SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 7 265F + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090

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
93%
PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 7 265F

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

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090

27,565 Benchmark Score
Top 7% 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 pairs with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 to create a desktop configuration that prioritizes multi-threaded throughput and high-capacity VRAM over raw single-thread responsiveness. The CPU’s benchmark profile places it in the 93rd percentile among all processors, while the GPU sits in the 73rd percentile among all graphics cards, resulting in a combined build percentile of 83. Because the FACT PACK contains no measured FPS rows for this exact combination, all gaming performance figures discussed here are estimates derived from the component benchmark scores rather than direct testing data.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265F is a 20-core, 20-thread processor built on the Arrow Lake-S architecture, manufactured on TSMC’s 3 nm process node. It packs 17,800 million transistors into a 243 mm² die. The CPU operates with a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz, with a 65 W TDP. The cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and a shared 30 MB L3 cache. Memory support is limited to dual-channel DDR5 with a bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s, and the CPU provides 20 PCIe Gen 5 lanes.

Benchmark results show a processor that excels in heavily threaded workloads. In Cinebench R23, the chip scores 41,980 points in multi-core and 5,926 points in single-core. The multi-core result is the standout figure here, placing the chip in the top 7% of all CPUs tracked. The single-core score is respectable but not class-leading, suggesting the architecture prioritizes sustained all-core throughput over peak single-thread speed. PassMark results reinforce this profile: multi-thread score of 49,410, integer math at 138,078, floating-point math at 173,855, and extended instructions at 39,235.

The average benchmark score of 64,438 places the Ultra 7 265F in a tight competitive cluster. It trails the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 by just 0.3%, sits 0.4% ahead of the AMD EPYC 7343, and is 0.6% ahead of the Intel Core i9-13900KS. This indicates that within this performance tier, the differences between rivals are marginal — less than one percentage point separates the top four contenders. For real workloads, this means the 265F offers essentially identical performance to its closest alternatives, with the choice between them coming down to platform features rather than raw compute.

The PassMark data compression score of 507,018 and data encryption score of 39,468 indicate strong throughput for file archiving and cryptographic operations. The find prime numbers score of 416 is notably lower, which suggests that the CPU’s integer-heavy prime calculation performance is not its strongest area. Random string sorting at 62,439 points further indicates solid but not exceptional memory-bound operation. The single-thread PassMark score of 4,750 aligns with the Cinebench R15 single-core result of 597, painting a consistent picture of a chip that is very capable in parallel tasks but merely average in single-threaded responsiveness.

Balance and Bottleneck

The data reveals a configuration where the CPU is the stronger component relative to its peers. With a CPU percentile of 93 versus a GPU percentile of 73, the processor is positioned 20 percentage points higher in its respective market. This imbalance suggests that in CPU-bound scenarios — such as physics simulation, data compression, or heavily threaded productivity tasks — the processor will not be the limiting factor. The GPU, while still above average, will be the first component to reach its performance ceiling in graphically intensive workloads.

The PassMark physics score of 3,172 for the CPU and the GPU’s PassMark compute score of 15,356 indicate that the GPU handles massively parallel compute tasks with roughly five times the throughput of the CPU’s physics engine. However, in gaming scenarios where frame generation depends on both CPU draw calls and GPU rasterization, the 20-core processor’s high multi-thread score of 49,410 ensures it can feed the GPU without stalling. The GPU’s 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 5,118 represents its peak graphical throughput, and the CPU’s single-thread score of 5,926 in Cinebench R23 suggests it can sustain high frame rates without becoming a bottleneck at standard resolutions.

The deltaPct values against nearest rivals show that the CPU is not meaningfully faster or slower than its direct competitors — all deltas are under one percent. This means the balance between CPU and GPU is determined almost entirely by the GPU’s lower percentile ranking. In practical terms, a user upgrading from a weaker CPU would see significant gains in multi-threaded tasks, but the GPU would remain the ceiling for frame rates in most modern games. The 20-lane PCIe Gen 5 connection from the CPU to the GPU provides ample bandwidth for data transfer, with the GPU supporting PCIe 4.0 x16, ensuring no interface bottleneck at current bandwidth requirements.

GPU Analysis

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 is built on the Ampere architecture using Samsung’s 8 nm process, with a GA102 chip containing 28,300 million transistors on a 628 mm² die. The GPU features 10,496 shading units, 328 texture mapping units, and 112 raster output pipelines. It includes 82 RT cores and 328 tensor cores, providing dedicated hardware for ray tracing and AI-accelerated workloads. The boost clock runs at 1,695 MHz with a base clock of 1,395 MHz.

