SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX + 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)

▼

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

92%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX

63,173 Benchmark Score

Top 4% 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 265HX and Intel Arc A350M form a laptop-class pairing with a clear performance split: the CPU sits at the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, while the GPU sits at the 70th percentile of all GPUs. The combined percentile for the pairing is 82. The FACT PACK contains no measured FPS rows for this exact combination — `measuredFpsUltraByGame` is empty and `dataIsMeasured` is false — so all gaming frame-rate statements in this analysis are estimates derived from benchmark scores rather than direct game measurements.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX uses Intel BGA 2114, a ball-grid-array socket typical of mobile platforms. Because the CPU is mounted on a BGA package, it is not a socketed desktop part; an "upgrade" in the traditional sense would mean replacing the laptop platform rather than swapping the processor. The same applies to the Intel Arc A350M, which is an IGP-class mobile GPU with slot width listed as IGP, so the graphics chip is tied to the platform's integrated design rather than being a modular add-in card.

Memory support is DDR5 on a dual-channel bus with a listed memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. ECC memory is not supported. The CPU provides PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU itself, which gives the system high-bandwidth connectivity to storage and optional devices. The Arc A350M, in contrast, uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 bus interface, so even though the CPU can generate Gen 5 signals, the GPU's connection is limited to the GPU's own interface.

The power figures are modest: the CPU TDP is 55 W and the GPU TDP is 25 W. The GPU record lists no suggested PSU, which is consistent with a mobile, integrated-scale part. In a laptop build, these power numbers feed into laptop power-delivery design rather than a user-replaceable PSU. Because both parts are mobile-class and the GPU is effectively integrated into the platform, the most sensible next upgrade is not a component swap but a move to another laptop platform that keeps the same DDR5 memory and PCIe Gen 5 foundation while offering a different CPU/GPU balance.

Gaming Performance

There are no measured FPS numbers for this CPU+GPU combination. The FACT PACK contains no rows under `measuredFpsUltraByGame`, and the `dataIsMeasured` flag is false. Consequently, this section cannot cite a real frame rate for any game at any resolution. Everything here is an estimate built from the benchmark scores.

What the scores suggest is a CPU-heavy but GPU-limited gaming laptop. The Core Ultra 7 265HX has a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 5737 and a Passmark single-thread score of 4500, both strong for maintaining high per-frame draw call throughput in esports and older titles. The Arc A350M, however, is only at the 70th percentile of all GPUs, with 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus and 112.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth. Those GPU-side numbers point to a card that can handle lower-detail or older games, but modern high-texture or high-resolution scenes will be gated by the frame buffer and bandwidth.

For gaming, the data supports a qualitative expectation: CPU-bound competitive settings will feel capable, while visually heavy ultra settings will run out of GPU headroom. The 6 RT cores on the Arc A350M enable ray-tracing API support, but the 4 GB VRAM and 64-bit memory interface leave little room for ray-traced effects at high quality. No resolution-specific FPS figures should be inferred beyond what the 70th GPU percentile and the empty measured FPS table imply.

FAQ

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

A: No. The `eccMemory` field is false.

Q: What memory does the Core Ultra 7 265HX support?

A: It supports DDR5 on a dual-channel bus with a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s.

Q: Does the Intel Arc A350M support ray tracing?

A: Yes, in terms of hardware and API support. It has 6 RT cores and the API list includes DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), Vulkan 1.4, and OpenGL 4.6. However, there is no measured FPS data for this pairing, so actual ray-traced frame rates are not available.

Q: Is the Intel Arc A350M still in production?

A: No. Its production status is End-of-life, and its release date is listed as 2022-03-29.

Q: How does the Core Ultra 7 265HX compare to the Core Ultra 7 255HX?

A: The 265HX has an average benchmark score of 63173, while the 255HX has an average score of 62738. The deltaPct is 0.7, meaning the 265HX is 0.7% ahead of the 255HX.

Q: What are the CPU and GPU percentiles?

A: The CPU is at the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, the GPU is at the 70th percentile of all GPUs, and the combined percentile is 82.

Q: Is there measured gaming FPS data for this exact CPU+GPU combination?

A: No. The FACT PACK contains no measured FPS rows, and `dataIsMeasured` is false.

Who Should Build It

This pairing suits users whose workloads are primarily CPU-driven, because the processor is far higher in the CPU distribution than the GPU is in the GPU distribution. A buyer who needs a laptop-class workstation for compiling code, running data processing, or doing content creation that leans on CPU multi-threading will get more out of this platform than someone expecting high-end GPU gaming.

Students and small business workstations fit the profile: the CPU's Passmark single-thread score of 4500 makes everyday interaction responsive, while 20 threads and a 93rd CPU percentile provide headroom for parallel office tasks. Software developers are also a strong fit, given the CPU's Passmark integer math score of 126954 and extended instructions score of 40741, both indicating strong logic-heavy throughput.

