SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF + Intel Arc A750

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
97%
VS
GPU
91%
PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF

71,910 Benchmark Score
Top 3% Market Ranking
View Full Specs →
GRAPHICS CARD

Intel Arc A750

20,582 Benchmark Score
Top 9% 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 265KF + Intel Arc A750: Desktop Benchmark Analysis

This pairing combines Intel's 20-core Arrow Lake desktop processor with Intel's Arc A750 graphics card, representing a desktop build that sits at the 80th percentile overall. The CPU is a strong performer with a 94th percentile ranking among all processors, while the GPU holds a more modest 66th percentile position among all graphics cards. No measured FPS rows exist for this exact combination in the benchmark database; all game performance figures discussed here are estimates derived from the component benchmark scores and should be treated as projections rather than verified results.

FAQ

Q: What is the Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF's core and thread configuration?

A: The CPU features 20 cores and 20 threads, which indicates that it does not support simultaneous multithreading. It has a base clock of 3.90 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz, with a TDP of 125 watts.

Q: How does the CPU perform in multi-core workloads compared to its nearest rivals?

A: The Core Ultra 7 265KF has an average benchmark score of 71910, placing it 0.2% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX (71797) and 0.8% ahead of the Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 (71370). It trails the Intel Xeon 6517P (72350) by 0.6% and the Intel Xeon 6724P (72396) by 0.7%.

Q: What memory and expansion capabilities does this CPU support?

A: The processor supports DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration with a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. It provides PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU itself, and it does not support ECC memory.

Q: What is the GPU's memory configuration and bandwidth?

A: The Intel Arc A750 comes with 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering a bandwidth of 512.0 GB/s. The memory runs at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective speed.

Q: What API support does the Arc A750 provide?

A: The GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. It also includes 28 ray tracing cores, making it capable of hardware-accelerated ray tracing workloads.

Q: What is the combined percentile ranking of this CPU+GPU pairing?

A: The pair achieves a combined percentile of 80, meaning it outperforms 80% of all recorded CPU+GPU combinations in the benchmark database. The CPU alone sits at the 94th percentile, while the GPU sits at the 66th percentile.

Q: What is the recommended power supply for this GPU?

A: The suggested PSU for the Intel Arc A750 is 550 W. The GPU itself has a TDP of 225 W and requires one 6-pin and one 8-pin power connector.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF uses the Intel Socket 1851 platform, which is the mounting interface for Arrow Lake-S desktop processors. This is a current-generation socket, and the CPU's production status is listed as active, meaning it remains readily available for new builds. The platform supports DDR5 memory exclusively, running in dual-channel mode with a theoretical bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. For storage and expansion, the CPU provides 20 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, which is sufficient for a modern graphics card and one or two Gen 5 NVMe drives directly attached to the processor.

The GPU side of this build uses PCIe 4.0 x16, which is backward-compatible with the CPU's Gen 5 slots, so there is no bottleneck at the interface level. The Arc A750 is marked as end-of-life in production status, with its successor being Battlemage. This means the GPU is not a forward-looking choice, but it remains a functional option for current builds.

A sensible next upgrade for this platform would be to replace the Arc A750 with a higher-tier GPU, since the CPU has substantial headroom. The Core Ultra 7 265KF's 94th percentile ranking indicates that it can drive much more powerful graphics cards without becoming the limiting factor in most scenarios. The power delivery is another consideration: the CPU's 125 W TDP combined with the GPU's 225 W TDP and a 550 W suggested PSU leaves modest headroom for overclocking (the CPU has an unlocked multiplier) but not for a significantly more power-hungry GPU without also upgrading the power supply.

Gaming Performance

Because the FACT PACK contains no measured FPS data for this exact CPU+GPU combination, all gaming performance figures here are estimates based on the benchmark scores of each component. The GPU's PassMark G3D score of 12534 and its 66th percentile ranking suggest that this card is positioned in the mid-range segment of desktop graphics. The CPU's strong single-threaded performance — a Geekbench single-core score of 2759 and a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 7021 — indicates that it will not hold back the GPU in most gaming scenarios.

At 1080p resolution with ultra settings, this pairing should deliver playable frame rates in most titles, though the Arc A750's 8 GB VRAM and 66th percentile position mean that the most demanding games may require settings adjustments to maintain smooth performance. The GPU's 17.20 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 537.6 GTexel/s texture rate provide a solid foundation for rasterized rendering, but the 28 ray tracing cores are relatively modest in number, so ray-traced workloads will likely see significant performance drops.

At 1440p, the estimates suggest that this combination would struggle with ultra settings in newer titles, as the GPU's compute resources are spread thinner at higher resolutions. The 512.0 GB/s memory bandwidth helps, but the 8 GB VRAM capacity may become a limiting factor in texture-heavy games at this resolution. The CPU's performance is more than sufficient for 1440p gaming; the bottleneck would clearly be on the GPU side.