Memory configuration is the defining feature of this GPU. It carries 24 GB of GDDR6X on a 384-bit bus, delivering a bandwidth of 936.2 GB/s. The memory clock is 1,219 MHz with 19.5 Gbps effective transfer rate. This VRAM capacity and bandwidth combination is exceptionally high, making the card suited for large dataset rendering, high-resolution texture work, and AI model training that exceeds the memory capacity of most consumer GPUs. The pixel rate of 189.8 GPixel/s and texture rate of 556.0 GTexel/s indicate strong fill-rate performance for high-resolution output.

In compute benchmarks, the RTX 3090 achieves 35.58 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16 (at 1:1 ratio), positioning it as a capable compute card. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 172,758 demonstrates strong general compute performance, while the Vulkan score of 53,927 shows solid graphics API performance. PassMark G3D score of 26,645 places the GPU in the 73rd percentile, with the nearest rival being the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile at a 0.5% delta and the AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT also at 0.5% delta. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 trails by 1%, and the AMD Radeon RX 7800M is 1.1% behind.

The GPU’s average benchmark score of 27,565 puts it in a competitive position where the top rivals are separated by just over one percentage point. The 24 GB VRAM is the differentiator here — no rival in the nearestRivals list comes close to matching that capacity. The 82 RT cores provide hardware-accelerated ray tracing, and the 328 tensor cores enable DLSS and other AI-based rendering features. The triple-slot design and 350 W TDP require substantial cooling and power delivery, with a suggested PSU of 750 W.

Who Should Build It

This configuration targets users who need substantial multi-threaded CPU performance combined with high-capacity GPU memory. The CPU’s 93rd percentile ranking makes it suitable for content creators who render video, compile large codebases, or run complex simulations. The 20 cores and 20 threads provide parallel processing headroom that benefits tasks like 3D rendering in Cinebench R23, where the 41,980 multi-core score demonstrates real-world rendering capability.

The GPU’s 24 GB VRAM makes this build particularly appealing for 3D artists working with large scenes, machine learning researchers training models that exceed 16 GB memory footprints, and video editors working with 8K footage. The 936.2 GB/s memory bandwidth ensures that large textures and datasets can be accessed quickly without stalling the GPU. The RTX 3090’s 35.58 TFLOPS FP32 performance supports scientific computing and data analysis workloads that leverage CUDA acceleration.

Gamers at 4K resolution will find the 24 GB VRAM and 936.2 GB/s bandwidth sufficient for ultra-high-resolution textures, though the GPU’s 73rd percentile ranking suggests it is not the absolute fastest option available. The CPU’s 93rd percentile ensures that even at high frame rates, the processor will not hold back performance. Students and small business workstations that run engineering simulations, financial modeling, or database processing will benefit from the CPU’s PassMark multi-thread score of 49,410 and data compression score of 507,018.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265F uses the Intel Socket 1851 platform, which supports DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration. The CPU provides 20 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, enabling high-bandwidth connections for the latest NVMe storage and expansion cards. The 65 W TDP is modest for a 20-core processor, leaving substantial thermal headroom for aftermarket cooling solutions. The CPU is not multiplier-unlocked, so overclocking is not available, but the boost clock of 5.30 GHz provides solid out-of-the-box performance.

The GPU requires a 750 W power supply according to the suggestedPsu field, and uses a single 12-pin power connector. The triple-slot design means the card occupies significant case space, with dimensions of 336 mm in length, 140 mm in height, and 61 mm in width. The GPU is end-of-life with its successor being the GeForce 40 series, but the 24 GB VRAM remains a compelling reason to keep this card in service for memory-intensive workloads.

A sensible next upgrade would be to increase system memory to take full advantage of the CPU’s 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth, particularly for tasks that benefit from large working sets. The PCIe Gen 5 lanes from the CPU ensure that future storage devices can achieve maximum throughput. The platform’s DDR5 support means that memory upgrades are straightforward, though the dual-channel limitation caps maximum bandwidth at 102.4 GB/s regardless of memory kit capacity.

Gaming Performance

The FACT PACK contains no measured FPS rows for this exact CPU-GPU combination, so all gaming figures presented here are estimates derived from the benchmark scores. The CPU’s Cinebench R23 single-core score of 5,926 and the GPU’s 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 5,118 provide the basis for these expectations. In CPU-bound games at 1080p, the processor’s high single-thread performance should maintain high frame rates, while the GPU’s 73rd percentile ranking suggests it will be the limiting factor at higher resolutions.

For esports titles and competitive shooters at 1080p with ultra settings, the combination of a 5.30 GHz boost clock and 10,496 shading units should deliver frame rates well above 144 Hz in most scenarios. At 1440p, the GPU’s 189.8 GPixel/s pixel rate and 556.0 GTexel/s texture rate will handle moderate graphical loads, but the RTX 3090’s age relative to newer architectures means it will not match the absolute fastest current cards. At 4K, the 24 GB VRAM and 936.2 GB/s bandwidth prevent memory-related stuttering, but raw compute performance will cap frame rates below what newer GPUs achieve.

