SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 7 265H + Intel Arc A350M

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)

▼

92 Score

Top 8% Ranking

92 / 100

ULTIMATE READY

Apex Performer

Top 8% 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

93%

GPU

92%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 7 265H

41,621 Benchmark Score

Top 7% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

Intel Arc A350M

24,647 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 Intel Core Ultra 7 265H paired with the Intel Arc A350M represents a mobile computing platform built around efficiency and moderate performance. The CPU, a 16-core Arrow Lake-H part, sits in the 88th percentile of all processors, while the Arc A350M GPU, based on the Xe-HPG architecture, holds the 70th percentile. This combination yields a combined percentile rank of 79, placing it firmly in the upper-midrange tier of laptop hardware. The data shows a system with substantial multi-threaded processing capability for a 28W TDP processor, but with a graphics solution that is more modest in its performance class.

Usage Scenarios

High-Refresh Gaming: This platform is not suited for high-refresh gaming at demanding settings. The Arc A350M, positioned in the 70th GPU percentile, is the limiting factor. While the CPU’s 88th percentile ranking ensures it can feed frames efficiently, the GPU’s estimated performance is insufficient to drive high frame rates at 1080p in modern titles. Users targeting high-refresh esports titles might achieve playable results, but the data does not support this as a primary use case.

Streaming: The system can handle streaming on a basic level. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265H’s strong multi-core Cinebench R23 score of 19940 provides ample headroom for encoding video in software while running a game. However, the Arc A350M’s modest rendering performance will limit the game’s graphical fidelity and frame rate, meaning streamers would need to prioritize encoding settings over game quality. The CPU’s high Passmark multi-thread score of 34027 further confirms its ability to manage concurrent workloads.

Video Editing: This is a viable scenario for light to moderate video editing. The CPU’s Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 19940 places it 0.6% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 9 5900X, a desktop-class processor, in average benchmark score. This indicates strong performance for timeline playback and rendering. The Arc A350M’s 4GB of VRAM and 112.0 GB/s bandwidth can handle 1080p projects, but the 64-bit memory bus and 3.379 TFLOPS of FP32 performance may struggle with complex effects or high-resolution source material.

3D Rendering: The CPU is the workhorse here. The 16-core/16-thread configuration delivers a Passmark multi-thread score of 34027, making it excellent for CPU-based rendering tasks. However, the Arc A350M is not a rendering powerhouse. Its 768 shading units and 6 RT cores provide some acceleration, but the 3.379 TFLOPS FP32 performance is a fraction of what dedicated desktop GPUs offer. This system is best for pre-visualization or simple scenes, not final-frame production renders.

Software Development: This is a strong scenario. The high single-thread performance, evidenced by a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2080, and the 16-core multi-threading capability make compilation times short. The Passmark data encryption score of 26005 and extended instructions score of 26805 indicate robust performance for security and cryptography workloads. The 24 MB of L3 cache helps with large codebases. This is a very capable development machine.

Student and Office Work: The platform excels here. The 28W TDP of the CPU and 25W TDP of the GPU suggest a power-efficient system that can deliver long battery life. The integrated Arc Graphics 140T in the CPU provides a backup for basic display tasks, potentially allowing the discrete GPU to idle. The high single-thread Passmark score of 4334 ensures snappy application launches and smooth multitasking in productivity suites.

FAQ

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

A: The combined percentile rank for this Intel Core Ultra 7 265H and Intel Arc A350M system is 79, placing it in the upper-midrange tier of all benchmarked laptop configurations.

Q: How does the CPU compare to the AMD Ryzen 9 5900X in average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265H has an average benchmark score of 41621, which is 0.6% higher than the AMD Ryzen 9 5900X's score of 41376, indicating nearly identical overall CPU performance.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of the Intel Arc A350M GPU?

A: The Arc A350M has a memory bandwidth of 112.0 GB/s, achieved through a 64-bit memory bus and 4 GB of GDDR6 memory running at 14 Gbps effective.

Q: Does the CPU support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Intel Core Ultra 7 265H lists ECC memory as a supported feature, which is unusual for a mobile processor and beneficial for data integrity in workstation tasks.

