SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 7 265T + 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)

▼

89 Score

Top 11% Ranking

89 / 100

HIGH-END

Power Build

Top 11% of systems. Excellent for 1440p Ultra or 4K High gaming.

1440p Ultra4K High

System Balance Analysis

CPU vs GPU performance ratio

Well Balanced

CPU

94%

GPU

85%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 7 265T

47,697 Benchmark Score

Top 6% 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

Strong Performance

Excellent for 1440p gaming. Most games will run at high/ultra settings smoothly.

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

This pairing combines a 20-core, 35-watt Arrow Lake desktop processor with Intel’s entry-level Arc A310 graphics card. The result is a system with extreme CPU efficiency and modest GPU output, aimed at productivity-first desktops rather than high-end gaming rigs. The data shows a significant performance gulf between the two components, which defines every strength and limitation of this build.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265T is a 20-core, 20-thread processor built on the Arrow Lake architecture and manufactured on a 3 nm process by TSMC. It operates with a base clock of 1.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz, a wide frequency range that allows it to idle efficiently and still deliver bursts of high-speed performance when needed. The chip’s thermal design power is just 35 watts, making it one of the most power-efficient high-core-count desktop parts in the database.

The cache hierarchy is substantial: 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3 cache. This large L3 pool helps with multi-threaded workloads and reduces latency when data is shared across cores. The processor supports dual-channel DDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s, and it offers PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU. The integrated graphics are Arc Xe-LPG with 64 execution units, which is a capable fallback for basic display output.

Benchmark results place this CPU in the 90th percentile among all CPUs tested. In Cinebench R23, it scores 31,558 points in multi-core and 4,455 points in single-core. The multi-core score reflects strong sustained throughput for a 35-watt part, while the single-core result shows excellent per-thread performance for everyday responsiveness. In PassMark, the processor achieves 37,084 in multithread, 4,338 in single-thread, 104,943 in integer math, and 129,817 in floating-point math. The floating-point advantage over integer math indicates solid performance in scientific and engineering calculations.

The nearest rivals show how tightly grouped this CPU is at the top of its class. The AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 5945 sits just 0.4% behind in average score, while the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X3D is 0.4% ahead. The Intel Core Ultra X9 378H leads by 0.5%, and the AMD Ryzen 9 3900 trails by 0.5%. These deltas are within noise, meaning the 265T trades blows with several high-core-count alternatives while consuming far less power.

Real-world workload interpretation: the 20-core design with no hyper-threading means each core is a physical core, which benefits predictable multi-threaded scaling in video encoding, compilation, and 3D rendering. The 5.30 GHz boost clock ensures snappy single-threaded performance in office apps, web browsing, and legacy software. For a desktop CPU, this is a workload-first processor that excels when efficiency and multi-core grunt matter more than raw frequency.

FAQ

Q: Why does the CPU have 20 cores but only 20 threads?

A: The Core Ultra 7 265T uses the Arrow Lake architecture without hyper-threading, meaning each core handles one thread. This design choice favors power efficiency and thermal headroom, allowing the chip to hit 5.30 GHz boost while maintaining a 35 W TDP.

Q: How does this CPU compare to the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X3D?

A: The Ryzen 9 7900X3D has an average benchmark score of 47,908, which is 0.4% higher than the 265T’s score. In practical terms, the two processors are effectively tied in aggregate performance, but the 265T does so at a 35 W TDP, making it far more efficient.

Q: What is the integrated graphics capable of?

A: The integrated Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units provides basic display output and hardware acceleration for video decode. It is not designed for gaming, but it can drive a desktop and handle media playback without a discrete GPU.

Q: Does this CPU support ECC memory?

A: No, ECC memory is not supported. The memory controller is dual-channel DDR5 only, which is standard for consumer desktop platforms.

Q: What is the launch MSRP of this processor?

A: The launch MSRP is $384. This places it in the upper mid-range desktop segment, though pricing discussions are not covered in this analysis.

Q: What is the transistor count and die size?

A: The Arrow Lake die contains 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die, fabricated by TSMC on a 3 nm process. This high transistor density contributes to the CPU’s strong performance-per-watt characteristics.

Q: Is the CPU multiplier unlocked?

A: No, the multiplier is locked. Overclocking is not supported, but the processor’s boost behavior at 5.30 GHz already provides high single-thread performance without manual tuning.

