SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX + Intel Arc A370M

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)

▼

95 Score

Top 5% Ranking

95 / 100

ULTIMATE READY

Apex Performer

Top 5% 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

93%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX

63,173 Benchmark Score

Top 4% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

Intel Arc A370M

29,175 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

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX paired with the Intel Arc A370M is an unusual combination: a current-generation flagship-class mobile processor from Core Ultra Series 2 sitting alongside a compact, entry-level discrete mobile GPU that Intel has since retired. The data shows a build defined almost entirely by its CPU. With a combined percentile of 84 across all tracked CPU+GPU pairings, this laptop-class configuration lands in the upper tier overall, but that figure masks a stark internal imbalance — the processor ranks in the 93rd percentile against all CPUs, while the GPU sits at just the 74th percentile against all GPUs. Note that no measured FPS rows exist for this exact combination in the database, so all frame-rate discussion below is estimated from the benchmark scores rather than directly measured.

Balance and Bottleneck

This pairing is GPU-limited in any graphically demanding workload, and the margin is wide. The Core Ultra 7 265HX posts an average benchmark score of 63173 against all CPUs tested; the Arc A370M averages 29175 across its compute benchmarks. That is a mismatch of more than a factor of two between the two components' relative standing, and the percentile split — 93 versus 74 — confirms it. In practice, the 20-core, 20-thread Arrow Lake-HX processor will spend much of its time waiting on a GPU with 4 GB of GDDR6 and 112.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth.

The consequence is predictable scaling behavior. At higher graphics settings and resolutions, estimated frame rates will be dictated almost entirely by the A370M's fixed limits — its 1024 shading units, 32 ROPs, and 64-bit bus — while the CPU idles far below its capability. At lower settings and resolutions, where the GPU load lightens, the 265HX's strong single-thread results (5737 in Cinebench R23 single-core, 4500 in PassMark single-thread) should keep frame delivery smooth and free of CPU-side stutter. The bottleneck will move toward the processor only in titles that are heavily simulation- or physics-driven, where the PassMark physics score of 2978 and the multicore score of 47985 indicate substantial headroom.

For compute workloads that run on the GPU — the Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan scores of 29676 and 28673 respectively — the same ceiling applies. Any rendering, encoding, or simulation pipeline pushed to the A370M will finish far slower than the same job executed on the 265HX's 20 threads. Sensible use of this machine keeps parallel work on the CPU.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The platform constraints here are significant. The Core Ultra 7 265HX uses Intel BGA 2114, a ball-grid-array socket — the chip is soldered to the board and cannot be swapped. Likewise, the Arc A370M is an integrated mobile part (listed as IGP slot width) on a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, not a replaceable card. In a laptop-class build, the realistic upgrade path runs through memory and storage, not silicon.

The CPU supports DDR5 on a dual-channel bus delivering 102.4 GB/s of memory bandwidth, so populating both channels with the fastest supported DDR5 modules is the primary lever for improving bandwidth-sensitive workloads. PCIe Gen 5 with 20 CPU-native lanes means a modern NVMe storage upgrade can run at full current-generation speeds, which benefits project load times and large file handling in content-creation workflows.

Power headroom is modest but sufficient: the CPU carries a 55 W TDP and the GPU 35 W. There is no suggested PSU figure — expected, given this is a mobile platform where power delivery is fixed by the chassis design. The practical takeaway is that thermals, not a user-replaceable power supply, define sustained performance. The multiplier on the 265HX is unlocked, though in a laptop the tuning envelope is governed by the OEM's firmware and cooling.

A sensible "next upgrade" for a user on this machine is not another component inside it but a newer laptop whose GPU matches its CPU class — the A370M is end-of-life with no listed successor, and the processor deserves a graphics partner several tiers higher.

CPU Analysis

The Core Ultra 7 265HX is a 20-core, 20-thread Arrow Lake-HX processor built on TSMC's 3 nm process, packing 17,800 million transistors into a 243 mm² die. It boosts to 5.30 GHz from a 2.60 GHz base. The cache hierarchy is generous: 192 KB of L1 and 3 MB of L2 per core, with a shared 30 MB L3.

The benchmark picture is consistent and strong. Cinebench R23 returns 40642 multi-core and 5737 single-core; R20 returns 17069 and 2409; R15 returns 4096 and 578. The scaling across generations of Cinebench shows a chip that holds its multi-core advantage at every test level, which indicates genuine sustained throughput rather than short-burst behavior. The PassMark suite reinforces this: 47985 multithreaded, 161605 floating point math, 126954 integer math, and 511817 data compression.

Against its nearest rivals, the 265HX sits in a dead heat at the top of its cluster. It leads the Intel Core i7-13790F by 0.1 percent, trails the AMD Ryzen AI 7 450G by 0.2 percent, leads the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 by 0.5 percent, and is 0.7 percent ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX. Those deltas are effectively noise; this is a chip trading blows with contemporaries rather than dominating them, and users moving between these parts should expect indistinguishable average performance.

