SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 7 265K + Intel Arc A310

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)

▼

91 Score

Top 9% Ranking

91 / 100

ULTIMATE READY

Apex Performer

Top 9% 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

97%

GPU

85%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 7 265K

70,879 Benchmark Score

Top 3% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

Intel Arc A310

7,550 Benchmark Score

Top 15% 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 265K paired with an Intel Arc A310 is a desktop configuration that combines a high-end 20-core processor with an entry-level discrete graphics card. No measured FPS rows exist for this exact combination in the database, so all frame-rate discussions below are estimates derived from the benchmark scores of each component, not from direct gameplay capture. The data clearly indicates a system where the CPU is the dominant performance driver, while the GPU represents the primary constraint for gaming workloads.

Gaming Performance

Since no measured FPS data is available for this pairing, gaming performance must be inferred from the GPU’s benchmark scores. The Arc A310 holds a 40th percentile position among all GPUs, which places it in the lower tier of discrete graphics solutions. Its PassMark G3D score of 5433 and DirectX 12 score of 29 suggest that this card is suitable for 1080p gaming at low-to-medium settings in esports and older titles, but it will struggle with modern AAA games at higher presets. The GPU’s 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus with 124.0 GB/s bandwidth is a limiting factor for texture-heavy scenes and higher resolutions.

For competitive titles like CS2 or Valorant, the strong single-thread performance of the Ultra 7 265K, reflected in its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2020, could help maintain high frame rates, but the GPU will cap output well below the CPU’s potential. The Arc A310’s pixel rate of 28.00 GPixel/s and texture rate of 56.00 GTexel/s are modest figures that indicate a fill-rate bottleneck in 1440p or 4K scenarios. At 1080p, users can expect playable frame rates in less demanding games, but the absence of measured data means these are qualitative expectations based on the GPU’s percentile rank and compute scores. For any modern 3D title with heavy effects, the system will likely fall short of 60 FPS at ultra settings, making resolution and detail reductions necessary.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU delivers exceptional results across all major benchmark suites. In Cinebench R23, the Ultra 7 265K scores 35850 in multi-core and 2020 in single-core, representing a strong balance between threaded throughput and single-thread responsiveness. Geekbench results show 23085 multi-core and 2713 single-core, reinforcing the processor’s high per-core efficiency. The average benchmark score for the CPU is 70879, placing it in the 94th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon 6511P at 71051 (0.2% higher), the Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 at 71370 (0.7% higher), the Intel Core i7-14700KF at 70163 (1% lower), and the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F at 69996 (1.3% lower). This places the Ultra 7 265K in a tightly contested tier alongside server-class Xeons and top consumer chips, with performance deltas under 1.5% across the board.

The GPU, by contrast, scores an average of 7550, ranking in the 40th percentile. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon R7 250 at 7557 (0.1% higher), the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 at 7580 (0.4% higher), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 at 7472 (1% lower), and the AMD Radeon HD 8850M at 7447 (1.4% lower). This places the Arc A310 in the same performance class as a GTX 1650, which is a significant gap relative to the CPU’s top-tier standing. The combined percentile for this pairing is 67, reflecting the disparity between the two components. The data shows a system with immense CPU headroom but limited GPU capability, making the graphics card the clear bottleneck in any graphics-intensive task.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K is built on the Arrow Lake architecture using a 3 nm process node from TSMC, containing 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. It features 20 cores and 20 threads, with a base clock of 3.90 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz. 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 dual-channel DDR5 with a bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s, and ECC memory is supported. The CPU is unlocked, allowing overclocking, and connects via Intel Socket 1851 with PCIe Gen 5 support providing 20 lanes from the CPU.

