SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF + NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation

Get a comprehensive performance analysis of your gaming rig with detailed benchmarks, bottleneck detection, and upgrade recommendations

98 / 100
ULTIMATE READY

Apex Performer

Top 2% 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
99%
PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF

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

NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation

184,664 Benchmark Score
Top 1% 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 NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation is a desktop build occupying the 96th percentile of all possible configurations, placing it firmly in the enthusiast-to-workstation tier. The data shows a CPU that edges out the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX by a hair in average benchmark scores, combined with a GPU that sits just above the NVIDIA A100 SXM4 80 GB in raw compute. This is a pairing designed for serious multi-threaded workloads and high-end professional graphics, not a casual gaming box.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF is built for the Intel Socket 1851 platform, which is the foundation for the Core Ultra Series 2 desktop processors. This is a current-generation platform, and the CPU’s production status is listed as Active, meaning the upgrade path forward is open but not infinite—future upgrades will be constrained to whatever Intel supports on this socket. The motherboard will need to be a newer chipset design, as this socket is distinct from previous LGA1700 or LGA1200 boards.

Memory support is limited to DDR5, and the memory controller runs in a Dual-channel configuration. The theoretical memory bandwidth is 102.4 GB/s, which is a solid figure for dual-channel operation, though it won’t match the bandwidth of a quad-channel workstation platform. The platform does not support ECC memory, which is a notable omission for a build that might otherwise target scientific computing or financial modeling where error-correcting memory is a hard requirement. For most prosumer and content creation tasks, standard DDR5 is sufficient, but the lack of ECC is a clear boundary line.

PCIe connectivity is provided by the CPU itself with Gen 5, offering 20 Lanes from the CPU. This gives you a full x16 slot for the GPU (though the GPU itself is PCIe 4.0, so it will run at Gen 4 speeds) and leaves several lanes for a Gen 5 NVMe SSD. A 20-lane Gen 5 allocation is generous for a desktop CPU, allowing for a high-bandwidth storage array without sacrificing GPU bandwidth. The CPU does not have integrated graphics, so the RTX 5000 Ada is the only display output source; this is worth remembering for troubleshooting.

Power requirements are moderate for the CPU class: the Core Ultra 7 has a TDP of 125 W. The GPU, however, is more demanding, with a TDP of 250 W and a suggested PSU rating of 600 W. The GPU requires a single 16-pin power connector, which means a modern ATX 3.0 power supply with a native 12VHPWR cable is the cleanest solution, though an adapter from two 8-pin PCIe cables will also work. The data suggests a 600 W PSU is the minimum recommendation; a quality 700-750 W unit would provide a comfortable buffer for the CPU’s 125 W TDP plus the GPU’s 250 W, leaving room for drives and motherboard power.

A sensible next upgrade within this platform, without changing the motherboard, would be to add more DDR5 memory if the system is below capacity, or to upgrade to a higher-core-count Intel CPU if one is released for Socket 1851. The GPU is already at the 98th percentile, so a GPU swap would only be worthwhile for niche professional needs; the more practical path is storage expansion via PCIe Gen 5 SSDs, as the CPU’s 20 Gen 5 lanes are currently only partially utilized by the GPU’s Gen 4 interface.

GPU Analysis

The NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation is a workstation-class GPU built on the Ada Lovelace architecture, using the AD102 chip. It is a massive chip, fabricated on a 5 nm process by TSMC, packing 76,300 million transistors on a 609 mm² die. The raw specs are staggering: 12,800 shading units, 400 TMUs, and 176 ROPs. This is not a cut-down consumer card; it is the full AD102 silicon, which explains its position at the 98th percentile of all GPUs.

Memory is a key differentiator. The card carries 32 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 576.0 GB/s. The 32 GB capacity is the headline feature here—it is not just large, it is double the capacity of most high-end consumer cards. This makes the GPU suitable for massive datasets, large 3D scenes, and AI model inference that cannot fit in 16 GB or even 24 GB. The memory clock is listed at 2250 MHz with an 18 Gbps effective rate, and while the bandwidth is high, it is not the fastest in the market; the capacity is the selling point, not the raw throughput.

