SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 7 265F + Intel Arc B570

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

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%
VS
GPU
91%
PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 7 265F

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

Intel Arc B570

20,556 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 Intel Arc B570 is an all-Intel desktop combination that splits its performance identity in two: a processor sitting in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs — effectively a top-tier compute part — driving a graphics card in the 65th percentile, an upper-mainstream GPU whose average benchmark score lands within a fraction of a percent of the Arc A750 and RTX 3070 Mobile. The combined percentile of 79 reflects exactly that asymmetry. Importantly, no measured FPS rows exist for this exact pairing in the database, so all frame-rate discussion below is estimated from the benchmark scores rather than recorded in-game measurements. The CPU carries a launch MSRP of $379 and the GPU a launch MSRP of 219 USD; both parts are in active production and were released in January of their respective launch windows.

CPU Analysis

The Core Ultra 7 265F is an Arrow Lake-S desktop processor built on TSMC's 3 nm node, packing 20 cores and 20 threads — notably, no hyperthreading-style doubling — with a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. Cache is generous and notably asymmetric in structure: 192 KB of L1 and 3 MB of L2 per core, with a shared 30 MB L3 pool. The die measures 243 mm² and carries 17,800 million transistors, figures consistent with a chiplet-era Intel design rather than a monolithic heavyweight. The "F" suffix means no integrated graphics, which is irrelevant here since a discrete Arc B570 occupies the graphics slot, but it matters for troubleshooting — there is no fallback display output from the CPU.

Benchmark results indicate a processor that is genuinely fast in both dimensions. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 41,980 sits comfortably in full-tower workstation territory, while the single-core score of 5,926 is equally telling — this is a chip that doesn't trade per-thread speed for throughput. Cinebench R20 backs that up with 17,631 multi-core and 2,488 single-core, and the older R15 run shows 4,231 multi-core against 597 single-core. The scaling across generations of Cinebench is consistent, which suggests stable multi-core scheduling across all 20 threads rather than bursty thermal-dependent behavior.

The PassMark suite rounds out the picture. The multi-thread score of 49,410 and single-thread score of 4,750 place it in the upper tier of the database, reflected in its 93rd percentile standing against all CPUs. Individual subtests show where the chip's strengths lie: integer math at 138,078, floating point at 173,855, data compression at 507,018, and encryption at 39,468. Random string sorting at 62,439 and extended instructions at 39,235 indicate solid memory-latency-sensitive throughput. The physics score of 3,172 is directly relevant to gaming, since game physics threads are exactly the kind of lightly-threaded, latency-sensitive workload that metric probes.

Against its nearest rivals, the 265F is essentially locked in a dead heat. Its average benchmark score of 64,438 sits 0.3 percent behind the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 (64,640) — which makes sense, as that chip is the same silicon with graphics enabled — 0.4 percent ahead of the AMD EPYC 7343 (64,202), 0.6 percent behind the AMD EPYC 4464P (64,823), and 0.6 percent ahead of the Intel Core i9-13900KS (64,051). Landing within one percent of an i9 flagship is the headline: the multi-core 20-thread array delivers workstation-class rendering throughput while the 5.30 GHz boost keeps single-threaded responsiveness at flagshiip-adjacent levels.

For real workloads, this translates as follows: video encoding, code compilation, and 3D rendering will use all 20 threads effectively; game engines, which still lean on a handful of fast threads, get the 5,926-point R23 single-core score to work with. The 65 W TDP is remarkably low for this performance class and shapes the whole build's thermal and power profile, discussed later.

FAQ

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

A: Its average benchmark score of 64,438 places it within one percent of four nearest rivals: 0.3 percent behind the Core Ultra 7 265, 0.4 percent ahead of the EPYC 7343, 0.6 percent behind the EPYC 4464P, and 0.6 percent ahead of the i9-13900KS. Effectively, it performs like a flagship-tier part across the averaged suite.

Q: How powerful is the Arc B570 relative to other GPUs?

A: The B570 averages 20,556 across its benchmark suite, placing it in the 65th percentile of all GPUs. It sits 0.1 percent ahead of the RTX 3070 Mobile, 0.1 percent behind the Arc A750, 0.4 percent ahead of the Quadro M4000M, and 0.5 percent behind the Radeon R9 M390X — an extremely tight cluster.