Q: What is the process node for the Intel Core Ultra 7 265H?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265H is manufactured on a 3 nm process node by TSMC, which contributes to its high performance-per-watt characteristics.

Q: Which API features does the Intel Arc A350M support?

A: The Arc A350M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, ensuring compatibility with modern game and rendering APIs.

Q: How does the GPU's benchmark score compare to the NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile?

A: The Arc A350M's average benchmark score is 24647, which is 0.5% lower than the NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile's score of 24763, showing they are statistically equivalent in compute performance.

Balance and Bottleneck

The data clearly indicates a CPU-bound system in most scenarios. The Core Ultra 7 265H operates in the 88th CPU percentile, while the Arc A350M is in the 70th GPU percentile. This 18-point gap signifies that the processor has significantly more compute headroom than the graphics card can utilize. In gaming workloads, the Arc A350M will be the primary bottleneck, limiting frame rates regardless of the CPU’s capability. The GPU’s estimated performance, based on its 24647 average benchmark score, is the ceiling for graphics-related tasks.

Conversely, in productivity workloads like 3D rendering or data processing, the bottleneck shifts. The CPU’s 16 cores and 24 MB of L3 cache will be the determining factor for speed. The GPU’s 3.379 TFLOPS of FP32 power is insufficient for GPU-accelerated rendering, meaning tasks will rely on the CPU. The Passmark physics score of 2497 and integer math score of 85479 further demonstrate the CPU’s dominance in logic-based tasks, while the GPU’s 52.80 GPixel/s pixel rate and 105.6 GTexel/s texture rate define its limits in graphics processing. This system is a classic case of a high-end CPU paired with an entry-level dGPU, creating an imbalance that favors CPU-intensive applications.

Who Should Build It

This configuration is ideal for software developers and students in STEM fields. The CPU’s Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 19940 and single-core score of 2080 provide the compilation speed and responsiveness required for coding, while the low TDP of 28W contributes to a portable, long-lasting laptop. The ECC memory support is a bonus for those working with large datasets where data corruption is a concern.

Content creators working with 1080p video will find this system adequate. The CPU’s performance, which is 0.1% ahead of the Intel Core i7-14650HX and 0.6% ahead of the Ryzen 9 5900X in average score, handles video encoding and editing smoothly. The Arc A350M’s 4GB of VRAM is sufficient for the GPU-accelerated effects in editing software, though users should not expect fast 4K timeline performance.

For gamers, this is not a target platform. The GPU’s 70th percentile ranking places it below the performance level needed for high-fidelity gaming. Small business workstations that prioritize CPU performance for tasks like financial modeling, virtualization, or database management will benefit most. The Passmark multi-thread score of 34027 and data encryption score of 26005 make it a formidable tool for such workloads, while the discrete GPU offers more flexibility than relying solely on integrated graphics.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU’s average benchmark score is 41621, placing it in the 88th percentile of all CPUs. This score is nearly identical to its nearest rival, the Intel Core 7 251TE, which scores 41650, representing a negligible delta of -0.1%. The CPU is also 0.1% ahead of the Intel Core i7-14650HX and 0.6% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 9 5900X. Specific scores include a Cinebench R23 multi-core result of 19940 and a single-core result of 2080, demonstrating a balanced architecture.

The GPU’s average benchmark score is 24647, placing it in the 70th percentile of all GPUs. This score is 0.4% lower than the AMD Radeon RX 590 and 0.5% lower than the NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile, showing it is competitive with older desktop cards. It is 0.8% higher than the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT. The combined percentile of 79 indicates that the CPU boosts the overall system ranking significantly above what the GPU alone would suggest, highlighting the disparity in their performance classes.

Gaming Performance

No measured FPS data exists for this exact CPU and GPU combination. All frame rate discussions are estimates derived from the benchmark scores. The Arc A350M’s 24647 average benchmark score, which is 1.5% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630, suggests it can handle esports titles at 1080p with medium settings. However, the 4GB VRAM capacity and 112.0 GB/s bandwidth will be a limiting factor for modern AAA games, which often require more memory for high-resolution textures.