Content creators who render on the CPU can use the Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 40642. However, users who expect the GPU to handle 3D rendering or video effects will be limited by the Arc A350M's 4 GB VRAM, 64-bit bus, and 3.379 TFLOPS FP32 throughput. The pairing is therefore not aimed at GPU-centric artists, but it can serve as a productive CPU-first laptop.

Gamers who play low-detail or older titles may find the 70th GPU percentile acceptable, especially when paired with the CPU's strong single-thread score of 5737 in Cinebench R23. But anyone building for high-end gaming at high detail should look at a platform with a more powerful GPU and more VRAM.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU's exact benchmark results are extensive. In Cinebench, the Core Ultra 7 265HX scores 4096 in R15 multi-core and 578 in R15 single-core, 17069 in R20 multi-core and 2409 in R20 single-core, and 40642 in R23 multi-core and 5737 in R23 single-core. In Passmark, it scores 511817 in data compression, 39472 in data encryption, 40741 in extended instructions, 406 in find prime numbers, 161605 in floating point math, 126954 in integer math, 47985 in multithread, 2978 in physics, 62458 in random string sorting, and 4500 in single-thread.

The CPU's average benchmark score is 63173, placing it at the 93rd percentile of all CPUs. Against its nearest rivals, that score is 0.1% above the Intel Core i7-13790F (average 63080), 0.5% above the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 (average 62839), and 0.7% above the Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX (average 62738). It is 0.2% below the AMD Ryzen AI 7 450G (average 63331). This places the 265HX in a tight pack of high-end processors, with no rival more than 0.7% away.

The GPU's Geekbench scores are 24546 in OpenCL and 24747 in Vulkan. Its average benchmark score is 24647, which puts it at the 70th percentile of all GPUs. Against nearest rivals, the Arc A350M is 0.4% behind the AMD Radeon RX 590 (average 24744), 0.5% behind the NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile (average 24763), 0.8% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT (average 24442), and 1.5% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 (average 24277).

The combined percentile of 82 reflects a laptop where the CPU is the dominant contributor to the overall performance tier. The CPU sits near the top of the CPU field, while the GPU sits comfortably in the upper-middle range of the GPU field.

GPU Analysis

The Intel Arc A350M is an Alchemist-generation mobile GPU built on TSMC's 6 nm process with 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die. It is based on the DG2-128 chip and uses the Xe-HPG architecture. The GPU has 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, 24 ROPs, and 6 ray-tracing cores. The tensor-core field is null, so no tensor-core count is specified in the data.

Memory consists of 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 112.0 GB/s. The memory clock is 1750 MHz, listed as 14 Gbps effective. The GPU core runs at a base clock of 1150 MHz and a boost clock of 2200 MHz. Pixel rate is 52.80 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 105.6 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput is 3.379 TFLOPS, while FP16 throughput is 6.758 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio.

For rendering, the numbers describe a small, efficient GPU with hardware ray tracing but a limited memory footprint. The 6 RT cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) support mean ray-traced effects are possible in supported APIs, but 4 GB of VRAM and 112.0 GB/s of bandwidth will constrain scene complexity and texture size. The 3.379 TFLOPS FP32 figure is modest, so traditional rasterized rendering at high detail will be more achievable than heavy ray tracing.

The Geekbench OpenCL score of 24546 and Vulkan score of 24747 give the GPU its 70th percentile rank. In terms of nearest rivals, the Arc A350M sits almost exactly between the RX 590 and RTX A5000 Mobile in average Geekbench score, and it is slightly ahead of the RX 6600 XT and GTX 1630 in that specific benchmark comparison. Those are benchmark scores, not game FPS values, and the empty measured FPS table reinforces that no game-specific result should be attached to this GPU here.

Balance and Bottleneck

The balance is heavily weighted toward the CPU. The Core Ultra 7 265HX is at the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, while the Arc A350M is at the 70th percentile of all GPUs. The combined percentile is 82, which is lower than the CPU percentile alone, indicating that the GPU drags the overall gaming and GPU-accelerated workload potential below the CPU's own tier.

For CPU-heavy workloads such as compiling, data encryption, multithreaded office tasks, and CPU rendering, the processor is the clear driver. The Passmark multithread score of 47985 and Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 40642 show abundant parallel throughput. For gaming, the GPU is the more natural bottleneck in visually demanding scenes: the 4 GB memory capacity and 64-bit bus will limit textures, while the 70th GPU percentile is far below the CPU's 93rd percentile.

Because there is no measured FPS data, there is no FPS scaling evidence to show how frame rate changes with resolution or settings. The only scaling evidence available is the percentile gap. A 93rd-percentile CPU paired with a 70th-percentile GPU suggests that, in most GPU-bound scenarios, the GPU will reach its limit before the CPU does. In lightly threaded or low-detail scenarios, the CPU's strong single-core Cinebench R23 score of 5737 may become the limiting factor only at very high frame-rate ceilings, though no measured FPS exists to confirm that threshold.