For real workloads, the numbers translate directly. The 5737 R23 single-core score predicts snappy application responsiveness, fast compile times for single-threaded build steps, and smooth low-core-count game logic. The 40642 R23 multi-core score and 47985 PassMark multithreaded result mean video encoding, code compilation across many modules, and 3D rendering across the full 20 threads will complete quickly — comfortably in the top decile of all CPUs in the database (93rd percentile).

The integrated Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 EU is worth noting: it provides a fallback display path and light graphics duties independent of the discrete A370M.

Who Should Build It

Because this is a BGA mobile platform rather than an assembly-friendly desktop, "building" here means choosing a laptop that ships with this pairing — and the honest answer is that the pairing itself is imbalanced. The buyers for whom it makes sense are those whose workloads are CPU-bound.

Software developers are the clearest fit. The 20 threads, 5737 single-core R23 score, and 47985 multithreaded PassMark result make compilation, containerized workloads, and local test suites fast, while the modest GPU requirement of IDEs and browsers means the A370M's limits never surface. Students in computer science or engineering fall into the same profile, and DDR5 support with PCIe Gen 5 storage keeps the machine viable for years of coursework.

Content creators working with editing tools that lean on the CPU — timeline editing, audio production, photo work with processor-heavy filters — will find the 265HX's top-decile throughput excellent, though GPU-accelerated effects will hit the A370M's 74th-percentile ceiling quickly. 3D artists should temper expectations: rendering on the CPU is strong, GPU rendering is not.

Gamers are the poorest match. High-refresh and high-resolution gaming is constrained by 4 GB of VRAM and a 64-bit bus; esports titles at moderate settings are the realistic ceiling, and even there, frames are estimates rather than measured data for this combination. Small-business workstation users running office suites, data analysis, and web conferencing will find the machine dramatically overpowered on the CPU side and adequately served on the GPU side — a comfortable, if lopsided, position.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming. With no measured FPS data for this pairing, expectations must be drawn from the A370M's 74th-percentile standing and average score of 29175. Modern AAA titles at high settings will be GPU-limited, and the 4 GB GDDR6 buffer is the binding constraint at elevated texture quality. Competitive titles at reduced settings are plausible, with the 265HX's 5.30 GHz boost ensuring the CPU never throttles frame delivery.

Streaming. CPU encoding is the viable path here. The 40642 R23 multi-core score leaves ample threads for a game, an encoder, and chat or capture software simultaneously. GPU-based encoding and compositing on the A370M is not advisable given its compute position.

Video editing. Timeline scrubbing, cuts, and CPU-side encodes will feel fast thanks to the 265HX's top-decile throughput. GPU-accelerated transitions, color grading, and export stages will queue behind the A370M — its 28673 Vulkan and 29676 OpenCL Geekbench scores place effects work firmly in entry-level territory.

3D rendering. CPU rendering across 20 threads is genuinely strong; the 17069 R20 and 47985 PassMark multithreaded results support that directly. GPU rendering with only 8 RT cores and 4.198 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput is best treated as a preview path rather than a production path.

Software development. This is the configuration's sweet spot. A 5737 single-core R23 score handles latency-sensitive build steps, while 126954 integer-math and 62458 string-sorting PassMark results indicate quick parsing, test, and toolchain work. Dual-channel DDR5 at 102.4 GB/s feeds large in-memory datasets well.

Student and office work. Documents, browsing, video calls, and web applications will barely register on this hardware. The machine's headroom here is enormous — the CPU could run these workloads with most of its cores idle, and the modest GPU is more than sufficient for multi-display productivity.

FAQ

Q: Is this CPU or GPU the bottleneck in games?

A: The GPU. The Core Ultra 7 265HX ranks in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, while the Arc A370M ranks 74th among GPUs, with only 4 GB of VRAM and 112.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Graphically demanding titles will be GPU-limited.

Q: Are the frame rates in this article measured?

A: No. The database contains no measured FPS rows for this exact CPU+GPU combination, so all frame-rate discussion is estimated from the benchmark scores and percentile data.

Q: Can I upgrade the CPU or GPU later?

A: No. The CPU uses Intel BGA 2114 (soldered), and the A370M is an integrated mobile GPU. Memory and PCIe Gen 5 storage are the practical upgrade levers.

Q: How does the 265HX compare to its rivals?

A: It is statistically tied with its nearest competitors: 0.1 percent ahead of the Intel Core i7-13790F, 0.2 percent behind the AMD Ryzen AI 7 450G, 0.5 percent ahead of the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185, and 0.7 percent ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX.

Q: Is the CPU good for multitasking like streaming while gaming?

