SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 7 265F + Intel Arc B580

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
92%
PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 7 265F

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

Intel Arc B580

23,021 Benchmark Score
Top 8% 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 pairing of an Intel Core Ultra 7 265F with an Intel Arc B580 is an all-Intel desktop combination that anchors a modern Arrow Lake platform to a Battlemage-class discrete GPU. The CPU sits in the 93rd percentile of all processors in the benchmark database, while the GPU lands in the 68th percentile of all graphics cards — an asymmetry that defines this build's character. Note upfront: no measured FPS rows exist for this exact pairing in the database, so all frame-rate discussion on this page is estimated from the benchmark scores rather than drawn from in-game measurements.

CPU Analysis

The Core Ultra 7 265F is a 20-core, 20-thread desktop processor from Intel's Core Ultra Series 2, built on the Arrow Lake-S architecture. Notably, it offers 20 cores without hyperthreading-style doubling — 20 cores, 20 threads, full stop — which reflects Arrow Lake's design philosophy of favoring per-thread throughput over logical-core inflation. The chip runs a 2.40 GHz base clock and boosts to 5.30 GHz, a wide range that suits a 65 W TDP envelope: light threads sprint, heavy all-core loads stay disciplined.

Manufacturing is handled by TSMC on a 3 nm process node, packing 17,800 million transistors into a 243 mm² die. The cache hierarchy is generous at every level: 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3. That per-core L2 allowance is the standout figure — with 20 cores each getting 3 MB, the total on-chip cache pool is substantial, which benefits latency-sensitive workloads like compilation and simulation.

Benchmark results indicate a processor that is strong in both dimensions. In Cinebench R23, the chip scores 41,980 multi-core and 5,926 single-core — a combination that places it comfortably in enthusiast-desktop territory for sustained rendering and snappy interactive work alike. Rolling back to Cinebench R20 produces 17,631 multi-core and 2,488 single-core, and R15 yields 4,231 multi-core and 597 single-core. The single-core figures across all three Cinebench revisions are consistent with the 5.30 GHz boost clock doing real work for lightly threaded applications.

The PassMark suite fills out the picture. A PassMark multithread score of 49,410 and a single-thread score of 4,750 confirm the Cinebench story. Integer math lands at 138,078, floating point math at 173,855, and data compression at 507,018 — numbers that translate directly to fast archive handling and general computational throughput. Data encryption scores 39,468, extended instructions 39,235, random string sorting 62,439, find-prime-numbers 416, and physics 3,172. The physics result in particular is a useful proxy for game-simulation responsiveness, since it exercises short, bursty, partially threaded code paths similar to those in game engines.

Context comes from the rivals list. The 265F's average benchmark score of 64,438 sits within a fraction of a percent of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 (-0.3%), AMD EPYC 7343 (0.4%), AMD EPYC 4464P (-0.6%), and Intel Core i9-13900KS (0.6%). Two takeaways follow. First, the 265F is statistically indistinguishable from the non-F 265 — the difference is the disabled integrated graphics, which this build renders irrelevant anyway by pairing a discrete GPU. Second, matching a prior-generation flagship like the i9-13900KS at essentially parity, while doing so at a 65 W TDP, is the headline efficiency story here.

One caveat for enthusiasts: the multiplier is locked, so manual overclocking is off the table. Performance tuning will instead come from memory and platform optimization.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The platform foundation is Socket 1851, Intel's current LGA interface for Arrow Lake desktop chips. Memory support is DDR5 only, dual-channel, with a stated bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. There is no ECC support, which positions this as a consumer/workstation-adjacent board rather than an enterprise-reliability platform. PCIe connectivity from the CPU is Gen 5 with 20 lanes — enough for a full-speed GPU plus multiple fast NVMe drives.

One compatibility note matters here: the Arc B580 connects over PCIe 4.0 x8, not Gen 5. On this platform that means the card runs at its native interface without compromise, since Socket 1851 provides Gen 5 lanes that fully cover a Gen 4 link. The card occupies a dual-slot footprint, measures 272 mm long, 115 mm tall, and 45 mm wide, and draws power through a single 8-pin connector — so chassis clearance requirements are modest by modern standards.

Power headroom is generous. The CPU carries a 65 W TDP and the GPU a 190 W TDP, with a suggested PSU rating of 450 W for the graphics card alone. In practice, a supply comfortably above that suggested figure leaves room for the 20-core CPU under all-core boost plus board, drives, and fans, all while keeping the PSU in its efficient operating band. This is not a build that demands exotic cooling — the 65 W processor TDP means a capable air cooler handles it without strain.

The sensible next upgrade is the graphics card. With the CPU at the 93rd percentile and the GPU at the 68th, the processor has substantial headroom above the current video card. A future GPU swap on the same Socket 1851 board would rebalance the system without touching the platform; the 20 Gen 5 CPU lanes mean even a top-tier card would not be interface-limited here. Conversely, the CPU is already at parity with a prior i9 flagship, so chasing more processor performance is the lower-priority path.

