SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF + Intel Arc A770

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)

▼

97 Score

Top 3% Ranking

97 / 100

ULTIMATE READY

Apex Performer

Top 3% 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

97%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF

71,910 Benchmark Score

Top 3% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

Intel Arc A770

68,809 Benchmark Score

Top 3% 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 265KF paired with the Intel Arc A770 is an all-Intel desktop combination that occupies an interesting position in the benchmark database: a current-generation CPU sitting at the 94th percentile of all processors, matched with a 90th-percentile GPU that is now formally end-of-life. Note upfront that no measured FPS rows exist for this exact pairing in the database — the FACT PACK contains no measuredFps data — so all frame-rate discussion below is framed as estimated from the benchmark scores rather than measured. The combined percentile of 92 indicates a build that is well above the median system in the dataset, driven substantially by a very strong processor and a graphics card that, while discontinued, still posts competitive aggregate scores.

CPU Analysis

The Core Ultra 7 265KF is a 20-core, 20-thread Arrow Lake-S desktop processor built on TSMC's 3 nm process node, with a 243 mm² die housing 17,800 million transistors. It runs a 3.90 GHz base clock and boosts to 5.50 GHz, with a 125 W TDP, on Intel Socket 1851. The "-KF" suffix reflects two deletions from the standard part: no integrated graphics (listed as N/A) and an unlocked multiplier, meaning overclocking headroom is available to builders who want to push beyond stock clocks. The lack of an iGPU is irrelevant in this build given the discrete Arc card, but it does remove any fallback output.

Cache configuration is generous: 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and a 30 MB shared L3. Memory support is DDR5 on a dual-channel bus delivering 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth, which matters for memory-bound workloads. There is no 3D V-Cache equivalent on this part — that technology belongs to the rival camp — but the per-core L2 allowance is substantial and helps latency-sensitive workloads. ECC is not supported, which positions this as an enthusiast/workstation-adjacent part rather than an entry server CPU, despite what its rival list might suggest.

And that rival list is telling. With an average benchmark score of 71910, the 265KF sits at the 94th percentile of all CPUs in the database, and its nearest competitors are a striking mix: the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX at 71797 (the 265KF leads by 0.2%), the Intel Xeon 6517P at 72350 (which leads the 265KF by 0.6%), the Intel Xeon 6724P at 72396 (a 0.7% advantage), and the Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 at 71370 (0.8% behind). In other words, a mainstream desktop chip is trading blows with Xeon workstation and server processors. That is the headline story of this CPU: workstation-class throughput in a desktop socket.

The individual benchmark scores reinforce this. Cinebench R23 multi-core lands at 49736 with a single-core score of 7021; Cinebench R20 posts 20889 multi and 2948 single; Cinebench R15 delivers 5013 multi and 707 single. The single-thread figures are excellent — 2759 in Geekbench single-core and 4928 in PassMark single-thread — which means lightly threaded applications, most game engines, and interactive software all get top-tier responsiveness. The PassMark suite covers the practical spread: 58518 in multithread, 143351 in integer math, 189431 in floating point math, 666589 in data compression, 48198 in encryption, 54513 in extended instructions, 486 in find-prime-numbers, 79735 in string sorting, and 3633 in physics. Geekbench multi-core is 22913. For real workloads, this profile means fast code compilation, quick video encodes, smooth heavy multitasking, and strong simulation throughput — the 20 threads without SMT still scale well because the raw core count is high.

Benchmark Performance

Taking the two components together, the picture is a 92nd-percentile combined system. The CPU's average benchmark score of 71910 against the GPU's 68809 shows the processor is the anchor of this pairing — and the percentile gap (94 vs 90) confirms it.

On the graphics side, the Arc A770's recorded scores are 2969 in 3DMark Steel Nomad (DX12), 109175 in Geekbench OpenCL, and 94284 in Geekbench Vulkan. The OpenCL figure is the standout: it indicates strong general-purpose compute throughput, useful for GPU-accelerated rendering and compute tasks. The Vulkan result trailing OpenCL by a meaningful margin is consistent with the card's well-documented API-dependent behavior, though the database only records the numbers, not the cause.

The A770's nearest rivals by average score are an eclectic set: the NVIDIA CMP 90HX at 69000 (the A770 trails by 0.3%), the AMD Radeon Instinct MI25 at 68562 (the A770 leads by 0.4%), the AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 at 69870 (a 1.5% A770 deficit), and the NVIDIA Quadro P6000 at 69986 (1.7% ahead). Statistically, the A770 is inseparable from these cards in aggregate — differences of under 2% are within run-to-run variance. What this means practically: a 90th-percentile GPU that handles modern titles at mainstream resolutions well, but that no longer represents the frontier of graphics performance, especially since the card is marked end-of-life with Battlemage as its successor.

The combined verdict: this is a lopsided build where the CPU comfortably outclasses the GPU in relative standing. Nothing here suggests a weak link — both parts are top-decile — but the pairing is CPU-forward.