Build Overview

This is a laptop-class build with the Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX as the CPU and the Intel Arc A350M as the GPU. The build class is explicitly `laptop`. The CPU is part of the Core Ultra Series 2, based on Arrow Lake and codenamed Arrow Lake-HX, released 2025-01-12 and still Active in production. The GPU is an Arc 3 Mobile part from the Alchemist generation, released 2022-03-29 and marked End-of-life.

The overall tier is defined by the percentiles: CPU 93rd, GPU 70th, combined 82. That combined percentile places the pairing in the upper part of the distribution for laptop builds, but the disparity between CPU and GPU means the system is not a balanced high-end gaming machine. It is better described as a high-tier CPU platform with a mid-tier GPU bolted on.

The CPU and GPU are both Intel parts, using Intel's Xe-HPG architecture for the discrete GPU and Intel's Arrow Lake architecture for the CPU. The CPU also contains integrated graphics, listed as Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU, though the system also carries the Arc A350M. From a performance-tier standpoint, the combined 82nd percentile is the headline figure, but the CPU-side scores are the reason that number is as high as it is.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX has 20 cores and 20 threads, meaning there is no hyperthreading expansion beyond the physical core count. The base clock is 2.60 GHz and the boost clock is 5.30 GHz. TDP is 55 W. The processor is built on TSMC's 3 nm process and contains 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. Its architecture is Arrow Lake, with the codename Arrow Lake-HX, and it belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2.

Cache is organized as 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3. Memory support is DDR5 over a dual-channel bus at 102.4 GB/s. The CPU provides PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU itself. The multiplier is unlocked, and the part number is SRVFH. It is also a mobile-market-segment CPU, which explains the 55 W TDP and BGA package.

The benchmark scores reveal a processor that excels in both single-thread and multi-thread work. Cinebench R23 multi-core is 40642, and single-core is 5737. Cinebench R20 multi-core is 17069, with single-core 2409. Cinebench R15 multi-core is 4096 and single-core 578. Passmark results reinforce the pattern: multithread 47985, single-thread 4500, floating point math 161605, integer math 126954, data compression 511817, and data encryption 39472.

For real workloads, the 20 cores and high boost clock make the CPU well-suited to code compilation, data processing, virtualization, and content-creation tasks that scale across threads. The high single-core scores keep interactive applications and lightly threaded workloads responsive. The 93rd CPU percentile and the tight cluster of nearest rivals — all within 0.7% of the 265HX — show that this processor is at the top of the mobile CPU range, though not uniquely ahead of its closest competitors.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: the CPU side is ready for high frame-rate scenarios, with a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 5737 and a Passmark single-thread score of 4500. The GPU, however, is at the 70th percentile with 4 GB VRAM, so the playable settings will be more limited than the CPU would suggest.

Streaming: the CPU's 20 threads, Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 40642, and Passmark multithread score of 47985 provide the parallel resources needed to encode and process at the same time, though the GPU's 4 GB frame buffer will likely cap the game's visual settings during a streamed session.

Video editing: the CPU can handle multi-core processing tasks well, as shown by the 40642 R23 multi-core score and the 161605 Passmark floating point math score. The GPU's 3.379 TFLOPS FP32 throughput can assist with effects and previews, but its 4 GB VRAM and 64-bit memory bus will limit more complex GPU-accelerated timelines.

3D rendering: CPU-based rendering is a realistic task given the 20 cores and 40642 Cinebench R23 multi-core score. GPU-based rendering and ray tracing are constrained by the Arc A350M's 4 GB VRAM and 6 RT cores; the 3.379 TFLOPS FP32 figure is low for heavy GPU rendering.

Software development: the Passmark integer math score of 126954 and extended instructions score of 40741 align well with compiling, parsing, and code analysis. The CPU's 93rd percentile and 20 threads keep parallel build jobs moving, while the 30 MB shared L3 helps working sets that fit in cache.

Student and office work: the Passmark single-thread score of 4500 makes day-to-day applications responsive, and the 55 W CPU TDP is suited to a mobile laptop form factor. Office workloads rarely need the full 20 threads, but the headroom is available for spreadsheet, database, and multitasking workloads.

Small business workstations: the CPU's data encryption score of 39472 and data compression score of 511817 point to useful throughput for encrypted storage, backups, and document-heavy workloads. The combined 82nd percentile places the platform above the average laptop build, while the GPU remains modest enough that power draw stays low and the system targets productivity rather than high-end graphics.

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

Apex Performer

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX

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

Upgrade Path and Platform

Gaming Performance

FAQ

Who Should Build It

Benchmark Performance

GPU Analysis

Balance and Bottleneck

Build Overview

CPU Analysis

Usage Scenarios

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