SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 7 265F + Intel Arc A750

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)

▼

94 Score

Top 6% Ranking

94 / 100

ULTIMATE READY

Apex Performer

Top 6% 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

91%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 7 265F

64,438 Benchmark Score

Top 4% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

Intel Arc A750

20,582 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 and Intel Arc A750 pairing represents a desktop configuration that combines a high-core-count Arrow Lake processor with an Alchemist-generation graphics card. This analysis relies exclusively on synthetic benchmark scores, as the FACT PACK contains no measured FPS rows for this exact combination. All performance discussions regarding frame rates are therefore estimates derived from the CPU and GPU benchmark data.

GPU Analysis — VRAM, bandwidth, clocks, RT/tensor hardware, what the benchmark scores mean for rendering

The Intel Arc A750 is built on the Xe-HPG architecture and uses the DG2-512 chip, fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC. The GPU packs 21,700 million transistors across a 406 mm² die, giving it a transistor density of 53.4 million per square millimeter. The memory subsystem consists of 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, which yields a memory bandwidth of 512.0 GB/s. The memory clock runs at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective data rate.

Clock speeds are set at 2050 MHz base and 2400 MHz boost. The shader configuration includes 3584 shading units, 224 texture mapping units, and 112 render output units. For ray tracing workloads, the A750 provides 28 dedicated RT cores. The GPU's compute throughput is notable: 17.20 TFLOPS for FP32 operations and 34.41 TFLOPS for FP16 using a 2:1 ratio. Pixel fill rate is 268.8 GPixel/s, while texture fill rate reaches 537.6 GTexel/s.

The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2612 places the A750 in a competitive position for its class. The Geekbench scores show a strong split between OpenCL (98554) and Vulkan (85631) performance, suggesting the architecture handles compute-oriented APIs well. PassMark results tell a more complex story: the G3D score of 12534 is respectable, but the DirectX scores are notably lower, with DirectX 10 at 65, DirectX 11 at 72, and DirectX 12 at 70. The DirectX 9 score of 181 is significantly higher, indicating legacy API performance is less of a bottleneck than modern API efficiency. The GPU compute score of 5368 and G2D score of 732 round out the picture.

The A750 sits at the 66th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 20582. Its nearest rivals are tightly grouped: the Intel Arc B570 scores 20556 (0.1% behind), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile scores 20534 (0.2% behind), the AMD Radeon R9 M390X scores 20662 (0.4% ahead), and the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M scores 20480 (0.5% behind). This clustering indicates the A750 performs within a narrow band of expected results for its tier, with no single rival holding a decisive edge.

For rendering workloads, the combination of 8 GB VRAM and 512.0 GB/s bandwidth provides adequate capacity for 1080p and moderate 1440p asset loading. The 28 RT cores enable hardware-accelerated ray tracing, though the modest DirectX 12 score of 70 suggests that heavily ray-traced scenes may see reduced performance relative to rasterized content. The FP32 throughput of 17.20 TFLOPS supports general compute tasks, while the FP16 capability doubles that figure for workloads that can utilize reduced precision.

Benchmark Performance — exact CPU and GPU scores, percentile positions, and what the combined picture is

The CPU delivers its strongest results in multi-threaded tests. Cinebench R23 multicore scores 41980, while the single-core test reaches 5926. The R20 suite shows 17631 multicore and 2488 single-core, and R15 produces 4231 multicore and 597 single-core. PassMark results include a multithread score of 49410 and a single-thread score of 4750. The CPU's average benchmark score is 64438, placing it at the 93rd percentile among all CPUs.

The GPU's average benchmark score of 20582 places it at the 66th percentile among all GPUs. Combined, this configuration achieves an 80th percentile ranking, indicating that the pairing sits above the majority of systems while not reaching the top tier. The CPU is clearly the stronger component relative to its peers, outperforming most processors while the GPU holds a more mid-pack position.

Nearest rival comparisons for the CPU show minimal separation. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 scores 64640, which is 0.3% higher than the 265F. The AMD EPYC 7343 scores 64202, 0.4% lower. The AMD EPYC 4464P scores 64823, 0.6% higher. The Intel Core i9-13900KS scores 64051, 0.6% lower. These deltas are all within a single percentage point, indicating the 265F delivers performance essentially identical to its closest alternatives.

The combined picture shows a system where the CPU leads the GPU by a substantial margin in relative standing. A 93rd percentile processor paired with a 66th percentile GPU means the graphics card will likely be the limiting factor in most frame-rate-bound scenarios. The estimated FPS for gaming workloads would be constrained by the A750's capabilities, while productivity tasks that rely heavily on CPU compute would see the 265F's strength shine through.

