant performance degradation. The CPU will not be a bottleneck in any gaming scenario, as its single-thread score of 5,926 in Cinebench R23 is more than sufficient for game physics and AI.

FAQ

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

A: The combined percentile is 69, which reflects the high CPU score offsetting the low GPU score.

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

A: The 265F has an average benchmark score of 64,438, which is 0.3% lower than the 265’s 64,640.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of the CPU?

A: The CPU supports dual-channel DDR5 with a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s.

Q: Does the GPU support hardware ray tracing?

A: Yes, the Intel Arc A380 has 8 ray tracing cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate.

Q: What is the suggested power supply wattage for the GPU?

A: The suggested PSU for the Arc A380 is 250 watts.

Q: What is the CPU’s socket type?

A: The CPU uses Intel Socket 1851.

Q: How much VRAM does the GPU have?

A: The GPU has 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 96-bit bus.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265F is a 20-core, 20-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, manufactured on a 3 nm process by TSMC. It has a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. The CPU includes 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. The cache hierarchy is substantial: 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3 cache.

The 20 threads are unusual for a consumer processor, as most high-end desktop CPUs offer fewer threads with hyperthreading. However, the 265F operates without hyperthreading, providing 20 physical cores for multi-threaded workloads. This design choice favors throughput over single-thread flexibility, though the 5.30 GHz boost clock ensures strong single-thread performance.

The benchmark scores reflect this architecture. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 41,980 is exceptional, placing the CPU in the 93rd percentile. The single-core score of 5,926 is also strong. The PassMark results show a balanced profile: integer math at 138,078, floating point math at 173,855, and extended instructions at 39,235. The data encryption score of 39,468 is notable for security-sensitive workloads.

The CPU’s 65-watt TDP is remarkably low for a 20-core part, indicating high power efficiency. This is likely due to the 3 nm process node. The lack of integrated graphics means the CPU relies entirely on a discrete GPU for display output, which is a consideration for troubleshooting or basic system bring-up.

Build Overview

This is a desktop-class build pairing the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F with the Intel Arc A380. The CPU is a high-end processor from the Core Ultra Series 2, ranking in the 93rd percentile among all CPUs. The GPU is an entry-level part from the Alchemist generation, ranking in the 44th percentile among all GPUs. The combined percentile of 69 places this system in the upper-midrange tier overall, but this is driven almost entirely by the CPU.

The build is best described as a workstation with a placeholder GPU. The CPU’s 20 cores and 65-watt TDP make it ideal for multi-threaded productivity tasks. The GPU’s 6 GB VRAM and 4.198 TFLOPS FP32 performance are sufficient for basic display output and light graphical work, but they will not satisfy gamers or GPU-accelerated compute users. The platform’s DDR5 support, PCIe Gen 5 lanes, and 250-watt suggested PSU for the GPU leave ample room for a future GPU upgrade, making this a scalable foundation for a more balanced system.