Q: Are there measured FPS figures for this exact CPU+GPU pairing?

A: No. The database contains no measured FPS rows for this combination, so all gaming frame-rate discussion is estimated from the benchmark scores, principally the PassMark G3D score of 14,195 and the 3DMark Steel Nomad result of 2,649.

Q: Does this CPU have integrated graphics?

A: No. The 265F is an "F" variant with no integrated graphics, so the Arc B570 is the only display output path.

Q: What memory does the platform support?

A: DDR5 on a dual-channel bus with 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth. ECC is not supported.

Q: Is the CPU multiplier unlocked?

A: No, the multiplier is locked, so tuning headroom is limited to what the platform allows within stock constraints.

Q: What power supply does the GPU require?

A: Intel suggests a 450 W PSU. The GPU draws a 150 W TDP through a single 8-pin connector, and the CPU adds a 65 W TDP, leaving headroom within that recommendation.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: The CPU will not be the limit here. With a single-thread PassMark score of 4,750 and a 93rd percentile standing, the 265F can feed frames as fast as any mainstream engine demands. The constraint is the B570's 65th-percentile GPU positioning; expect high-refresh play at 1080p and high frame rates at 1440p in less demanding titles, estimated from the G3D score of 14,195 rather than measured data.

Streaming: This is a strong scenario for the pairing. The 20-thread CPU posts a 49,410 PassMark multi-thread score and 41,980 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, meaning encoding and compositing overhead can live on threads the game isn't using. The GPU's dual encoder aren't specified in the data, but the compute score of 7,281 in PassMark GPU Compute indicates usable headroom for GPU-assisted encoding work.

Video editing: Timeline scrubbing and preview playback depend on the GPU's 10 GB of GDDR6 and 380 GB/s of bandwidth, both reasonable for 1440p-class editing timelines. Final exports lean on the CPU, and a 41,980 R23 multi-core score means render passes complete in genuinely fast time — roughly flagship-adjacent, per the 0.6 percent gap to the i9-13900KS.

3D rendering: CPU rendering is excellent for the class: 4,231 in R15 multi-core and 17,631 in R20 multi-core confirm sustained all-thread throughput. GPU-path rendering in Blender-class engines is more modest; the Geekbench OpenCL score of 83,514 and Vulkan score of 96,844 describe a card that can accelerate viewport work and moderate final renders but isn't a rendering appliance.

Software development: Arguably the best-fit scenario. Compilation is a bursty, heavily multi-threaded workload that the 20 threads and 49,410 multi-thread score handle easily, while the 5.30 GHz boost and 4,750 single-thread score keep IDE responsiveness and test-suite latency low. The 30 MB shared L3 helps working-set-heavy builds.

Student and office work: Vastly overprovisioned, which is fine. Documents, browsing, and conferencing barely register against this hardware; the 65 W CPU TDP means the system stays quiet and cool under routine loads. The absence of integrated graphics is the only wrinkle — the discrete card must be healthy for any display output.

Balance and Bottleneck

This build is GPU-bottlenecked in essentially every graphically demanding workload, and that is not a criticism — it is the correct way to pair a 93rd-percentile CPU with a 65th-percentile GPU. In games at 1440p and above, the Arc B570's PassMark G3D score of 14,195 and Steel Nomad result of 2,649 set the frame-rate ceiling long before the 265F's capabilities come into play. The CPU's physics score of 3,172 and single-thread score of 4,750 mean simulation-heavy titles — large-scale strategy and open-world games with dense NPC counts — will remain smooth where a weaker processor would stutter.

The imbalance works in the user's favor at lower resolutions. At 1080p, where the GPU works less hard per frame, the CPU's high single-thread throughput keeps frame times consistent, making this a coherent high-refresh 1080p machine or a solid 1440p machine. The combined percentile of 79 quantifies the pairing honestly: the CPU pulls it up, the GPU pulls it down, and the average lands in the upper fifth of the database.

On the compute side, the bottleneck inverts. In rendering, encoding, and compilation, the CPU is the engine and the GPU is a supporting actor; the B570's compute score of 7,281 is modest next to its graphics scores. Memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s dual-channel DDR5 is adequate but is the one place a power user might feel a squeeze in bandwidth-hungry workloads, since the CPU offers no quad-channel escape hatch.