Balance and Bottleneck

The benchmark data shows a stark imbalance between CPU and GPU capabilities. The CPU sits in the 90th percentile of all processors, while the GPU lands in the 40th percentile. This means the Arc A310 will be the limiting factor in any graphics-intensive workload, while the CPU will sit largely idle in gaming scenarios.

In CPU-bound tasks such as video encoding, compilation, or 3D rendering, the processor can operate near its full potential, delivering Cinebench R23 multi-core scores of 31,558. However, when paired with the A310, any graphics-related task will hit the GPU ceiling first. The GPU’s PassMark G3D score of 5,433 is roughly 11% of the CPU’s PassMark multithread score of 37,084, illustrating the performance gulf.

For gaming, there are no measured FPS rows for this exact combination in the FACT PACK, so all FPS estimates are inferred from benchmark scores. The GPU’s performance class, indicated by its 40th percentile position, suggests it can handle 1080p gaming at low-to-medium settings in less demanding titles, but it will not keep up with modern AAA releases. The CPU’s 90th percentile position means it could support a far more powerful GPU without becoming a bottleneck.

In mixed workloads, such as streaming while gaming, the CPU can handle the encoding load with its 20 cores, but the GPU will struggle to render the game at acceptable frame rates. The result is a system where the CPU is over-provisioned for the GPU, and any upgrade path should prioritize the graphics card first.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The Core Ultra 7 265T uses the Intel Socket 1851 platform, which supports DDR5 dual-channel memory. The CPU provides PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes, offering ample bandwidth for a high-end discrete GPU or fast NVMe storage. The integrated graphics are Arc Xe-LPG with 64 execution units, providing a fallback if the discrete GPU is removed.

The GPU, an Intel Arc A310, uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface and has a suggested power supply of 200 W. The GPU’s TDP is just 30 W, and it draws power directly from the motherboard slot with no additional power connectors. This makes it extremely easy to install in any system, but the low power draw reflects its limited performance ceiling.

A sensible next upgrade would be to replace the Arc A310 with a more powerful GPU. The CPU’s 20 cores and 5.30 GHz boost clock can support a significantly faster graphics card without becoming a bottleneck. The PCIe Gen 5 lanes and dual-channel DDR5 memory ensure that the platform will not hold back a mid-range or even high-end GPU upgrade. The 35 W TDP of the CPU also leaves plenty of thermal and power headroom in the system for a larger graphics card.

For memory, the platform supports DDR5, and the 102.4 GB/s bandwidth is sufficient for most workloads. If the user plans to run memory-intensive applications, adding more capacity would be more beneficial than chasing higher speeds, as the CPU’s locked multiplier limits tuning options.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU’s average benchmark score is 47,697, placing it in the 90th percentile of all CPUs. The GPU’s average benchmark score is 7,550, placing it in the 40th percentile of all GPUs. The combined system percentile is 65, reflecting the large gap between the two components.

In Cinebench R23, the CPU scores 31,558 multi-core and 4,455 single-core. These results indicate strong multi-threaded performance for a 35 W part, with single-thread performance that rivals higher-TDP chips. In PassMark, the CPU achieves 37,084 in multithread and 4,338 in single-thread, with specific sub-scores of 104,943 in integer math and 129,817 in floating-point math. The floating-point advantage suggests good performance in simulation and scientific workloads.

The GPU’s benchmark results are more modest. In Geekbench, it scores 30,607 in OpenCL and 28,964 in Vulkan. In PassMark, the G3D score is 5,433, with compute at 2,157. The DirectX scores are low across the board: 69 in DirectX 9, 31 in DirectX 10, 33 in DirectX 11, and 29 in DirectX 12. These numbers confirm that the A310 is a basic entry-level GPU, suitable for office productivity and light media tasks, but not for modern gaming or GPU compute.

The combined picture is clear: this is a CPU-heavy build with a placeholder GPU. The system’s 65th percentile combined ranking is dragged down by the GPU, and any performance upgrade should focus on the graphics card first.

GPU Analysis

The Intel Arc A310 is based on the Xe-HPG architecture, codenamed Alchemist, and manufactured on a 6 nm process by TSMC. It has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, delivering 124.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU clock runs at a fixed 1750 MHz for both base and boost, with memory at 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective).

The chip has 768 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 raster operation units. It also includes 6 ray-tracing cores, which provide basic ray-tracing support but at a very low performance level. The pixel rate is 28.00 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 56.00 GTexel/s. The FP32 performance is 2.688 TFLOPS, with FP16 at 5.376 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio). This places the A310 in the entry-level segment, comparable to a low-end discrete GPU from several generations ago.

The GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, meaning it has the feature set for modern APIs, but not the raw horsepower to use them effectively. The 4 display outputs are all mini-DisplayPort 2.0, which is a professional-friendly feature but limits consumer monitor compatibility without adapters.

Benchmark results show the A310 in the 40th percentile of all GPUs, with an average score of 7,550. Its nearest rival is the AMD Radeon R7 250, which is 0.1% faster. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 is 0.4% ahead, and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is 1% faster. The AMD Radeon HD 8850M trails by 1.4%. These deltas are small, meaning the A310 performs at the level of a decade-old mid-range card. For rendering, the low FP32 throughput of 2.688 TFLOPS will limit 3D workloads, but the 6 ray-tracing cores provide some hardware acceleration for ray-traced effects in supported applications.

Who Should Build It

This build targets users who need a powerful, efficient CPU for productivity and are willing to accept entry-level graphics. The 90th percentile CPU performance makes it ideal for software developers compiling large codebases, students running simulations, and small business workstations handling data analysis.

Content creators who work primarily with CPU-bound tasks like video encoding or batch photo processing will benefit from the 20 cores and 31,558 Cinebench R23 multi-core score. The 35 W TDP means this build can run in a compact, quiet desktop without high-end cooling.

Gamers should look elsewhere, as the GPU’s 40th percentile performance cannot deliver high-refresh experiences at 1080p in modern titles. However, for office productivity, web development, and light 2D design, the system is more than sufficient. The integrated Arc Xe-LPG graphics also provide a fallback if the discrete GPU is removed, making this a flexible platform for future upgrades.

Build Overview

This is a desktop-class build combining the Intel Core Ultra 7 265T with the Intel Arc A310. The CPU is a 20-core, 20-thread Arrow Lake processor with a 35 W TDP and a 5.30 GHz boost clock, placing it in the 90th percentile of all CPUs. The GPU is an entry-level Arc A310 with 4 GB of GDDR6 memory, 768 shading units, and a 30 W TDP, placing it in the 40th percentile of all GPUs.

The combined system percentile is 65, reflecting the CPU’s strength and the GPU’s weakness. This pairing is best understood as a professional workstation core with a display adapter attached, rather than a balanced gaming or content-creation system. The CPU’s average benchmark score of 47,697 is nearly six times the GPU’s 7,550, and that ratio defines the build’s character.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: Not viable with this GPU. The Arc A310’s 40th percentile position and PassMark G3D score of 5,433 indicate it can handle only light or older titles at 1080p with low settings, and even then, frame rates will be modest. The CPU’s 90th percentile performance is irrelevant here because the GPU is the bottleneck.

Streaming: The CPU can handle streaming encoding with its 20 cores, as evidenced by its 37,084 PassMark multithread score. However, the GPU cannot render modern games at quality settings that would make streaming worthwhile, so this scenario is limited to streaming desktop content or lightweight titles.

Video editing: The CPU excels at video encoding, with Cinebench R23 multi-core at 31,558 and PassMark floating-point math at 129,817. This makes 4K video export and rendering smooth. The GPU’s low compute score of 2,157 means GPU-accelerated effects will be slow, but CPU-based editing workflows will perform well.

3D rendering: CPU-based rendering will be strong, leveraging all 20 cores and 30 MB of L3 cache. However, GPU-based renderers will struggle with the A310’s 2.688 TFLOPS FP32 throughput, making this a poor choice for real-time or GPU-accelerated rendering workflows.

Software development: This is a prime scenario. The 20 cores and 4,338 PassMark single-thread score provide fast compilation and responsive IDE performance. The 35 W TDP allows for a quiet, always-on development machine.

Student and office work: The CPU’s high single-thread performance and integrated graphics make this a capable machine for word processing, spreadsheets, and research. The discrete GPU is unnecessary for this use case, and the system’s low power draw keeps electricity costs minimal.

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

Power Build

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core Ultra 7 265T

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

Strong Performance

Performance Tiers Explained

Ultimate

High-End

Mid-Range

Entry Level

Legacy

CPU Analysis

FAQ

Balance and Bottleneck

Upgrade Path and Platform

Benchmark Performance

GPU Analysis

Who Should Build It

Build Overview

Usage Scenarios

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