SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080

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

97%

GPU

92%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF

71,910 Benchmark Score

Top 3% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080

23,172 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 265KF and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 form a desktop pairing that combines a high-core-count Arrow Lake processor with an Ampere-based graphics card. The CPU sits in the 94th percentile among all processors, while the GPU lands in the 68th percentile among all graphics cards, giving the combined build an 81st percentile overall ranking. No measured FPS rows exist for this exact combination in the data; all performance discussion below is estimated from the respective benchmark scores.

GPU Analysis — VRAM, bandwidth, clocks, RT/tensor hardware, what the benchmark scores mean for rendering

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 is built on the GA102 chip using Samsung's 8 nm process, packing 28,300 million transistors on a 628 mm² die. The GPU operates with a base clock of 1440 MHz and a boost clock of 1710 MHz, with memory running at 1188 MHz, translating to 19 Gbps effective. The 10 GB of GDDR6X memory sits on a 320-bit bus, delivering 760.3 GB/s of bandwidth — a figure that remains competitive for high-resolution texture streaming and compute workloads that demand large data movement.

The RTX 3080's compute configuration includes 8704 shading units, 272 texture mapping units, and 96 raster output pipelines. It also carries 68 RT cores and 272 tensor cores, the latter enabling DLSS and AI-accelerated features. Pixel rate reaches 164.2 GPixel/s, while texture rate hits 465.1 GTexel/s. Raw FP32 throughput is 29.77 TFLOPS, with FP16 also at 29.77 TFLOPS (1:1), indicating that the card does not gain a half-precision boost — a detail relevant for workloads that rely on FP16 acceleration.

Benchmark results for the GPU show a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 4407, a Geekbench OpenCL score of 152423, and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 33620. In PassMark, the GPU scores 25086 in G3D, 14397 in GPU compute, and 1054 in G2D. The DirectX 12 PassMark score of 100 is notably lower than the DirectX 11 score of 207, suggesting that the card's DX12 path may not be its strongest relative metric, though the 3DMark DX12 result tells a more favorable story. The GPU's percentile ranking of 68 places it slightly above the median but well below top-tier cards, and its nearest rivals — NVIDIA P106-100, AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16, AMD Radeon RX 6600M, and AMD Radeon R9 M290X — all sit within 0.4% of its average score of 23172, indicating that the RTX 3080 is clustered with a broad group of mid-to-upper-range performers.

For rendering tasks, the 29.77 TFLOPS FP32 figure and 465.1 GTexel/s texture rate suggest strong rasterization throughput, while the 68 RT cores provide hardware-accelerated ray tracing capability. The 10 GB VRAM allocation, however, may become a limiting factor in heavy 3D scenes with high-resolution textures, though the 760.3 GB/s bandwidth helps mitigate some of that constraint. The 1:1 FP16 ratio means that compute workloads expecting a half-precision advantage will not find one here, which can affect render farms or simulation workloads that rely on FP16 tensor operations.

Balance and Bottleneck — which component limits which workload, using percentiles and FPS scaling as evidence

The balance between the Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF and the RTX 3080 is asymmetric in favor of the CPU. The processor's 94th percentile ranking versus the GPU's 68th percentile indicates that the graphics card is the more likely bottleneck in most gaming and GPU-accelerated scenarios. The CPU's average benchmark score of 71910 dwarfs the GPU's 23172, and the combined percentile of 81 reflects this gap — the build's overall performance is pulled down by the GPU relative to the CPU's standing.

In CPU-bound workloads such as physics simulation, data compression, or single-threaded tasks, the Core Ultra 7 265KF will not be the limiting factor; its PassMark physics score of 3633 and single-thread score of 4928 indicate strong headroom. Conversely, in GPU-bound tasks like high-resolution gaming or 3D rendering with ray tracing, the RTX 3080's 68th percentile position means it will saturate before the CPU does. The PassMark DirectX 12 score of 100, when compared to the CPU's Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 49736, underscores this disparity — the GPU's graphics pipeline is the constraining resource.

FPS scaling, estimated from benchmark scores rather than measured data, would follow this pattern: at lower resolutions where CPU overhead dominates, the 265KF's 94th percentile single-core performance (Geekbench single-core 2759, Cinebench R23 single-core 7021) would allow the RTX 3080 to stretch its legs, but at higher resolutions or with ray tracing enabled, the GPU's 68th percentile and 10 GB VRAM would cap frame rates. The memory bandwidth of 760.3 GB/s on the GPU helps, but the card's raw compute (29.77 TFLOPS) is not in the same class as the CPU's multi-threaded output (PassMark multithread 58518). For mixed workloads like gaming while streaming, the CPU's 20 threads can handle encoding overhead without stealing significant performance from the GPU-bound game loop, but the RTX 3080's tensor cores would be the primary resource for any DLSS-based upscaling.