Benchmark Performance

The complete CPU picture: Cinebench R15 multi-core 4,231 and single-core 597; Cinebench R20 multi-core 17,631 and single-core 2,488; Cinebench R23 multi-core 41,980 and single-core 5,926. PassMark multi-thread 49,410, single-thread 4,750, integer math 138,078, floating point 173,855, data compression 507,018, encryption 39,468, extended instructions 39,235, prime finding 416, string sorting 62,439, physics 3,172. The average benchmark score of 64,438 puts the chip in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs.

The complete GPU picture: 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 at 2,649; Geekbench OpenCL 83,514 and Vulkan 96,844; PassMark G3D 14,195, GPU Compute 7,281, G2D 661, DirectX 9 at 164, DirectX 10 at 65, DirectX 11 at 118, and DirectX 12 at 72. The average benchmark score of 20,556 places the B570 in the 65th percentile of all GPUs.

The combined picture is a 79th-percentile desktop. Interpreted: the pairing outperforms roughly four of five systems in the database overall, but the composition matters. Against its nearest rivals, the B570 is statistically indistinguishable from the Arc A750 (-0.1 percent) and RTX 3070 Mobile (+0.1 percent), so users comparing builds should treat those as performance equivalents at the aggregate level. The CPU's cluster — within a point of two EPYC parts and an i9 flagship — tells the same story at the top end. What the numbers describe is a machine whose compute ceiling is far above its graphics ceiling, ideal for workloads that lean on the processor and entirely competent, if unexceptional, in pure graphics throughput.

Who Should Build It

1080p and 1440p gamers: The estimated frame-rate profile derived from a 14,195 G3D score suits high-refresh 1080p and mainstream 1440p play. Players targeting maximum settings at higher resolutions will find the GPU percentile of 65 to be the limiting factor, and should size expectations accordingly.

Content creators on a CPU-first workflow: Video editors, motion designers, and 3D artists whose pipelines are render-and-export heavy benefit most. A 41,980 R23 multi-core score and 0.6 percent parity with the i9-13900KS mean CPU render passes finish in flagship company; the GPU handles viewport acceleration through its Xe2 architecture and Vulkan score of 96,844.

Software developers: The strongest technical fit. Twenty threads, 5.30 GHz boost, and top-percentile single- and multi-thread scores make compilation, containerized workloads, and local test suites fast, with the 3 nm process keeping the 65 W TDP in check during sustained builds.

Students: Overkill for coursework, but future-proof; the platform's modern socket and DDR5 support outlast a degree program.

Small business workstations: The 65 W CPU TDP, dual-slot GPU, and single 8-pin power connector make this a compact, efficient machine for CAD-lite, media, and general productivity — though the lack of ECC memory rules out environments that require data-integrity guarantees.

Gaming Performance

No measured FPS rows exist for this exact CPU and GPU combination in the database — this must be stated plainly, and it means every frame-rate statement below is an estimate derived from benchmark scores, not recorded gameplay. The B570's PassMark G3D score of 14,195 and its cluster position — level with the Arc A750 and RTX 3070 Mobile within a fraction of a percent — provide the basis for estimation. Cards in that performance band are conventionally associated with smooth high-refresh 1080p gaming and solid 1440p play in mainstream titles, with reduced headroom at ultra settings in the heaviest modern engines.

The DirectX sub-scores offer texture on API behavior: PassMark DirectX 9 at 164, DirectX 10 at 65, DirectX 11 at 118, and DirectX 12 at 72 show the expected pattern of newer-API tests being far more demanding, and DirectX 12 Ultimate support with ray tracing via 18 RT cores means the feature set is complete even if raw ray-traced throughput is modest. The 10 GB of GDDR6 and 380 GB/s of bandwidth should prevent texture-memory walls in current titles at 1440p.

On the CPU side, gaming is safe from processor-side stalls. The physics score of 3,172 and single-thread score of 4,750 place the 265F well above what current game engines demand per frame. In estimated terms: the CPU has surplus capacity the GPU cannot consume at 1440p, meaning frame-time consistency in simulation-heavy games will be a strength of this pairing even where average frame rates are set by the B570. Users who want measured figures rather than estimates should treat this page's gaming section as directional.