Clock speeds are respectable: a base clock of 1155 MHz and a boost clock of 2550 MHz. These clocks, combined with the massive core count, produce an FP32 throughput of 65.28 TFLOPS and an equal FP16 output of 65.28 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio). The 1:1 FP16 rate is notable because many cards halve FP16 throughput, but here you get full rate, which is valuable for AI and scientific workloads that use mixed-precision arithmetic. The texture rate is 1,020.0 GTexel/s, and the pixel rate is 448.8 GPixel/s, both of which are top-tier figures.

The GPU is equipped with 100 RT cores and 400 Tensor cores. This is a significant amount of dedicated hardware for ray tracing and AI acceleration. The RT cores are fourth-generation Ada cores, and the Tensor cores are fourth-generation as well. In benchmark terms, the GPU scores 175,286 in Geekbench OpenCL and 194,041 in Geekbench Vulkan. The Vulkan score being higher than OpenCL suggests strong driver optimization for modern compute APIs. Compared to the NVIDIA RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell, this Ada card is 1.4% ahead in average benchmark score, indicating that generation-on-generation, the Ada card still holds its own against the newer Blackwell professional card.

The GPU’s average benchmark score is 184,664, placing it just 0.5% above the NVIDIA A100 SXM4 80 GB. This is a critical data point: the A100 is a data-center GPU known for AI training, and the fact that this workstation card matches it in these compute benchmarks shows that the RTX 5000 Ada is not just a graphics card but a serious compute accelerator. The bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x16, which is a generation behind the CPU’s Gen 5 support, but the bandwidth difference is minimal for most workloads.

Balance and Bottleneck

In this pairing, the CPU and GPU are both high-end, but they are not perfectly balanced for every workload. The CPU scores a 94th percentile rank among all CPUs, while the GPU sits at the 98th percentile among all GPUs. The combined percentile is 96, which is higher than either component individually, suggesting that the system as a whole is well-matched, but the GPU is the stronger component relative to its peer group.

For gaming at high resolutions, the GPU will be the limiting factor, but not in a bad way. The GPU’s massive compute power and 32 GB VRAM mean it will rarely be bottlenecked by memory or raw rasterization. The CPU, with its high single-core score of 7,021 in Cinebench R23 single-core, will keep up with the GPU’s frame generation in most scenarios. However, the data shows no measured FPS rows for this exact combination, so all FPS discussion is estimated from benchmark scores. The CPU’s single-thread performance is strong enough to avoid being a drag on the GPU in 1440p or 4K gaming, where the GPU is usually the limiter.

In multi-threaded workloads, the bottleneck shifts. The CPU has 20 cores and 20 threads, and it scores 49,736 in Cinebench R23 multi-core. This is a strong score, but the GPU’s compute potential is even higher relative to its peers. For 3D rendering that uses both CPU and GPU (like hybrid rendering in Blender), the CPU will likely finish its part of the frame before the GPU, but the GPU will still be the primary renderer for final frames. For pure CPU rendering (like Cinebench itself), the CPU is the bottleneck, but it is a fast one.

The FPS scaling evidence is absent here, but the percentile data tells the story: the GPU is 4 percentile points higher than the CPU. This means the GPU is the more exceptional component in this build. In practical terms, the CPU will not hold back the GPU in most tasks, but the GPU will be the component that determines the ceiling for frame rates in games and render times in GPU-accelerated applications. The CPU is also running at a TDP of 125 W, which is modest for 20 cores, suggesting it is power-efficient; the GPU at 250 W draws double the CPU’s power, reinforcing that the GPU is the dominant power consumer and likely the performance leader.

Who Should Build It

The target user for this build is a professional or prosumer who needs both heavy CPU multi-threading and extreme GPU compute. The data points to several specific profiles.

High-resolution gamers who play at 4K with ultra settings will benefit from the GPU’s 98th percentile performance. The 32 GB VRAM ensures that even the most demanding texture packs will not overflow memory, and the 65.28 TFLOPS FP32 compute means frame rates will be high. The CPU’s 7,021 single-core score in Cinebench R23 ensures that game logic and physics are handled without stutter.

