SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus + Intel Arc A580

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

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
98%
VS
GPU
97%
PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus

93,785 Benchmark Score
Top 2% Market Ranking
View Full Specs →
GRAPHICS CARD

Intel Arc A580

57,756 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 270K Plus and Intel Arc A580 combination represents a desktop pairing where a top-tier 24-core processor meets a mid-range graphics card. The benchmark data shows the CPU is the dominant component in this system, placing in the 96th percentile of all CPUs, while the GPU sits in the 87th percentile. This creates a clear asymmetry in compute potential, with the processor capable of far more than the graphics card can feed at high resolutions. The combined percentile for this pair is 92, reflecting the strong CPU contribution. This analysis relies on the available benchmark scores, as no measured FPS data exists for this exact combination.

Balance and Bottleneck

The data presents a system where the processor significantly outclasses the graphics card. The CPU’s average benchmark score is 93,785, while the GPU’s is 57,756. This nearly 40% gap in raw compute scores indicates that in most gaming scenarios, the Intel Arc A580 will be the limiting factor. The CPU’s single-threaded performance, evidenced by a PassMark single-thread score of 5,068 and a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2,439, is exceptionally high, meaning it can handle even the most demanding game logic and physics calculations without breaking a sweat. The bottleneck will almost always be the GPU’s rendering throughput.

This imbalance is most pronounced at lower resolutions. At 1080p, a high-refresh-rate monitor would demand the GPU produce hundreds of frames per second, a task likely beyond the Arc A580’s capabilities, despite the CPU being able to issue draw calls rapidly. The GPU’s 12.29 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 192.0 GPixel/s pixel rate are respectable for its class, but they are not in the same league as the CPU’s processing power. The CPU’s Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 44,253 indicates a processor that can handle massive parallel workloads, but gaming at 1080p is often single-thread or lightly-threaded, further emphasizing the GPU as the primary constraint.

Conversely, in productivity and content creation workloads, the balance shifts. The CPU’s PassMark multi-thread score of 68,574 and data compression score of 804,322 will drive video encoding, 3D rendering, and code compilation at speeds that the GPU cannot match for graphics-specific tasks. In these scenarios, the CPU is the workhorse, and the GPU serves as a capable but secondary accelerator. The 24-core, 24-thread configuration with a 5.50 GHz boost clock is a formidable computation engine. The data suggests that for a balanced gaming build, the GPU would need to be upgraded to better match the CPU’s potential, while for a workstation, the current pairing might be adequate for non-graphics tasks.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The platform foundation is built on the Intel Socket 1851, which supports the Core Ultra Series 2 family. The CPU supports DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, with a memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s, and it also supports ECC memory, a feature often crucial for workstation stability. PCIe Gen 5 connectivity is provided by the CPU, offering 20 lanes, which is essential for future high-bandwidth storage devices and next-generation GPUs. The CPU’s TDP is 125 W, and the GPU has a TDP of 175 W, with the system’s suggested PSU rated at 450 W. This leaves headroom for a more powerful graphics card, as the current 450 W recommendation is modest for a system with this CPU.

The upgrade path is clear. The CPU’s performance is not the limiting factor, so the first logical upgrade would be the GPU. The motherboard’s PCIe Gen 5 support means a future graphics card will not be bandwidth-constrained. The 450 W PSU suggestion, however, might need to be revisited if a significantly more powerful GPU is installed, as those typically require more power. The ECC memory support and 20 PCIe Gen 5 lanes also make this platform suitable for expansion into workstation territory. The CPU’s unlocked multiplier also allows for overclocking, potentially extending its relevance further.

A sensible next upgrade would be to replace the Arc A580 with a higher-tier GPU. The CPU’s 96th percentile rank suggests it can drive almost any graphics card on the market without becoming a bottleneck. The memory system, with its 115.2 GB/s bandwidth, is also robust. The platform is designed for longevity, with support for the latest memory and I/O standards. The data suggests that the CPU is a long-term investment, while the GPU is the component most likely to be swapped out for performance gains.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is a 24-core, 24-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake Refresh architecture, manufactured on a 3 nm process by TSMC. It has a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz. This is a high-core-count desktop part with a 125 W TDP. The cache hierarchy is substantial, with 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. This large cache is critical for feeding the 24 cores, and the data shows it is effective.