CPU Analysis — cores, clocks, architecture, what the benchmark scores mean for real workloads

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF is a 20-core, 20-thread desktop processor from the Core Ultra Series 2, built on Arrow Lake architecture with a 3 nm process from TSMC. It packs 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die, 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 30 MB of shared L3. It supports DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, delivering 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth, and uses Intel Socket 1851. The processor lacks integrated graphics and ECC memory support, but the multiplier is unlocked for overclocking.

Benchmark results for the 265KF are strong across the board. Cinebench R23 multi-core scores 49736, while single-core reaches 7021; Cinebench R20 shows 20889 multi-core and 2948 single-core; Cinebench R15 records 5013 multi-core and 707 single-core. Geekbench results are 22913 multi-core and 2759 single-core. PassMark tests show multithread at 58518, single-thread at 4928, integer math at 143351, floating-point math at 189431, data compression at 666589, data encryption at 48198, extended instructions at 54513, find prime numbers at 486, physics at 3633, and random string sorting at 79735. The average benchmark score is 71910, placing it in the 94th percentile of all CPUs.

The 20 threads, while not offering simultaneous multithreading (20 cores, 20 threads), still provide ample parallelism for multi-threaded workloads. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 49736 indicates strong rendering capability, while the 7021 single-core score ensures responsive single-threaded performance. PassMark integer math at 143351 and floating-point math at 189431 show balanced compute across different instruction types. The data encryption score of 48198 and extended instructions score of 54513 suggest robust security and SIMD performance. Nearest rivals include AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX (0.2% faster), Intel Xeon 6517P (0.6% slower), Intel Xeon 6724P (0.7% slower), and Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 (0.8% faster), placing the 265KF in a tight cluster with server-class Xeon parts.

For real workloads, the 265KF excels in content creation, software compilation, and any multi-threaded task that can leverage 20 threads. The 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth supports data-intensive operations, though the dual-channel DDR5 configuration is not as wide as some HEDT platforms. The 3 nm process node from TSMC contributes to power efficiency, with a 125 W TDP that is modest for the core count.

Who Should Build It

This build targets users who prioritize CPU-heavy workloads but still want capable gaming performance. The 94th percentile CPU ranking makes it suitable for professionals in content creation, software development, and data analysis who need multi-threaded throughput. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 49736 and PassMark multithread score of 58518 indicate that video editors, 3D artists, and developers compiling large codebases will see substantial performance.

Gamers at 1440p or 4K resolutions, where the GPU becomes the primary bottleneck, will find the RTX 3080's 68th percentile adequate for most titles, though not at the highest refresh rates. The 10 GB VRAM and 760.3 GB/s bandwidth handle modern textures, but the 68th percentile ranking means it lags behind top-tier cards. Students and small business workstations benefit from the CPU's 20 cores for multitasking and office productivity, while the lack of integrated graphics requires a discrete GPU — which this build includes.

The 125 W TDP and 700 W suggested PSU make this a practical build for a desktop workstation, though the GPU's 320 W TDP and dual-slot design require adequate case airflow. The 3 nm process node on the CPU and 8 nm on the GPU represent different generations, but the pairing is logical for a productivity-first system that can still game.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF uses Intel Socket 1851, which is specific to the Arrow Lake generation. The platform supports DDR5 memory in dual-channel configuration, with 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The CPU provides PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only), while the RTX 3080 uses PCIe 4.0 x16 — backward compatible but not taking full advantage of the newer standard. The 125 W TDP is modest, and the suggested PSU of 700 W provides headroom for the GPU's 320 W TDP.

A sensible next upgrade would be a higher-tier GPU, as the RTX 3080's 68th percentile is the clear bottleneck in this pairing. The CPU's 94th percentile and 20 threads can support a more powerful graphics card without becoming the limiting factor. The PCIe Gen 5 lanes on the CPU mean that future GPUs using Gen 5 will be fully supported, though the current RTX 3080 uses Gen 4. Memory upgrades are limited to DDR5, and the dual-channel configuration caps bandwidth at 102.4 GB/s, so moving to a platform with quad-channel memory would require a different socket.

The PSU headroom of 700 W suggests that a GPU upgrade up to around 350-400 W would be feasible without replacing the power supply, though the 12-pin power connector on the RTX 3080 is worth noting for compatibility with newer cards. The 125 W TDP of the CPU leaves thermal and power headroom for overclocking, given the unlocked multiplier, but the GPU's 320 W TDP is fixed.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: The RTX 3080's 68th percentile and 29.77 TFLOPS provide solid 1440p performance, but the 10 GB VRAM and 100 PassMark DX12 score suggest limitations at 4K with max settings. Estimated FPS at 1080p would be high, limited by the CPU's single-core strength (Geekbench 2759), while at 1440p the GPU becomes the constraint. The 760.3 GB/s bandwidth helps maintain frame pacing in texture-heavy scenes.