Gaming Performance

No measured FPS data exists for this exact CPU+GPU combination in the database, so the following is estimated strictly from the benchmark scores above and should be treated as such.

At 1080p, the CPU is almost never the constraint. A 94th-percentile processor with a 7021 Cinebench R23 single-core score and 4928 PassMark single-thread result can feed frames far faster than a 90th-percentile GPU can rasterize them. Estimated frame rates at ultra settings, 1080p, should be high and largely GPU-bound across modern titles. The Arc A770's DirectX 12 Ultimate support (feature level 12_2) means it renders current-generation visual feature sets natively, and the 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 2969 places it in solidly mid-high territory for that test.

At 1440p, the estimated picture remains playable-to-smooth at ultra settings in most titles, with the 512 GB/s of memory bandwidth and 16 GB VRAM preventing the texture-memory stalls that hurt smaller-buffer cards. At 4K ultra, estimates from the benchmark data suggest frame rates drop to levels where settings reductions or upscaling would be advisable for high-refresh play; the raw compute profile (19.66 TFLOPS FP32) is mid-pack for 4K ultra rasterization. Ray tracing is supported through the card's 32 RT cores, but estimated RT performance at ultra settings demands compromise at higher resolutions. These are estimates, not measurements.

Balance and Bottleneck

The data identifies the GPU as the limiting component in gaming workloads. The percentile spread is the clearest evidence: CPU at 94, GPU at 90, and a pairing that is CPU-forward in every aggregate metric. In any game where the engine's draw calls are reasonable, the 265KF's single-thread scores (7021 R23 single-core, 2759 Geekbench single-core) mean the processor will be waiting on the A770, not the reverse.

Flip to productivity workloads and the bottleneck disappears entirely — or rather, moves nowhere, because the CPU is doing the work alone. Compilation, encoding, compression (666589 in PassMark data compression), and rendering scale with the 20 threads and have no dependency on the GPU unless the application specifically uses OpenCL, where the A770's 109175 Geekbench OpenCL score can contribute meaningfully. One caveat for GPU-compute users: the A770 lacks tensor cores (the field is null), so AI inference workloads must run on shader hardware or the CPU.

Memory bandwidth is the third potential limiter. With 102.4 GB/s of dual-channel DDR5 on the CPU side versus 512 GB/s of GPU-side bandwidth, workloads that stream large datasets through the CPU can become bandwidth-bound before they become compute-bound. The PCIe interface is also worth noting: the CPU offers Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only), while the A770 connects over PCIe 4.0 x16 — no bottleneck for gaming, but the card cannot exploit Gen 5 bandwidth.

FAQ

Q: How does the Core Ultra 7 265KF compare to its nearest rivals?

A: With an average score of 71910, it sits 0.2% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX (71797) and 0.8% ahead of the Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 (71370), while trailing the Intel Xeon 6517P (72350) by 0.6% and the Xeon 6724P (72396) by 0.7%. All five are effectively performance-equivalent in aggregate.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does this build have?

A: The CPU side provides 102.4 GB/s via dual-channel DDR5; the GPU side provides 512 GB/s via a 256-bit GDDR6 bus running at 16 Gbps effective.

Q: Can this build play games at 4K?

A: No measured FPS data exists for this pairing; estimates from the benchmark scores suggest 4K ultra play is feasible with settings adjustments, with 1080p and 1440p as the sweet spots.

Q: Is the CPU overclockable?

A: Yes. The multiplier is unlocked, base clock is 3.90 GHz, and boost reaches 5.50 GHz, with a 125 W TDP as the stock envelope.

Q: Does the 265KF have integrated graphics as a backup?

A: No. Integrated graphics are listed as N/A on this KF variant, so the Arc A770 is the only display output path.

Q: Is the Arc A770 still in production?

A: No. Its production status is end-of-life; Battlemage is listed as its successor.

Q: What power supply does this build need?

A: The GPU's suggested PSU is 550 W, against component TDPs of 125 W (CPU) and 225 W (GPU).

Who Should Build It

This combination suits three profiles. First, gamers targeting 1080p and 1440p at ultra settings: the 94th-percentile CPU guarantees no processor-side frame ceiling, and the 90th-percentile GPU with 16 GB of VRAM is well matched to those resolutions. Second, content creators and developers: the 49736 Cinebench R23 multi-core score, 22913 Geekbench multi-core result, and 58518 PassMark multithread score make compilation, video encoding, and rendering fast, while the 7021 single-core score keeps timeline scrubbing and IDE responsiveness excellent. Third, students and small-business workstation users who need heavy multitasking throughput: 20 threads, 30 MB of shared L3, and workstation-rivaling aggregate performance — the Xeon comparisons prove the point — in a standard desktop platform. It is less ideal for buyers prioritizing a long-term GPU platform, since the A770 is end-of-life, and for ECC-dependent professional workloads, which this CPU does not support. Launch MSRP figures, where relevant: the CPU launched at $379 and the GPU at 329 USD.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming. At 1080p, the 265KF's single-thread scores (4928 PassMark, 2759 Geekbench) can drive very high frame rates in esports-style titles; the A770 becomes the frame cap. Estimated from benchmark scores — no measured data exists — high-refresh 1080p play is the best-fit gaming scenario for this pairing.