The benchmark scores paint a picture of a processor that is strong in all areas. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 44,253 is a strong indicator of professional rendering performance, suggesting it can handle complex 3D scenes and video encodes with ease. The single-core score of 2,439 is equally impressive, ensuring snappy responsiveness in everyday tasks and excellent performance in lightly-threaded applications like many games. The PassMark scores are consistently high: integer math at 175,986, floating-point math at 229,491, and extended instructions at 63,506. This indicates a processor that is not just fast in one area but is a balanced, high-performance general-purpose compute engine.

The data shows that the CPU performs in the 96th percentile of all CPUs, with its nearest rivals being server-class parts like the Intel Xeon 6520P and AMD EPYC 4564P. Its average benchmark score of 93,785 is nearly identical to the Intel Xeon 6520P, and it trails the AMD EPYC 4564P by only 1.5%. This places it in an elite category, competing with enterprise silicon despite being a desktop part. For real workloads, this means the CPU will not be the bottleneck in any task, from gaming to scientific computing. Its 24 threads are more than enough for high-end content creation, and its single-thread speed ensures it is not left behind in latency-sensitive operations.

Who Should Build It

This system is for a user who demands top-tier CPU performance but does not have the same requirement for GPU performance. The target user is a content creator, particularly one who works on large, multi-threaded projects like video editing, 3D modeling, or software compilation. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 44,253 and PassMark multi-thread score of 68,574 are direct evidence of its capability in these fields. A software developer would benefit from the 24 cores for parallel builds, and the ECC memory support adds a layer of reliability for long-running processes.

Gamers at 1080p or 1440p who prioritize high frame rates in less demanding titles would also find this system suitable, but they would be leaving significant CPU performance on the table. The GPU would be the limiting factor in most modern AAA games. For a student in a technical field, the CPU power ensures that any computationally intensive assignments are handled quickly, while the GPU is adequate for general use and light gaming. Small business workstations that run virtual machines, database servers, or complex Excel models would benefit from the core count and ECC support.

The data does not suggest this is a balanced gaming PC. The user is paying for a CPU that is in the 96th percentile, while the GPU is in the 87th percentile. This makes sense for a workstation that occasionally games, or for a user who plans to upgrade the GPU later. It is less sensible for someone whose primary use is gaming, as they would see little benefit from the CPU’s extreme multi-threading capabilities. The CPU’s performance in data encryption, with a score of 59,097, and random string sorting, at 96,945, also makes it suitable for security-focused tasks and database management.

FAQ

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the stronger component in this build?

A: The CPU is significantly stronger. Its average benchmark score is 93,785, placing it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs, while the GPU’s average score is 57,756, placing it in the 87th percentile of GPUs.

Q: What type of memory does this build use?

A: The CPU supports DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, providing a memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. It also supports ECC memory.

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

A: The suggested PSU for the GPU is 450 W. The CPU has a TDP of 125 W and the GPU has a TDP of 175 W.

Q: What is the performance difference between this CPU and its closest rival?

A: The CPU’s average benchmark score is 93,785, which is essentially tied with the Intel Xeon 6520P (93,786). It is 1.5% behind the AMD EPYC 4564P and 1.9% behind the AMD EPYC 9175F.

Q: Does the GPU support hardware ray tracing?

A: Yes, the GPU has 24 dedicated ray tracing cores, which are part of its Xe-HPG architecture.

Q: What is the CPU’s boost clock speed?

A: The CPU has a boost clock of 5.50 GHz, with a base clock of 3.70 GHz.

Q: What is the GPU’s memory size and bandwidth?

A: The GPU has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 512.0 GB/s.

Usage Scenarios

High-Refresh Gaming: At 1080p, the CPU can deliver extremely high frame rates in esports titles, but the GPU’s 12.29 TFLOPS of FP32 performance will likely limit ultra-high refresh rates in more demanding games. The system is more suited for 1440p gaming at high settings.

Streaming: The CPU’s 24 cores are more than capable of handling game capture and encoding simultaneously, with a PassMark multi-thread score of 68,574 ensuring no dropped frames due to CPU load. The GPU is sufficient for the game rendering itself.

Video Editing: The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 44,253 indicates excellent performance in exporting and rendering video timelines. The GPU can assist with effects and decoding, making this a potent combination for 4K editing.

3D Rendering: This is a strong scenario for this build. The CPU’s high multi-core score will drive CPU-based renderers, while the GPU’s 24 ray tracing cores can accelerate GPU-based renders, offering flexibility.

Software Development: The 24 cores and 24 threads are ideal for parallel code compilation, reducing build times. The ECC memory support is a bonus for developers who need to ensure data integrity during long debugging sessions.