Streaming: The CPU's 20 threads (PassMark multithread 58518) can handle x264 encoding without major frame drops, while the GPU's tensor cores support NVENC-based encoding. The 68th GPU percentile means the card can game and encode simultaneously, but the 10 GB VRAM may be tight when capturing at high resolutions.

Video editing: Cinebench R23 multi-core of 49736 and PassMark floating-point math of 189431 indicate strong export and effect processing. The GPU's 14397 PassMark compute score accelerates timeline rendering, but the 10 GB VRAM limits preview quality with large projects. The 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth on the CPU supports multi-stream editing.

3D rendering: The CPU's 20 threads and 49736 Cinebench R23 score excel in CPU-based renders, while the GPU's 29.77 TFLOPS FP32 and 68 RT cores handle GPU-accelerated paths. The 1:1 FP16 ratio means no half-precision advantage, which some renderers may not exploit. The 760.3 GB/s bandwidth on the GPU aids texture streaming.

Software development: PassMark integer math of 143351 and data compression of 666589 indicate strong compilation and build times. The 20 threads allow parallel builds, and the 94th CPU percentile ensures no bottlenecks in code analysis tools. The GPU is less relevant here but available for testing GPU-accelerated code.

Student and office work: The CPU's 4928 PassMark single-thread score handles everyday tasks with ease, while the 20 threads provide multitasking headroom. The lack of integrated graphics means the RTX 3080 is always active, drawing 320 W, which is more than needed for office workloads but unavoidable with this CPU.

FAQ

Q: Does this build have integrated graphics?

A: No, the Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF has no integrated graphics (N/A field), so the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 is the only display output source.

Q: What is the CPU's core and thread count?

A: The CPU has 20 cores and 20 threads, with no simultaneous multithreading, running at a base clock of 3.90 GHz and boost clock of 5.50 GHz.

Q: How much VRAM does the GPU have?

A: The RTX 3080 has 10 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 320-bit bus, providing 760.3 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: What is the combined performance percentile of this build?

A: The combined percentile is 81, with the CPU at 94 and the GPU at 68, indicating the GPU drags down the overall ranking.

Q: What is the CPU's memory bandwidth?

A: The CPU supports dual-channel DDR5 with a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s, and it does not support ECC memory.

Q: Is the CPU multiplier unlocked?

A: Yes, the multiplier is unlocked (true field), allowing overclocking, and the CPU has a 125 W TDP.

Q: What is the GPU's process node and transistor count?

A: The GPU uses Samsung's 8 nm process with 28,300 million transistors on a 628 mm² die, while the CPU uses TSMC's 3 nm process with 17,800 million transistors.

Build Overview

This is a desktop build pairing the Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF, a 20-core Arrow Lake processor from the Core Ultra Series 2, with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080, an Ampere-based graphics card from the GeForce 30-series. The CPU is built on a 3 nm process with 17,800 million transistors, while the GPU uses an 8 nm process with 28,300 million transistors. The build's combined percentile is 81, placing it in the upper tier of desktop systems, though the GPU's 68th percentile is significantly lower than the CPU's 94th percentile. The CPU was released on 2024-10-23 with a launch MSRP of $379, while the GPU was released on 2020-08-31 with a launch MSRP of 699 USD and is now end-of-life.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU achieves an average benchmark score of 71910, with notable results including Cinebench R23 multi-core at 49736, Cinebench R23 single-core at 7021, Geekbench multi-core at 22913, and PassMark multithread at 58518. The GPU scores an average of 23172, with 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 at 4407, Geekbench OpenCL at 152423, PassMark G3D at 25086, and PassMark GPU compute at 14397. The CPU's nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX (0.2% faster), Intel Xeon 6517P (0.6% slower), and Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 (0.8% faster), while the GPU's rivals include the NVIDIA P106-100 (0.3% slower), AMD Radeon RX 6600M (0.4% slower), and AMD Radeon R9 M290X (0.4% slower). The combined picture is a CPU that outperforms most processors but a GPU that is only modestly above average, resulting in a system that excels in CPU-bound tasks and is adequate, but not exceptional, in GPU-bound scenarios.

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080

Apex Performer

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080

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

GPU Analysis — VRAM, bandwidth, clocks, RT/tensor hardware, what the benchmark scores mean for rendering

Balance and Bottleneck — which component limits which workload, using percentiles and FPS scaling as evidence

CPU Analysis — cores, clocks, architecture, what the benchmark scores mean for real workloads

Who Should Build It

Upgrade Path and Platform

Usage Scenarios

FAQ

Build Overview

Benchmark 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