The CPU’s high performance, with a Passmark single-thread score of 4334, ensures that it will not bottleneck the GPU at lower resolutions. However, the GPU’s 3.379 TFLOPS of FP32 performance is the limiting factor. Users can expect playable frame rates in less demanding games, but the system will struggle to maintain 60 FPS in graphically intensive titles at 1080p ultra settings. The data suggests this is a light gaming platform, not a high-performance one.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265H is a 16-core, 16-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake-H architecture, manufactured on a 3 nm process by TSMC. It operates at a base clock of 2.20 GHz and can boost up to 5.30 GHz, with a TDP of 28W. The cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and a shared 24 MB of L3 cache. This configuration supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory over a dual-channel bus, providing a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s.

The benchmark results indicate a processor that excels in both single and multi-threaded tasks. The Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2080 is strong, while the multi-core score of 19940 shows excellent scaling across the 16 cores. Passmark scores for integer math (85479) and floating-point math (109123) are robust, and the data compression score of 334711 indicates high throughput for data-intensive workloads. The 88th percentile ranking confirms its position as a high-end mobile CPU, rivaling desktop parts from the previous generation.

Build Overview

This is a laptop-class build combining a high-performance mobile CPU with an entry-level discrete GPU. The system’s combined percentile of 79 places it in the upper-midrange tier of all benchmarked configurations. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265H is a recent, active production part, while the Intel Arc A350M is marked as end-of-life, having been released in 2022. This pairing suggests a system where the CPU is the primary investment, providing long-term usability for processor-intensive tasks, while the GPU serves as a stopgap solution for light graphics work.

The data shows a platform that is well-suited for productivity and development but is not a gaming machine. The CPU’s 88th percentile performance is a clear highlight, while the GPU’s 70th percentile ranking is more modest. The 28W CPU TDP and 25W GPU TDP make this a power-efficient combination, ideal for a thin-and-light laptop chassis. The overall tier is defined by the CPU’s strength, making this a workstation-class processor in a consumer laptop form factor.

GPU Analysis

The Intel Arc A350M is based on the DG2-128 chip, utilizing the Xe-HPG architecture on a 6 nm process. It features 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, 24 ROPs, and 6 RT cores. The GPU operates at a base clock of 1150 MHz and boosts to 2200 MHz, with a memory clock of 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). It is equipped with 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 112.0 GB/s.

The GPU’s compute capabilities are defined by its 3.379 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 6.758 TFLOPS of FP16 performance. The pixel rate is 52.80 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 105.6 GTexel/s. Its average benchmark score of 24647 places it in the 70th percentile, close to the performance of an AMD Radeon RX 590. The 6 RT cores provide some ray tracing capability, but the modest 3.379 TFLOPS of compute power limits its effectiveness. The GPU is best suited for 1080p gaming at medium settings and light creative workloads.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The CPU is socketed on Intel BGA 2049, which is a mobile-specific package, meaning the processor is not upgradeable in a traditional sense. The platform supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory, and the CPU provides 8 PCIe Gen 5 lanes. The GPU connects via a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface. The absence of a suggested PSU value for the GPU, combined with the low TDPs of both components (28W CPU, 25W GPU), indicates that power consumption is not a concern for this system.

A sensible next upgrade, given the data, would focus on the GPU. The CPU has significant headroom, as evidenced by its 88th percentile ranking. Replacing the Arc A350M with a higher-performing GPU would better balance the system and unlock the CPU’s full potential in gaming and GPU-accelerated tasks. However, the end-of-life status of the Arc A350M suggests that any upgrade would require a new motherboard or laptop, as the BGA socket is not upgradeable. The platform’s memory support for DDR5 ensures that memory bandwidth is not a bottleneck for future CPU upgrades, but the socket limitation is the primary constraint.

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 7 265H + Intel Arc A350M

Apex Performer

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core Ultra 7 265H

Intel Arc A350M

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

Usage Scenarios

FAQ

Balance and Bottleneck

Who Should Build It

Benchmark Performance

Gaming Performance

CPU Analysis

Build Overview

GPU Analysis

Upgrade Path and Platform

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