Student and Office Work: This system is overpowered for basic office tasks, but it offers future-proofing. The single-core score of 5,068 in PassMark ensures that even the most complex spreadsheets or documents are handled instantly, and the system will not become obsolete quickly.

Gaming Performance

No measured FPS data is available for this exact CPU and GPU combination. The following analysis is entirely estimated from the benchmark scores of the individual components. The GPU’s performance in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 (score of 2,229) and its Geekbench Vulkan score of 79,381 suggest it is a capable 1080p card. It is not in the same class as high-end GPUs, as indicated by its average score of 57,756, which is 1.1% behind the AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT.

Given the CPU’s exceptional single-thread performance (Cinebench R23 score of 2,439), it will not be a bottleneck in gaming. Therefore, the frame rates will be largely determined by the GPU. In less demanding games, such as esports titles, the system should be able to achieve high frame rates at 1080p. In more demanding AAA titles, the GPU’s 8 GB of VRAM and 12.29 TFLOPS of compute will likely result in playable frame rates at 1080p with medium-to-high settings, but not consistently high frame rates at 4K. The GPU’s performance is estimated to be within a few percent of the AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM and Intel Arc A570M, based on the deltaPct values of -0.6% and -0.8% respectively. Users should expect a solid 1080p experience, with the CPU ensuring that frame times are consistent.

Build Overview

This is a desktop build that pairs a 24-core Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus processor with an Intel Arc A580 graphics card. The CPU is a high-end part in the 96th percentile of all CPUs, while the GPU is a mid-range part in the 87th percentile of all GPUs. The combined percentile for this pair is 92, reflecting the high overall performance level, which is primarily driven by the CPU. This is a build that is heavily skewed toward processor-intensive tasks.

The class is desktop, and the tier is high-end, but with a notable imbalance. The CPU is a top-tier product, competing with server-class chips from Intel and AMD, while the GPU is a solid mainstream performer. This pairing is unusual in that it pairs an enthusiast-level processor with a more budget-conscious graphics card. The data suggests that this is a workstation-oriented configuration where the CPU is the star, and the GPU is a supporting player. It is a platform with immense potential, but its gaming performance is capped by the graphics card. The 3 nm CPU process and 6 nm GPU process also highlight the generational difference between the two components.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU’s benchmark scores are its defining feature. In Cinebench R23, it scores 44,253 multi-core and 2,439 single-core. In Cinebench R20, it scores 24,461 multi-core and 3,453 single-core. The PassMark scores are equally extensive, with a multi-thread score of 68,574, a single-thread score of 5,068, and a data compression score of 804,322. This performance places the CPU in the 96th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 93,785. Its closest rival, the Intel Xeon 6520P, has an identical average score, showing the CPU is at the top of its class.

The GPU’s benchmark scores are more modest. It scores 2,229 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, 91,657 in Geekbench OpenCL, and 79,381 in Geekbench Vulkan. This places the GPU in the 87th percentile of all GPUs, with an average score of 57,756. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM, has an average score of 58,085, making the Intel GPU 0.6% slower. The combined picture is a system with a massive 36,029-point gap between the CPU and GPU average scores. This indicates that the CPU is over twice as powerful as the GPU in their respective fields, making it clear which component defines the system’s peak performance.

GPU Analysis

The Intel Arc A580 is based on the DG2-512 chip and the Xe-HPG architecture, manufactured on a 6 nm process. It has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 512.0 GB/s. The GPU has 3,072 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, and 96 raster output units. It also has 24 ray tracing cores. The base clock is 1700 MHz, and the boost clock is 2000 MHz, with memory running at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective). This configuration yields a pixel rate of 192.0 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 384.0 GTexel/s, with FP32 compute at 12.29 TFLOPS.

The benchmark results show that the GPU is a solid performer for its class. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 91,657 indicates strong general compute capability, while its Vulkan score of 79,381 shows good API efficiency. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2,229 is a measure of its gaming performance, placing it in the 87th percentile of all GPUs. Its average benchmark score of 57,756 puts it in the same performance tier as the AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM, which is 0.6% faster, and the AMD Radeon RX 9070 GRE, which is 0.7% faster. The 24 RT cores provide hardware-accelerated ray tracing, but the overall compute power suggests that ray tracing performance will be modest, requiring upscaling or lower resolutions for playable frame rates. The 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth is adequate for 1080p and 1440p gaming, but the 8 GB VRAM could be a limiting factor in future titles at higher resolutions.