Content creators and video editors will find a sweet spot. The CPU’s 20 cores and 49,736 multi-core score in Cinebench R23 will accelerate video encoding and timeline scrubbing, while the GPU’s 400 Tensor cores will speed up AI-based effects like denoising and upscaling. The 32 GB VRAM is ideal for 8K video editing timelines where the GPU needs to hold multiple frames in memory.

3D renderers and architects are a primary audience. The GPU’s 100 RT cores will accelerate ray-traced renders, and the 65.28 TFLOPS FP32 throughput will handle complex scenes. The CPU’s 20 cores will handle physics simulations and scene preparation. The 32 GB VRAM is critical for large scene files that would otherwise spill to system RAM.

Software developers working on AI or machine learning will appreciate the 400 Tensor cores and the 1:1 FP16 rate. The GPU’s average benchmark score of 184,664 is on par with the A100, making this a viable local development machine for training smaller models or fine-tuning larger ones.

Students and small business workstations are a stretch target, but this build is overkill for such use. The CPU’s passmark single-thread score of 4,928 is excellent for general productivity, but the cost of this setup is not justified for office work alone. The data suggests this is a niche tool for specialized work, not a general-purpose office PC.

Benchmark Performance

The benchmark data for this pairing is split between CPU and GPU tests, and it is important to note that no measured FPS rows exist for this exact combination. All FPS discussion is estimated from the benchmark scores.

The CPU, the Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF, delivers a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 49,736 and a single-core score of 7,021. These are strong numbers. The multi-core score places it in the 94th percentile of all CPUs, and its average benchmark score is 71,910. In the nearest rival comparison, it edges out the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX by 0.2% in average score (71,910 vs 71,797), but it trails the Intel Xeon 6517P by 0.6% and the Intel Xeon 6724P by 0.7%. It leads the Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 by 0.8%. This tells us the CPU is competitive with high-end Xeon server chips, which is remarkable for a desktop part.

In Geekbench, the CPU scores 22,913 multi-core and 2,759 single-core. The Passmark suite shows varied results: a multithread score of 58,518, a single-thread score of 4,928, and an integer math score of 143,351. The floating-point math score is 189,431, and the extended instructions score is 54,513. The data compression score is 666,589, and data encryption is 48,198. These scores indicate a CPU that is exceptional at integer and floating-point math, which translates to excellent performance in scientific computing and financial modeling.

The GPU, the NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada, scores 175,286 in Geekbench OpenCL and 194,041 in Geekbench Vulkan. Its average benchmark score is 184,664, placing it at the 98th percentile of all GPUs. In the nearest rival comparison, it is 0.5% ahead of the NVIDIA A100 SXM4 80 GB, 1.4% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX PRO 5000 Blackwell, and 3.7% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 D. It trails the A100 SXM4 40 GB by 1.3%. This shows the GPU is competitive with data-center accelerators, which reflects its compute capability.

The combined picture is a system that ranks in the 96th percentile overall. The CPU is a top-tier desktop part that competes with server chips, and the GPU is a workstation-class card that matches data-center accelerators. Together, they form a cohesive unit for heavy compute tasks.

FAQ

Q: What is the socket type for the Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF?

A: The CPU uses Intel Socket 1851, which is specific to the Core Ultra Series 2 desktop processors.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does the CPU support?

A: The CPU supports dual-channel DDR5 memory with a theoretical bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s.

Q: Does the CPU have integrated graphics?

A: No, the integrated graphics are listed as N/A, so a discrete GPU is required for display output.

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

A: The GPU has 32 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 576.0 GB/s.

Q: How does the GPU compare to the NVIDIA A100 SXM4 80 GB?

A: The GPU’s average benchmark score is 184,664, which is 0.5% higher than the A100 SXM4 80 GB’s score of 183,725.

Q: What is the suggested power supply wattage for this system?

A: The GPU has a suggested PSU rating of 600 W, which accounts for the CPU’s 125 W TDP and the GPU’s 250 W TDP.

Q: Does the system support ECC memory?