CPU Analysis — cores, clocks, architecture, what the benchmark scores mean for real workloads

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265F is a 20-core, 20-thread processor from the Core Ultra Series 2, built on the Arrow Lake architecture (codename Arrow Lake-S). It uses a 3 nm process node from TSMC, packing 17,800 million transistors into a 243 mm² die. The base clock runs at 2.40 GHz with a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. The TDP is rated at 65 W, which is modest for a processor with this core count.

Cache topology includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3 cache. Memory support covers DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration, providing 102.4 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The CPU connects via PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU only. The multiplier is locked, meaning overclocking is not supported. The processor has no integrated graphics, which explains the need for a discrete GPU in this build.

The R15 single-core score of 597 and R20 single-core of 2488 demonstrate strong per-thread performance, consistent with the 5.30 GHz boost clock. The R23 single-core score of 5926 confirms this trend. In multi-threaded tests, the scaling from R15 to R23 is significant: 4231 to 41980, a roughly tenfold increase that reflects the 20 available threads. PassMark integer math scores 138078, floating point math scores 173855, and extended instructions score 39235. Data compression results are strong at 507018, while data encryption reaches 39468. Find prime numbers scores 416, random string sorting scores 62439, and physics scores 3172.

For real workloads, the data suggests this CPU excels in content creation and compilation tasks. The high multi-thread scores indicate strong parallel processing capability, while the single-thread results show responsiveness in lightly threaded applications. The 65 W TDP is notable for a 20-core part, suggesting efficient power delivery that could benefit sustained workloads in thermally constrained environments. The lack of integrated graphics means the discrete A750 is mandatory for any display output.

Balance and Bottleneck — which component limits which workload, using percentiles and FPS scaling as evidence

The CPU's 93rd percentile standing versus the GPU's 66th percentile creates a clear imbalance. In gaming scenarios, the A750 will be the bottleneck for frame rate delivery. The GPU's PassMark G3D score of 12534 and 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 2612 establish its performance ceiling, and the CPU's single-thread capability is sufficient to feed it without constraint. Estimated FPS scaling would show the GPU saturating before the CPU reaches its limits in most titles.

For CPU-bound workloads, the situation reverses. Multi-threaded tasks like video encoding, 3D rendering, and software compilation will see the 265F operating at its full potential while the A750 contributes little. The CPU's R23 multicore score of 41980 indicates it can handle demanding compute tasks, and the 20 threads provide ample parallelism for heavily threaded applications.

The 80th combined percentile reflects this mixed profile. The system is neither perfectly balanced nor severely mismatched, but the data suggests that users prioritizing gaming should be aware the GPU will cap performance. Conversely, users focused on productivity will find the CPU delivers near-top-tier results with the GPU serving as a capable but secondary component. The memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s from the CPU and 512.0 GB/s from the GPU operate independently, so data transfer between components is not a shared bottleneck in this configuration.

Who Should Build It — target users and industries (gamers at specific resolutions, content creators, developers, students, small business workstations) tied strictly to the measured performance

Gamers targeting 1080p resolution represent a primary audience for this build. The A750's 8 GB VRAM and 512.0 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient for standard texture loads at this resolution, and the GPU's 66th percentile standing places it above the median for playable frame rates in most titles. The CPU's 93rd percentile ensures no processor-induced frame drops.

Content creators working with video editing or 3D rendering will benefit from the CPU's multi-threaded strength. The R23 multicore score of 41980 and PassMark multithread score of 49410 indicate strong performance in render workflows. The GPU's FP32 throughput of 17.20 TFLOPS provides additional compute acceleration for effects and compositing tasks.

Software developers compiling large codebases will see significant throughput from the 20 cores. The PassMark data compression score of 507018 suggests fast build and packaging operations, while the integer math score of 138078 supports the data manipulation common in programming workloads. Students working on engineering or data science projects would find the CPU's compute capabilities ample for their needs.

Small business workstations handling office productivity, spreadsheet analysis, and database operations would benefit from the CPU's single-thread performance and the GPU's adequate display output capabilities. The absence of integrated graphics means the A750 is required, but its 66th percentile performance handles standard office workloads without issue. The 65 W CPU TDP contributes to a system that can run in compact chassis configurations.

FAQ

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

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

Q: How much VRAM does the Intel Arc A750 have?

A: The A750 comes with 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: What is the CPU's performance percentile compared to all CPUs?

A: The 265F sits at the 93rd percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 64438.

Q: Does the CPU have integrated graphics?