For competitive or esports titles, the estimates are more favorable. The CPU's high single-thread performance (PassMark single-thread score of 4928) and the GPU's decent pixel rate of 268.8 GPixel/s suggest that high-refresh-rate gaming at 1080p with lower settings is achievable. However, the lack of measured FPS data means these figures should be taken as directional guidance rather than exact predictions.

Balance and Bottleneck

The data shows a clear imbalance between the CPU and GPU in this pairing. The Core Ultra 7 265KF sits at the 94th percentile among all CPUs, while the Arc A750 sits at the 66th percentile among all GPUs. This 28-percentage-point gap indicates that the GPU will be the primary limiting factor in most workloads that depend heavily on graphics processing.

In gaming scenarios, the bottleneck is almost exclusively the GPU. The CPU's Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 49736 and Geekbench multi-core score of 22913 demonstrate that it can handle complex game logic, physics calculations, and background tasks without breaking a sweat. Even the most demanding game engines would struggle to saturate this CPU's 20 cores and 20 threads. The GPU's PassMark G3D score of 12534, by contrast, places it in the mid-range tier, which means frame rates will be capped by the graphics card in most titles.

For compute-heavy workloads such as video encoding or 3D rendering, the balance shifts. The CPU's PassMark multi-thread score of 58518 and floating-point math score of 189431 show exceptional performance, while the GPU's PassMark GPU compute score of 5368 is comparatively modest. In these scenarios, the CPU will dominate the workload, and the GPU may sit partially idle unless the application leverages GPU acceleration.

The FPS scaling evidence, though estimated, reinforces this imbalance. At lower resolutions and settings, the CPU's strength becomes more apparent as the GPU's load decreases. At higher resolutions and ultra settings, the GPU's limitations become the ceiling. This pairing is best understood as a strong CPU paired with a mid-range GPU, and the balance is skewed toward CPU-heavy workloads.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: The CPU's single-thread performance (Geekbench single-core 2759, Cinebench R23 single-core 7021) is excellent for driving high frame rates, but the GPU's 66th percentile position will limit performance in demanding titles. This setup can handle competitive gaming at 1080p with high refresh rates, but AAA games at ultra settings will likely fall short of 144Hz.

Streaming: The 20-core CPU provides ample headroom for simultaneous gaming and encoding. The PassMark data compression score of 666589 and encryption score of 48198 indicate strong throughput for encoding workloads. The GPU's limited VRAM and compute resources mean that hardware encoding via the GPU may be less effective than CPU-based encoding.

Video editing: The CPU's multi-threaded scores (Cinebench R20 multi-core 20889, PassMark integer math 143351) are strong indicators of fast timeline rendering and export performance. The GPU can assist with effects and color grading, but its 8 GB VRAM may be restrictive for large projects.

3D rendering: CPU-based rendering will excel here, given the Cinebench R15 multi-core score of 5013 and the PassMark floating-point math score of 189431. GPU-accelerated rendering is possible but will be limited by the Arc A750's 17.20 TFLOPS FP32 compute and 8 GB memory capacity.

Software development: The CPU's high single-thread and multi-thread scores make compilation and code analysis fast. The PassMark extended instructions score of 54513 is particularly relevant for modern workloads that leverage SIMD instructions.

Student and office work: This pairing is dramatically overqualified for productivity tasks. The CPU's PassMark single-thread score of 4928 ensures snappy responsiveness, while the GPU is more than sufficient for document editing, spreadsheet work, and web browsing.

Who Should Build It

This combination targets users who prioritize CPU performance over GPU performance. Gamers at 1080p resolution who play esports titles or are willing to adjust settings in AAA games will find this pairing adequate. The CPU's 94th percentile ranking means it will remain relevant for several years, even as the GPU becomes a limiting factor in newer titles.

Content creators who work primarily in CPU-bound applications — such as video encoding, 3D rendering with CPU engines, or large-scale data processing — will benefit from the 20-core processor while accepting the GPU's mid-range capabilities. The PassMark multi-thread score of 58518 and data compression score of 666589 support this use case.

Software developers building and testing large codebases will appreciate the CPU's compilation speed, while the GPU provides enough graphical capability for basic GPU compute testing. Students and small business workstations that need a responsive system for general productivity will find this pairing more than sufficient, though it may be overkill for their actual needs.

The key caveat is that this build is not well-suited for users who want high-end gaming performance or GPU-accelerated compute. The Arc A750's 66th percentile and end-of-life status mean that users with these priorities should consider a different GPU, even if the CPU is an excellent choice.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF is a 20-core, 20-thread desktop processor built on the Arrow Lake architecture. It uses a 3 nm process node manufactured by TSMC, with 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. The lack of hyper-threading means that the 20 cores operate as 20 threads, which is an unusual configuration for a desktop CPU but reflects the architecture's focus on efficiency.