A: No, the CPU’s ECC memory support is listed as false, so standard non-ECC DDR5 is required.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: At 1440p or 4K, the GPU’s 98th percentile performance will drive very high frame rates on ultra settings. The CPU’s single-core score of 7,021 in Cinebench R23 ensures that the game engine’s main thread is not a bottleneck. The 32 GB VRAM will never overflow, even with high-resolution texture packs.

Streaming: While streaming, the CPU’s 20 cores can handle the encode workload via x264, but the GPU’s NVENC (implied by the Ada architecture) can offload this task. The CPU’s 49,736 multi-core score in Cinebench R23 leaves headroom for both game and stream encoding without a significant frame rate hit.

Video editing: The CPU’s 20 cores and high multi-thread score will accelerate timeline preview and export times. The GPU’s 400 Tensor cores will speed up AI-driven effects like denoising and auto-reframe. The 32 GB VRAM is sufficient for 8K timelines with multiple layers.

3D rendering: In GPU-based renderers, the GPU’s 65.28 TFLOPS FP32 compute and 100 RT cores will deliver fast ray-traced renders. The 32 GB VRAM is critical for complex scenes that exceed 16 GB. For CPU-based rendering, the CPU’s 49,736 Cinebench R23 score will handle production-quality frames, though slower than the GPU.

Software development: For code compilation, the CPU’s high integer math score of 143,351 in Passmark indicates fast build times. For AI development, the GPU’s 400 Tensor cores and 1:1 FP16 rate (65.28 TFLOPS) provide a capable local environment for model training and inference.

Student and office work: The CPU’s passmark single-thread score of 4,928 is excellent for general productivity, and the GPU is overkill for this use case. The system would be snappy for spreadsheets and documents, but the hardware is wasted on such tasks.

Build Overview

This build combines the Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF with the NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation in a desktop form factor. The CPU is a 20-core, 20-thread Arrow Lake processor running on Socket 1851, and the GPU is a workstation-class Ada Lovelace card with 32 GB of VRAM. The combined percentile rank is 96, indicating this is a top-tier system for both consumer and professional workloads. The CPU sits at the 94th percentile, and the GPU at the 98th percentile, making the GPU the standout component. This is not a balanced mid-range build; it is a high-end workstation-class desktop that excels at compute-intensive tasks. The lack of measured FPS data means game performance is estimated from benchmark scores, but the raw compute numbers suggest this is a very capable gaming machine as well as a professional workhorse.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF is a 20-core, 20-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, manufactured on a 3 nm process by TSMC. It is part of the Core Ultra Series 2 family, and it is a desktop part with a TDP of 125 W. The base clock is 3.90 GHz, and it boosts to 5.50 GHz, which is a high boost clock for a 20-core chip. The CPU has 30 MB of shared L3 cache, with 3 MB of L2 cache per core and 192 KB of L1 cache per core. The die size is 243 mm², and it contains 17,800 million transistors.

In benchmark terms, the CPU is a multi-threaded monster. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 49,736 is just below the 50,000 mark, which is a significant achievement for a desktop chip. The single-core score of 7,021 is also excellent, ensuring snappy responsiveness in lightly-threaded tasks. The Geekbench multi-core score of 22,913 and single-core score of 2,759 reinforce this picture.

The Passmark suite provides more granular data. The multithread score of 58,518 is high, and the physics score of 3,633 is also strong. The integer math score of 143,351 and floating-point math score of 189,431 are both exceptional, indicating the CPU is well-suited for scientific simulations and financial modeling. The data encryption score of 48,198 shows good security processing capability, and the extended instructions score of 54,513 suggests strong performance in modern vectorized workloads.

The CPU’s average benchmark score is 71,910, placing it at the 94th percentile of all CPUs. It rivals the Intel Xeon 6517P and 6724P, which are server processors, coming within 0.7% of their scores. This shows that the 265KF is not just a gaming CPU; it is a legitimate workstation processor that can handle heavy multi-threaded workloads. The market segment is listed as Desktop, and the multiplier is unlocked, allowing for overclocking to push performance even higher. The CPU is actively in production, so it is a current product with platform support.