Build Overview

This is a desktop-class build — buildClass is "desktop" — pairing an all-Intel CPU and GPU from the same January release window. The Core Ultra 7 265F is a Core Ultra Series 2, Arrow Lake-S processor on Socket 1851, 3 nm TSMC silicon, 20 cores and threads, in the 93rd CPU percentile. The Arc B570 is a Battlemage-generation Xe2-HPG card on the BMG-G21 chip, 5 nm TSMC silicon, in the 65th GPU percentile. Combined, the system sits in the 79th percentile of the database.

Tier-wise, this is an upper-mainstream desktop with an enthusiast-class processor. The architecture story is coherent: both parts are recent Intel designs on TSMC nodes — 3 nm for the CPU, 5 nm for the GPU — and both support modern APIs (DirectX 12 Ultimate, Vulkan 1.4, OpenGL 4.6 on the GPU side). Neither part has a listed successor, meaning both sit at the current edge of their respective lineages. The transistor economics are notable: 17,800 million transistors on 243 mm² for the CPU, 19,600 million on 272 mm² for the GPU at a density of 72.1M per mm².

GPU Analysis

The Arc B570 is defined by balance rather than extremes. It carries 2,304 shading units, 144 TMUs, and 80 ROPs, producing a pixel rate of 200.0 GPixel/s, a texture rate of 360.0 GTexel/s, and FP32 throughput of 11.52 TFLOPS — FP16 doubles to 23.04 TFLOPS at the 2:1 ratio. Base and boost clocks are both listed at 2500 MHz, and memory runs at 2375 MHz, 19 Gbps effective, over a 160-bit bus to 10 GB of GDDR6 for 380.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

The ray tracing hardware comprises 18 RT cores; tensor core specifications are not listed in the data. For rendering workloads, the benchmark scores frame the card's ceiling: Geekbench Vulkan at 96,844 outpaces its OpenCL result of 83,514, suggesting the Xe2 architecture's Vulkan path is its strongest compute route — relevant for Blender-adjacent engines that expose a Vulkan or optimized back end. The PassMark GPU Compute score of 7,281 is modest relative to the graphics scores, confirming this is a graphics-first card with secondary compute capability.

The 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 2,649 in DX12 is the most forward-looking gaming metric here, since Steel Nomad stresses modern rendering pipelines; it positions the card for current-generation engines at mainstream settings. Physically, the card is a dual-slot design, 272 mm long and 115 mm tall, powered by a single 8-pin connector at a 150 W TDP, with one HDMI 2.1a and three DisplayPort 2.1 outputs. Its bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x8 — narrower than a full x16 link, which pairs interestingly with the CPU's PCIe Gen 5, 20-lane capability discussed below.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The platform foundation is Intel Socket 1851 with DDR5 dual-channel support at up to 102.4 GB/s, and PCIe Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes. That platform is the build's most durable asset: the 93rd-percentile CPU is already near the top of its socket's performance envelope per the rival clustering, so the sensible upgrade direction is the graphics card, not the processor.

Power headroom is generous. The CPU's 65 W TDP plus the GPU's 150 W TDP totals well under the 450 W suggested PSU for the B570 alone, so a quality unit at that recommendation runs the entire system with margin to spare. A future GPU upgrade that stays within that envelope requires no PSU change.

The PCIe situation deserves attention. The CPU offers Gen 5 with 20 lanes, while the B570 connects via PCIe 4.0 x8. That means the card uses half the lanes at one generation below the platform's maximum — a non-issue for this card at its performance level, but a relevant fact for a future GPU upgrade: the platform has both the lane count and the generation headroom to host a faster card without interface constraints. Memory is the other upgrade axis: dual-channel DDR5 is the ceiling by design, so capacity increases are straightforward but bandwidth is fixed at 102.4 GB/s.

A sensible next upgrade, given the 79th combined percentile and the CPU's clear surplus, is a GPU in a higher percentile tier — the data shows the processor could drive a substantially faster card before becoming the limiting component in any graphically bound workload. The motherboard, memory, and PSU as outlined here would not need to change to accommodate that step.