Benchmark results indicate exceptional multi-threaded performance, with a Cinebench R20 multi-core score of 20918 and a PassMark multithread score of 58594. Single-thread performance is equally strong, with a Geekbench single-core score of 2713 and a PassMark single-thread score of 4928. The data compression score of 665554 and encryption score of 48246 in PassMark suggest that the CPU handles data-intensive workloads very efficiently. The floating-point math score of 189629 and integer math score of 143242 further illustrate its arithmetic throughput. In real workloads, this translates to rapid compilation times for developers, fast rendering for content creators, and smooth multitasking for power users. The 94th percentile ranking confirms that this CPU is among the fastest available, competing closely with server-grade Xeons and top-tier consumer processors like the i7-14700KF.

Who Should Build It

This pairing targets users who prioritize CPU-bound tasks over gaming graphics. Developers and software engineers will benefit from the 20 cores and strong multi-threaded scores, such as the Cinebench R23 multi-core result of 35850, which accelerates code compilation and virtual machine workloads. Students and small business workstations that rely on office applications, spreadsheet calculations, and light database work will find the CPU’s single-thread performance, evidenced by the Geekbench single-core score of 2713, more than sufficient for daily tasks.

Content creators working with 2D graphics, audio processing, or video encoding that utilizes the CPU’s integrated Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU may find this system usable for basic editing, but the discrete Arc A310 will limit GPU-accelerated effects. Gamers at 1080p who play esports titles or older games will get acceptable performance, but those seeking high-refresh-rate experiences in modern titles should consider a different GPU. The 94th percentile CPU ranking makes this an excellent choice for users who expect long-term CPU relevance, while the 40th percentile GPU suggests that graphics upgrades will be necessary for demanding applications.

Balance and Bottleneck

The performance data reveals a severe imbalance between the CPU and GPU. The Ultra 7 265K sits in the 94th percentile of all CPUs, while the Arc A310 sits in the 40th percentile of all GPUs. This 54-percentile gap means that the GPU will be the limiting factor in virtually every graphics-related workload. In gaming, the CPU can feed frames far faster than the GPU can render them; the Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 35850 indicates that the processor has ample headroom to handle game logic and physics, but the GPU’s PassMark G3D score of 5433 caps the output.

For CPU-bound tasks like data compression, encryption, or 3D rendering that rely on the processor, the system performs exceptionally well, with the GPU playing little to no role. Conversely, in GPU-bound workloads such as 3D modeling in real-time viewports or video encoding with hardware acceleration, the Arc A310 becomes the constraint. The GPU’s DirectX 12 score of 29 and OpenCL score of 30607 suggest that compute tasks are possible but not competitive with higher-tier cards. The bottleneck is therefore workload-dependent: the CPU dominates productivity and multi-threaded tasks, while the GPU restricts gaming and graphics rendering. Users should expect to upgrade the GPU to unlock the CPU’s full potential in visual applications.

FAQ

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

A: The combined percentile is 67, indicating that this system outperforms 67% of all tracked desktop configurations.

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K compare to its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F?

A: The Ultra 7 265K scores an average of 70879, which is 1.3% higher than the Ryzen 7 9700F’s average score of 69996.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of the CPU, and what type of memory does it support?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K supports dual-channel DDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s.

Q: What is the GPU’s position relative to the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650?

A: The Intel Arc A310 scores an average of 7550, which is 1% higher than the GTX 1650’s average score of 7472.

Q: Does the GPU support hardware ray tracing?

A: Yes, the Intel Arc A310 includes 6 ray tracing cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2).

Q: What is the CPU’s boost clock speed?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K has a boost clock of 5.50 GHz.

Q: What is the GPU’s memory size and type?

A: The Intel Arc A310 has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus with 124.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Usage Scenarios

For high-refresh gaming, the system is mismatched. The CPU’s single-core performance, with a Cinebench R23 score of 2020, is excellent for frame pacing, but the GPU’s 40th percentile ranking limits frame rates to what a GTX 1650-class card can deliver. Esports titles at 1080p low settings may achieve high FPS, but modern AAA games will not sustain high refresh rates.