Display connectivity on the B580 includes one HDMI 2.1a port and three DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, supporting multi-monitor arrangements natively.

Gaming Performance

To restate clearly: the database contains no measured FPS rows for this exact CPU+GPU combination, so every frame-rate statement in this section is an estimate extrapolated from benchmark scores, not in-game measurement.

The Arc B580's credentials for 1080p and 1440p gaming are solid. The card is built on the Xe2-HPG architecture — Intel's Battlemage, or Arc 5, generation — on TSMC's 5 nm node with 19,600 million transistors across a 272 mm² die at a density of 72.1M per mm². It carries 2,560 shading units, 160 TMUs, 80 ROPs, and 20 RT cores, producing 13.67 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput. Memory is 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus delivering 456.0 GB/s of bandwidth — a capacity-and-bandwidth pairing that suggests comfortable texture headroom at 1440p in particular.

Synthetic results frame the expectations. A 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 3,068 and a PassMark G3D score of 15,748 place the card in the 68th percentile of all GPUs. The Vulkan score in Geekbench is 109,672 versus an OpenCL score of 92,821 — the Vulkan figure being the more relevant one for gaming APIs, and the gap between them reflecting Battlemage's strengths in modern graphics APIs. PassMark GPU compute lands at 7,729.

Estimated from these scores, this configuration should deliver high-refresh 1080p gaming and solid 1440p play in most modern titles at ultra settings, with the 12 GB buffer preventing texture-related stutters in memory-heavy scenes. Ray-traced workloads will run, given the 20 dedicated RT cores, but at reduced settings relative to rasterized output. The CPU side is not a concern for frame delivery: the 4,750 single-thread PassMark score and 5,926 Cinebench R23 single-core result indicate the processor can feed the GPU without becoming the limiter at these resolutions. The PassMark DirectX suite scores — 183 for DX9, 128 for DX11, 76 for DX12, and 76 for DX10 — further indicate that legacy-API titles remain fully playable, relevant for older esports and back-catalog games.

Balance and Bottleneck

The combined percentile for this build is 81 — a strong overall placement driven almost entirely by the CPU. The 93rd-percentile processor versus the 68th-percentile GPU creates a clear, deliberate imbalance: this is a GPU-limited gaming build by design.

The evidence is in the scaling logic. With the Arc B580 as the weaker link, gaming frame rates at 1080p and 1440p will rise and fall with the graphics card, not the CPU. The Core Ultra 7 265F's single-thread and physics scores are far above what the B580 needs to stay saturated at those resolutions, meaning the processor will idle through much of a gaming session — headroom that is available for background tasks. A player streaming while gaming, for example, can dedicate encode and compositing overhead to spare CPU cores without subtracting frames from the game, because the GPU remains the binding constraint.

Flip to productivity workloads and the picture inverts. Video rendering, code compilation, and simulation scale with the 20 cores and the 41,980 Cinebench R23 multi-core score, and in those tasks the GPU is largely a bystander. The Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan compute scores show the B580 can contribute to GPU-accelerated work where supported, but the CPU is the engine.

For context on where the GPU sits, its nearest rivals by average score are a fascinating mix of eras: the AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP (-0.2% relative to the B580), NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (0.6%), NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 (-0.7%), and NVIDIA P106-100 (-1%). The B580 trades blows within a single percentage point of all four — including cards that were once flagship-tier hardware. That is the practical definition of a midrange card with mainstream-silicon efficiency: 5 nm, dual-slot, one 8-pin connector.

FAQ

Q: Does the Core Ultra 7 265F have integrated graphics?

A: No. The "F" suffix denotes disabled integrated graphics — the chip lists integrated graphics as N/A. A discrete GPU like the Arc B580 is required for display output.

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

A: They are effectively identical in performance. The 265 averages 64,640 versus the 265F's 64,438 — a delta of just -0.3% — with the difference being the 265F's lack of integrated graphics.

Q: Can this CPU be overclocked?

A: No. The multiplier is locked, so performance tuning is limited to platform-level adjustments rather than core-clock overclocking.

Q: Is 12 GB of VRAM enough for modern games?

A: For 1080p and 1440p gaming, the 12 GB GDDR6 buffer on a 192-bit bus with 456.0 GB/s of bandwidth is a comfortable specification at the card's performance tier, and the estimate-based frame expectations here assume ultra settings at those resolutions.

Q: What power supply does this build need?

A: The GPU's suggested PSU rating is 450 W. Combined with the CPU's 65 W TDP, a supply comfortably above that suggestion provides ample headroom for the full system.

Q: What memory does the platform support?

A: DDR5 in dual-channel configuration, with 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth. ECC is not supported.

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

A: No. The database contains no measured FPS data for the Core Ultra 7 265F plus Arc B580 combination; all frame-rate expectations on this page are estimates derived from benchmark scores.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: Estimated from the B580's PassMark G3D score of 15,748 and 3DMark Steel Nomad result of 3,068, this build targets high frame rates at 1080p and strong performance at 1440p in modern titles. The 68th-percentile GPU sets the ceiling; the 93rd-percentile CPU never gets in the way.