The base clock of 3.90 GHz and boost clock of 5.50 GHz are both respectable figures. The CPU has an unlocked multiplier, allowing for overclocking, though the 125 W TDP provides limited thermal headroom for aggressive tuning. The cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3 cache.

Benchmark results show strong performance across the board. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 49736 and single-core score of 7021 are both competitive figures. Geekbench scores of 22913 multi-core and 2759 single-core reinforce this picture. The PassMark suite shows particular strength in data compression (666589), integer math (143351), and floating-point math (189431), indicating broad capability across different workload types.

The CPU's average benchmark score of 71910 places it at the 94th percentile among all CPUs. It trades blows with the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX (71797, 0.2% slower), Intel Xeon 6517P (72350, 0.6% faster), Intel Xeon 6724P (72396, 0.7% faster), and Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 (71370, 0.8% slower). This puts it in the same performance class as server-grade Xeon processors, which is notable for a desktop chip.

Build Overview

This is a desktop-class build combining the Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF with the Intel Arc A750. The CPU is a high-end desktop processor (94th percentile), while the GPU is a mid-range desktop card (66th percentile). The combined percentile of 80 reflects the fact that the CPU's strong performance is partially offset by the GPU's more modest capabilities.

The build class is explicitly desktop, and both components are designed for desktop use. The CPU uses the Intel Socket 1851 platform with DDR5 memory support and PCIe Gen 5 connectivity. The GPU uses PCIe 4.0 x16, which is fully compatible with the CPU's PCIe Gen 5 slots.

Overall, this pairing represents a CPU-first build. Users who prioritize processor performance will find the Core Ultra 7 265KF to be an excellent choice, while the Arc A750 serves as a functional but not exceptional graphics solution. The 80th combined percentile places this build in the upper tier of desktop configurations, though the GPU is clearly the weaker link.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU's benchmark scores are consistently strong across multiple test suites. In Cinebench, it achieves 5013 in R15 multi-core, 707 in R15 single-core, 20889 in R20 multi-core, 2948 in R20 single-core, 49736 in R23 multi-core, and 7021 in R23 single-core. Geekbench results show 22913 multi-core and 2759 single-core. The PassMark suite includes a multi-thread score of 58518, single-thread score of 4928, and various sub-scores ranging from 486 for prime numbers to 666589 for data compression.

The GPU's benchmark scores are more modest. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 2612. Geekbench OpenCL is 98554 and Vulkan is 85631. PassMark scores include G3D at 12534, G2D at 732, and GPU compute at 5368. DirectX tests range from 65 (DX10) to 181 (DX9), which are all low figures.

The CPU's average benchmark score of 71910 places it at the 94th percentile, while the GPU's average of 20582 places it at the 66th percentile. The combined picture is that the CPU is a top-tier performer that can handle any workload, while the GPU is a competent mid-range option that will satisfy most users but not enthusiasts. This asymmetry is the defining characteristic of this pairing.

GPU Analysis

The Intel Arc A750 is built on the Xe-HPG architecture with the DG2-512 chip, manufactured on a 6 nm process by TSMC with 21,700 million transistors on a 406 mm² die. It has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The memory runs at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective speed.

The GPU's compute configuration includes 3584 shading units, 224 texture mapping units, and 112 raster operation units. It has 28 ray tracing cores, though no tensor cores are listed. Clock speeds are 2050 MHz base and 2400 MHz boost, with pixel rate of 268.8 GPixel/s and texture rate of 537.6 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 17.20 TFLOPS, with FP16 at 34.41 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio).

Benchmark scores show the GPU's capabilities. The PassMark G3D score of 12534 and GPU compute score of 5368 indicate mid-range performance. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2612 is a modern benchmark that reflects current gaming workloads. Geekbench OpenCL (98554) and Vulkan (85631) scores are moderate.

The GPU's average benchmark score of 20582 places it at the 66th percentile. Its nearest rivals are the Intel Arc B570 (20556, 0.1% slower), NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile (20534, 0.2% slower), AMD Radeon R9 M390X (20662, 0.4% faster), and NVIDIA Quadro M4000M (20480, 0.5% slower). The GPU has a 225 W TDP and requires a 550 W power supply, with one 6-pin and one 8-pin connector.

For rendering workloads, the GPU's 17.20 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 28 ray tracing cores provide a reasonable foundation, but the 8 GB VRAM is a limiting factor for large scenes. The production status is end-of-life, with Battlemage as its successor, which means driver updates and optimization may become less frequent over time.