Streaming is feasible due to the CPU’s 20 cores and strong multi-threaded scores, such as the Cinebench R20 result of 20918, which can handle encoding while gaming. However, the GPU’s limited VRAM and compute performance may require reduced game settings to avoid dropped frames.

Video editing in software like Premiere Pro will see strong CPU performance for timeline rendering and export, as shown by the PassMark floating-point score of 189629. The GPU can assist with effects, but its low G3D score means hardware-accelerated tasks will be slower than on higher-tier cards.

3D rendering in CPU-based engines like Blender’s Cycles will benefit from the 20 cores and Cinebench R23 multi-score of 35850. GPU rendering is possible but limited by the Arc A310’s 2.688 TFLOPS FP32 performance.

Software development is a strong use case, with the CPU’s PassMark data compression score of 665554 and encryption score of 48246 indicating fast compilation and secure data handling. The 20 threads allow parallel builds, and the high single-core speed (Geekbench 2713) reduces latency in interactive editors.

Student and office work is well-served by the CPU’s single-thread efficiency, but the GPU is overkill for basic tasks. The integrated Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU could handle most office workloads, making the discrete GPU unnecessary for this scenario.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The system is built on Intel Socket 1851, which supports the Core Ultra Series 2 processors. The CPU supports dual-channel DDR5 memory with ECC capability, and the platform provides PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU. The GPU uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, which is sufficient for its bandwidth needs. The CPU has a TDP of 125 W, while the GPU has a TDP of 30 W, and the suggested PSU for the GPU is 200 W, indicating that the power supply requirements are modest for the current configuration.

The most sensible next upgrade is replacing the Arc A310 with a higher-tier GPU. The CPU’s 94th percentile ranking ensures it will not bottleneck any graphics card on the market, making it a solid foundation for future GPU upgrades. The platform’s DDR5 memory support and PCIe Gen 5 lanes provide headroom for storage and expansion. Given that the GPU is end-of-life with a successor in Battlemage, users may want to plan for a GPU replacement to balance the system. The CPU’s unlocked multiplier allows overclocking to extend its useful life, but the current bottleneck is firmly in the graphics department.

Build Overview

This is a desktop-class build that pairs the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K with the Intel Arc A310. The CPU is a top-tier processor in the 94th percentile of all CPUs, while the GPU is an entry-level card in the 40th percentile. The combined percentile of 67 reflects a system that excels in CPU-bound tasks but is underpowered for graphics-intensive work. The build is best described as a productivity workstation with incidental gaming capability, where the processor’s 20 cores and high clock speeds dominate the performance profile.

GPU Analysis

The Intel Arc A310 is based on the Xe-HPG architecture, specifically the DG2-128 chip, manufactured on a 6 nm process by TSMC. It contains 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die. The GPU has 768 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output units, along with 6 ray tracing cores. Clock speeds are fixed at 1750 MHz for both base and boost, with memory running at 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective). The 4 GB GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus provides 124.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

Benchmark scores show a GPU that is competitive with older entry-level cards. The PassMark G3D score of 5433 and the Geekbench Vulkan score of 28964 indicate adequate performance for DirectX 11 and Vulkan titles. The DirectX 12 score of 29 suggests that newer API workloads are not a strength. The GPU’s FP32 performance is 2.688 TFLOPS, with FP16 at 5.376 TFLOPS, which supports light compute tasks. The 40th percentile ranking places it near the GTX 1650, and its 30 W TDP makes it very power-efficient, requiring no external power connectors and only a 200 W PSU. The GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, with display outputs of four mini-DisplayPort 2.0 connections. For rendering, the low pixel rate and texture rate limit its usefulness to 1080p and lower detail settings.

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 7 265K + Intel Arc A310

Apex Performer

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core Ultra 7 265K

Intel Arc A310

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

Gaming Performance

Benchmark Performance

CPU Analysis

Who Should Build It

Balance and Bottleneck

FAQ

Usage Scenarios

Upgrade Path and Platform

Build Overview

GPU Analysis

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