Streaming. Simultaneous gaming and encoding is where 20 threads shine. The 58518 PassMark multithread result and 666589 data compression score indicate the CPU can absorb an x264-class encode load alongside game execution without collapsing frame delivery, while the GPU handles rendering.

Video editing. The 49736 Cinebench R23 multi-core score translates directly to export speed, and 16 GB of GPU VRAM accommodates large timelines in GPU-accelerated NLEs. The 102.4 GB/s system bandwidth is adequate for most codec work.

3D rendering. CPU rendering benefits from the full 20-thread array; the Xeon-class aggregate score confirms workstation-grade throughput. GPU rendering can additionally draw on the A770's 109175 Geekbench OpenCL result, though its end-of-life status matters for long-term pipeline decisions.

Software development. Compilation is one of the most throughput-sensitive desktop tasks; the 94th-percentile aggregate and strong integer math (143351) make large builds fast, and the 30 MB shared L3 helps in memory-resident tooling.

Student and office work. This build is overkill for documents and browsing, but students running simulations, statistical computing (floating point 189431), or local VMs will use the threads; everyday responsiveness is covered by elite single-thread numbers.

Build Overview

This is a desktop build (buildClass: desktop) pairing Intel's current Core Ultra Series 2 mainstream flagship-tier CPU with Intel's first serious discrete gaming GPU generation. The combined percentile of 92 places it in the top decile of systems in the database. The character of the build is processor-dominant: an Arrow Lake-S 20-core on 3 nm TSMC silicon driving the platform, with an Alchemist-generation Xe-HPG card providing graphics. It is a coherent all-Intel platform — both chips are Intel-designed, both fabricated at TSMC — and the CPU's launch MSRP of $379 against the GPU's 329 USD launch MSRP reflects a roughly even original component positioning, though the GPU is now discontinued.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The platform foundation is Socket 1851 with DDR5 support, PCIe Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes, and no ECC. The 265KF's unlocked multiplier provides the cheapest "upgrade" available: tuning beyond the 5.50 GHz boost clock within the 125 W TDP envelope's cooling headroom. PSU planning is straightforward: the GPU's suggested 550 W unit against 125 W CPU and 225 W GPU TDPs leaves margin for both stock operation and moderate overclocking, and the card's single 6-pin plus 8-pin connectors are modest by current standards.

The obvious next upgrade is graphical. The A770 is end-of-life with Battlemage named as its successor, so a same-family GPU swap is the natural path — and the CPU's 94th percentile means any top-tier GPU added later will be fed without constraint. The PCIe 4.0 x16 interface of the current card is not a limitation at this performance tier, but a Gen 5-capable slot and 20 CPU lanes mean the platform itself is forward-ready. A final platform note: with no integrated graphics on the KF variant, the system cannot boot to display without a discrete card installed — a consideration during any GPU transition window.

GPU Analysis

The Arc A770 is the flagship of Intel's Alchemist (Arc 7) generation: the DG2-512 chip on TSMC's 6 nm process, with 21,700 million transistors on a 406 mm² die at a density of 53.4M per mm². Compute resources comprise 4096 shading units, 256 TMUs, 128 ROPs, and 32 RT cores, delivering 19.66 TFLOPS FP32 and 39.32 TFLOPS FP16 at a 2:1 ratio. Clocks run from a 2100 MHz base to a 2400 MHz boost, with a pixel rate of 307.2 GPixel/s and texture rate of 614.4 GTexel/s.

Memory is the card's structural strength: 16 GB of GDDR6 across a 256-bit bus at 16 Gbps effective, totaling 512 GB/s of bandwidth. That buffer size matches or exceeds many contemporaries and directly benefits high-texture workloads and content creation. Tensor cores are absent (the field is null), which limits dedicated AI acceleration relative to competitors that include them. Ray tracing is hardware-supported via the 32 RT cores under DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), Vulkan 1.4, and OpenGL 4.6. Output connectivity is one HDMI 2.1 and three DisplayPort 2.0.

The benchmark interpretation: 2969 in 3DMark Steel Nomad places it in the upper-middle of the database's gaming distribution, while 109175 Geekbench OpenCL and 94284 Geekbench Vulkan show genuine compute competence — the OpenCL figure in particular makes it viable as a compute accelerator for rendering workloads, not just a gaming part. With a 225 W TDP, dual-slot footprint, and end-of-life status, it is a capable, bandwidth-rich card whose aggregate scores (90th percentile, 68809 average) still hold up, and whose 16 GB buffer remains its most future-relevant specification in this build.

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF + Intel Arc A770

Apex Performer

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF

Intel Arc A770

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

CPU Analysis

Benchmark Performance

Gaming Performance

Balance and Bottleneck

FAQ

Who Should Build It

Usage Scenarios

Build Overview

Upgrade Path and Platform

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