A: Yes. With 20 threads, a PassMark multithreaded score of 47985, and 40642 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, it can carry encoding, capture, and background tasks alongside a game without CPU-side strain.

Q: What memory does this platform support?

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

Q: Is the Arc A370M still in production?

A: No. Its production status is end-of-life, with no successor listed in the database.

GPU Analysis

The Arc A370M is an Alchemist-generation Xe-HPG part (DG2-128) built on TSMC's 6 nm process, with 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die — a density of 45.9M per mm². It carries 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, 32 ROPs, and 8 RT cores, boosting to 2050 MHz from a 1550 MHz base. There are no tensor cores listed.

Memory is the defining limitation: 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus at 14 Gbps effective, yielding 112.0 GB/s. For context, the CPU's own dual-channel DDR5 subsystem delivers 102.4 GB/s — the discrete GPU's frame buffer bandwidth is barely ahead of the system memory path, which is a clear marker of the part's entry-level positioning.

Throughput figures follow suit: 4.198 TFLOPS FP32, 8.397 TFLOPS FP16 at a 2:1 ratio, a pixel rate of 65.60 GPixel/s, and a texture rate of 131.2 GTexel/s. The API support is modern — DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), Vulkan 1.4, OpenGL 4.6 — so compatibility is not the issue; capacity is.

The benchmark results, 29676 in Geekbench OpenCL and 28673 in Geekbench Vulkan for an average of 29175, place the GPU in the 74th percentile. Against its nearest rivals it is effectively tied with the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH (-0.1 percent) and AMD FirePro W8000 (-0.1 percent), 0.6 percent ahead of the Radeon RX 470, and 1 percent ahead of the Radeon RX 6800M on these averages. For rendering work, the practical read is that GPU compute is usable for previews and light acceleration but not for production-scale rendering, where the host CPU is dramatically faster.

Build Overview

This is a laptop-class configuration (buildClass: laptop) pairing a mobile flagship-tier processor with an entry-level discrete mobile GPU, both from Intel. The CPU percentile of 93 and the GPU percentile of 74 produce a combined percentile of 84 — upper-tier overall, but a tier built on one pillar. The Core Ultra 7 265HX contributes flagship-adjacent compute (its average benchmark score of 63173 puts it neck-and-neck with rivals like the Core i7-13790F and Ryzen AI 7 450G), while the Arc A370M, now end-of-life, contributes only entry-level graphics. The pairing makes sense only where CPU throughput dominates the workload mix.

Benchmark Performance

The exact numbers, by test:

Cinebench R15: 4096 multi-core, 578 single-core
Cinebench R20: 17069 multi-core, 2409 single-core
Cinebench R23: 40642 multi-core, 5737 single-core
PassMark multithreaded: 47985; single-thread: 4500
PassMark physics: 2978
PassMark integer math: 126954; floating point: 161605
PassMark data compression: 511817; encryption: 39472
PassMark extended instructions: 40741; find prime numbers: 406; string sorting: 62458
Geekbench OpenCL (GPU): 29676; Geekbench Vulkan (GPU): 28673

The CPU's average benchmark score of 63173 places it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs. The GPU's average of 29175 places it 74th among GPUs. The combined percentile of 84 reflects a machine whose aggregate standing is pulled up by the processor and pulled down by the graphics. The combined picture: elite-class CPU throughput, mid-tier graphics, and a delta between the two that no driver or setting can close.

Gaming Performance

No measured FPS data exists for this exact CPU+GPU combination — the database's measuredFpsUltraByGame field is empty for this pairing — so every frame-rate statement below is an estimate derived from the benchmark scores, not a measurement.

From those scores, the expectation is a GPU-bound experience in nearly all modern titles. The A370M's 74th-percentile standing, 4 GB VRAM, and 112.0 GB/s of bandwidth define the ceiling; the 93rd-percentile CPU beneath it will rarely be the limiting factor. At 1080p with high ultra preset expectations, demanding AAA games will likely fall short of fluid frame rates once VRAM saturates — texture quality is the first setting to reduce. At lower presets, and especially in esports-style titles with modest asset loads, frame rates should climb toward playable-to-smooth territory, and the 265HX's 5737 R23 single-core score guarantees the CPU side of the pipeline stays ahead.

Ray tracing deserves a specific caveat: with only 8 RT cores, enabling it will cost a disproportionate share of an already limited frame budget. The realistic gaming profile for this configuration is competitive and lighter titles at reduced settings, where the processor's enormous headroom ensures consistent frame pacing — everything graphically heavier should be treated as out of scope for this GPU.

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX + Intel Arc A370M

Apex Performer

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX

Intel Arc A370M

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

Balance and Bottleneck

Upgrade Path and Platform

CPU Analysis

Who Should Build It

Usage Scenarios

FAQ

GPU Analysis

Build Overview

Benchmark Performance

Gaming Performance

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