Streaming: This is an asymmetric pairing that suits streaming well. With the GPU as the frame-rate limiter, the 20-core processor — 49,410 PassMark multithreaded — has spare capacity to absorb encoding, scene compositing, and chat overlays while the game runs.

Video editing: Rendering throughput of 41,980 in Cinebench R23 multi-core handles timeline scrubbing, previews, and exports capably, and the GPU's 12 GB VRAM plus Vulkan compute score of 109,672 support accelerated effects where the application uses them.

3D rendering: The 17,631 Cinebench R20 and 4,231 R15 multi-core results indicate fast CPU-based renders, while the 20 RT cores and 13.67 TFLOPS of FP32 give viewport and GPU-render engines workable hardware at this tier.

Software development: Compilation and containerized workloads benefit from 20 physical cores with 3 MB of L2 each and 30 MB of shared L3. The 5,926 single-core Cinebench R23 score keeps single-threaded tooling — interpreters, linters, IDE responsiveness — quick.

Student and office work: The 65 W TDP keeps the system quiet and cool for everyday productivity, web work, and document tasks, while the single-thread percentile performance of the CPU ensures the machine never feels sluggish in bursty interactive use.

Who Should Build It

This combination suits the 1080p-to-1440p gamer who wants a CPU with longevity headroom. Players targeting high-refresh 1080p monitors or standard 1440p displays get a GPU appropriately matched to those goals, while the 93rd-percentile processor means a future graphics-card upgrade drops in without a platform change. Content creators doing video editing, streaming, or 3D work will find the CPU does the heavy lifting — the parity with the i9-13900KS at 0.6% delta confirms flagship-adjacent multi-core throughput.

Developers and students building a do-everything machine are also well served: 20 cores for parallel builds, strong single-thread scores for tooling, DDR5 bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s, and 20 Gen 5 CPU PCIe lanes for fast storage. Small-business workstations fit too, with the caveat of no ECC support for those needing memory-reliability guarantees. What this build is not: a 4K-max-settings gaming rig or a rendering box where the GPU must pull its weight — the B580's 68th percentile position defines that boundary.

Build Overview

This is a desktop-class build, all-Intel end to end: an Arrow Lake processor on Socket 1851 paired with a Battlemage discrete GPU over PCIe. The combined percentile of 81 reflects a system whose overall strength is carried by a top-decile CPU attached to an upper-midrange graphics card. Both components are in active production status, released in December 2024 (GPU) and January 2025 (CPU), so this is a current-generation platform rather than an end-of-life clearance pairing. The CPU launched at an MSRP of $379; the GPU launched at an MSRP of 249 USD.

The class character is best summarized by the percentile spread: 93rd for the CPU, 68th for the GPU. That is a deliberate architecture — buy processing power now, upgrade graphics later — and Socket 1851 plus Gen 5 lanes make that later upgrade frictionless.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU's complete benchmark card:

| Test | Score |

|---|---|

| Cinebench R15 Multi-Core | 4,231 |

| Cinebench R15 Single-Core | 597 |

| Cinebench R20 Multi-Core | 17,631 |

| Cinebench R20 Single-Core | 2,488 |

| Cinebench R23 Multi-Core | 41,980 |

| Cinebench R23 Single-Core | 5,926 |

| PassMark Multithread | 49,410 |

| PassMark Single Thread | 4,750 |

| PassMark Integer Math | 138,078 |

| PassMark Floating Point Math | 173,855 |

| PassMark Data Compression | 507,018 |

| PassMark Data Encryption | 39,468 |

| PassMark Extended Instructions | 39,235 |

| PassMark Physics | 3,172 |

| PassMark String Sorting | 62,439 |

| PassMark Find Prime Numbers | 416 |

The CPU's average benchmark score is 64,438, placing it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs in the database.

The GPU's benchmark card:

| Test | Score |

|---|---|

| 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 | 3,068 |

| Geekbench Vulkan | 109,672 |

| Geekbench OpenCL | 92,821 |

| PassMark G3D | 15,748 |

| PassMark GPU Compute | 7,729 |

| PassMark G2D | 709 |

| PassMark DirectX 9 | 183 |

| PassMark DirectX 11 | 128 |

| PassMark DirectX 12 | 76 |

| PassMark DirectX 10 | 76 |

The GPU's average benchmark score is 23,021, placing it in the 68th percentile of all GPUs. Among its nearest rivals, it sits within one percentage point of the Radeon RX 580 2048SP, GeForce RTX 2080, GeForce RTX 3080, and P106-100.

The combined picture: an 81st-percentile desktop build whose performance identity is set by a processor matching prior-flagship throughput at a 65 W TDP, attached to a modern midrange GPU with a 12 GB buffer and efficient 5 nm silicon. For gaming, the GPU sets the pace; for everything else, the CPU takes over — and no measured FPS data exists yet for this specific pairing, so all frame-rate expectations here remain benchmark-derived estimates.