Ray tracing performance will benefit from the 82 RT cores, but the Ampere architecture’s ray tracing efficiency is lower than newer generations. The 328 tensor cores enable DLSS, which can significantly boost frame rates in supported titles by rendering at lower internal resolutions. The PassMark DirectX 12 score of 110 and DirectX 11 score of 220 suggest that the GPU handles modern APIs efficiently, though the scores are lower than some newer cards, indicating potential driver or architecture limitations in certain workloads.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: At 1080p, the CPU’s 5,926 single-core Cinebench R23 score and the GPU’s 10,496 shading units should sustain frame rates above 144 Hz in most competitive titles, though the GPU’s 73rd percentile ranking means it will not match top-tier current cards. The 24 GB VRAM ensures that even future games with large texture packs will not exceed memory capacity.

Streaming: The CPU’s 20 cores provide ample headroom for simultaneous game encoding and streaming workloads, with the PassMark multi-thread score of 49,410 indicating strong parallel processing. The GPU’s NVENC encoder, implied by the tensor cores and Ampere architecture, can offload encoding tasks, but the data does not specify encoder performance.

Video editing: The CPU’s Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 41,980 accelerates rendering and export times, while the GPU’s 24 GB VRAM handles 8K timelines and complex effects without memory pressure. The 936.2 GB/s bandwidth supports high-bitrate footage playback and scrubbing.

3D rendering: The 20-core CPU with a 93rd percentile ranking excels in CPU-based rendering, while the GPU’s 35.58 TFLOPS FP32 performance accelerates GPU-accelerated renderers. The 82 RT cores provide hardware ray tracing for real-time viewport previews.

Software development: The CPU’s PassMark integer math score of 138,078 and data encryption score of 39,468 indicate strong performance for code compilation and cryptographic operations. The 20 threads handle parallel builds efficiently, and the 30 MB L3 cache reduces memory latency for frequently accessed data.

Student and office work: The CPU’s 65 W TDP and the GPU’s 350 W TDP combine for a total system power draw that is manageable for a desktop workstation. The PassMark single-thread score of 4,750 handles everyday productivity tasks, while the data compression score of 507,018 accelerates file archiving and backup operations.

FAQ

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

A: The combined build percentile is 83, with the CPU at the 93rd percentile and the GPU at the 73rd percentile.

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F compare to the Intel Core i9-13900KS?

A: The Ultra 7 265F is 0.6% ahead of the Core i9-13900KS in average benchmark score, with a score of 64,438 versus 64,051.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of the RTX 3090?

A: The RTX 3090 has 936.2 GB/s memory bandwidth, achieved through 24 GB of GDDR6X on a 384-bit bus.

Q: Does the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F support ECC memory?

A: No, the FACT PACK indicates ECC memory support is false for this processor.

Q: What is the launch MSRP of the RTX 3090?

A: The launch MSRP is 1,499 USD.

Q: How many RT cores does the RTX 3090 have?

A: The RTX 3090 has 82 RT cores and 328 tensor cores.

Q: What is the TDP of the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F?

A: The TDP is 65 W, while the RTX 3090 has a TDP of 350 W, with a suggested power supply of 750 W.

Benchmark Performance

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265F achieves an average benchmark score of 64,438, placing it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 7 265, scores 64,640, a delta of -0.3%, meaning the 265F is essentially tied with its direct sibling. The AMD EPYC 7343 scores 64,202, putting the 265F 0.4% ahead. The AMD EPYC 4464P scores 64,823, meaning the 265F trails by 0.6%. The Intel Core i9-13900KS scores 64,051, with the 265F ahead by 0.6%.

In specific CPU benchmarks, the Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 41,980 is the standout figure, representing strong all-core performance. The Cinebench R20 multi-core score of 17,631 and R15 multi-core score of 4,231 follow the same trend. Single-core scores are 5,926 in R23, 2,488 in R20, and 597 in R15. PassMark results show a multi-thread score of 49,410, single-thread score of 4,750, and a floating-point math score of 173,855.

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 achieves an average benchmark score of 27,565, placing it in the 73rd percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the RTX 4070 Mobile, scores 27,435, a delta of 0.5% in favor of the 3090. The AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT scores 27,425, also 0.5% behind. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 scores 27,839, putting the 3090 1% behind, and the AMD Radeon RX 7800M scores 27,883, with the 3090 1.1% behind.

The GPU’s 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 5,118 represents its peak DX12 gaming performance. Geekbench OpenCL score of 172,758 and Vulkan score of 53,927 show strong compute and graphics API support. PassMark G3D score of 26,645 and GPU compute score of 15,356 round out the performance picture. The combined picture shows a CPU that outperforms its GPU counterpart relative to their respective markets, with the CPU ranking 20 percentile points higher than the GPU. This configuration is CPU-dominant, meaning the processor will not limit performance in most workloads, but the GPU will cap frame rates in graphically intensive gaming scenarios.