A: No, the 265F has no integrated graphics, so a discrete GPU like the A750 is mandatory for display output.

Q: What is the GPU's performance percentile compared to all GPUs?

A: The Arc A750 sits at the 66th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 20582.

Q: What socket does the CPU use?

A: The 265F uses the Intel Socket 1851, supporting DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration.

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

A: The combined percentile is 80, placing the configuration above the majority of systems.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming at 1080p will be GPU-limited. The A750's 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 2612 and its 66th percentile position indicate it can deliver competitive frame rates, but the CPU's 93rd percentile far exceeds the GPU's capability. Estimated FPS in esports titles will be high, while demanding AAA games will rely on the GPU's 8 GB memory and 512.0 GB/s bandwidth to maintain playable performance.

Streaming workloads benefit from the CPU's multi-threaded strength. The R23 multicore score of 41980 provides headroom for encoding while gaming, and the PassMark multithread score of 49410 supports simultaneous capture, encode, and broadcast tasks. The GPU's Vulkan score of 85631 suggests good API support for capture pipelines.

Video editing in applications like Premiere Pro or DaVinci Resolve will leverage the CPU's 20 threads for timeline operations and export encoding. The PassMark data compression score of 507018 indicates fast media file handling. The GPU's FP32 throughput of 17.20 TFLOPS accelerates effects and color grading, though the DirectX 12 score of 70 suggests some modern API features may underperform.

3D rendering in Blender or similar tools will see the CPU dominate. The R23 multicore score of 41980 handles CPU-based renders, while the A750's 28 RT cores provide hardware-accelerated ray tracing for GPU-rendered frames. The GPU's FP16 throughput of 34.41 TFLOPS supports reduced-precision compute in rendering engines that utilize it.

Software development with large codebases will run efficiently on the 20 cores. The integer math score of 138078 and extended instructions score of 39235 support compilation, static analysis, and test execution. The single-thread score of 4750 ensures responsive IDE performance, and the memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s keeps data flowing during builds.

Student and office work covering documents, spreadsheets, and web applications will find the system overqualified. The CPU's single-core R23 score of 5926 handles everyday tasks with ease, and the GPU's G2D score of 732 provides adequate 2D acceleration. The 65 W CPU TDP contributes to lower system power draw during typical office workloads.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The platform is built around Intel Socket 1851, which supports DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration. The CPU provides PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes, ensuring compatibility with current high-speed storage and graphics cards. The A750 connects via PCIe 4.0 x16, so the Gen 5 lanes carry headroom for future GPU upgrades.

The 65 W TDP of the CPU is modest, and the GPU's suggested PSU of 550 W indicates the power supply requirement is manageable for this configuration. The GPU's 225 W TDP and its power connectors (1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin) define the current power draw. A sensible next upgrade would be a higher-tier GPU to address the 66th percentile bottleneck, as the CPU's 93rd percentile provides substantial headroom for more powerful graphics hardware.

The A750 is end-of-life, with Battlemage as its successor. Users looking to extend system lifespan should consider GPU replacement first, since the CPU's performance standing is significantly higher. Memory upgrades remain possible given the dual-channel DDR5 support. The locked multiplier on the CPU limits overclocking, so performance gains would come from hardware replacement rather than tuning.

Build Overview

This is a desktop configuration pairing the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F with the Intel Arc A750. The CPU represents the top tier of consumer processors at the 93rd percentile, while the GPU sits at the 66th percentile. The combined percentile of 80 places the overall system above most configurations, though the imbalance between components is notable.

The build targets users who prioritize CPU-intensive workloads while maintaining capable graphics performance. The 20-core, 20-thread processor with a 5.30 GHz boost clock handles demanding compute tasks, while the 8 GB A750 provides solid 1080p gaming and compute acceleration. The system's overall tier is upper-midrange, with the CPU carrying the bulk of the performance weight and the GPU serving as a competent but not class-leading companion.

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 7 265F + Intel Arc A750

Apex Performer

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core Ultra 7 265F

Intel Arc A750

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

GPU Analysis — VRAM, bandwidth, clocks, RT/tensor hardware, what the benchmark scores mean for rendering

Benchmark Performance — exact CPU and GPU scores, percentile positions, and what the combined picture is

CPU Analysis — cores, clocks, architecture, what the benchmark scores mean for real workloads

Balance and Bottleneck — which component limits which workload, using percentiles and FPS scaling as evidence

Who Should Build It — target users and industries (gamers at specific resolutions, content creators, developers, students, small business workstations) tied strictly to the measured performance

FAQ

Usage Scenarios

Upgrade Path and Platform

Build Overview

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