PCBenchmark/Results/Intel Core Ultra 5 245K + Intel Arc Graphics 24EU browser benchmark
PC SCORE58OUT OF 100
SYSTEM GRADED
Limited quality run 29 September 2026 · 21:13 EEST

Intel Core Ultra 5 245K+Intel Arc Graphics 24EU

Capable performance; the category detail shows where this system is strongest.

SUITEFULL SYSTEM MODEQUICK GPU APIWebGL 2 ENGINE1.2.1 SCORE SCALEPROVISIONAL R4 DURATION00:31
Run same suite
01 / WORKLOAD BREAKDOWN

Performance by workload.

CPU and GPU use the current adaptive scale for the same workload, mode and graphics backend. When a faster validated device becomes the reference, older comparable scores are projected onto the new scale without changing their raw measurements. VRAM remains a pass/fail diagnostic.

CPU68

Processor throughput

Single thread
715.77 Mops/s
Multi thread
6,148.82 Mops/s
Compression proxy
684.2 MB/s
GPU33

Graphics throughput

Estimated shader work
1,997.4 G shader ops/s
Render throughput
11.8 FPS
Frame time p95
282.87 ms
MEMORY92

System memory

Effective bandwidth
55.46 GB/s
Latency proxy
17.9 ns
Browser RAM class
8 GB class
VRAMNOT RUN

GPU-memory diagnostic

No completed VRAM measurement was recorded for this run.

02 / RELATIVE PERFORMANCE

What sits above and below this hardware.

Each ladder uses one consistent source. Validated PCBenchmark medians take priority when the matching workload cohort has enough approved runs; until then, the report shows a clearly marked catalog estimate.

CPU POSITION

Intel Core Ultra 5 245K comparison ladder

ESTIMATE

Specification-based estimateApproximate browser CPU capacity derived from official core, thread and clock specifications for Arrow Lake desktop processors. It is not a measured benchmark.

  1. Intel Core Ultra 7 265KArrow Lake · 20 cores / 20 threads · 2024
    +15.8%higher estimate
  2. Intel Core Ultra 5 245KArrow Lake · 14 cores / 14 threads · 2024
    BASECATALOG REFERENCE

No slower peer is available in this comparison set.

GPU POSITION

Intel Arc Graphics 24EU comparison ladder

ESTIMATE

Theoretical FP32 estimatePercentages compare theoretical FP32 compute within the desktop GPU catalog; they are not measured PCBenchmark or gaming performance.

  1. Intel Arc Pro A40Alchemist(Pro Series) · 6 GB VRAM · 2022
    +351.9%higher estimate
  2. Intel Arc A350Alchemist(Arc 3) · 4 GB VRAM · 2022
    +298.7%higher estimate
  3. Intel Arc A310Alchemist(Arc 3) · 4 GB VRAM · 2022
    +249.4%higher estimate
  4. Intel Arc Graphics 24EUHD Graphics(Arrow Lake) · 2024
    BASECATALOG REFERENCE

No slower peer is available in this comparison set.

03 / STABILITY12.5%

Sustained-load signal

This signal summarizes frame delivery during the timed graphics phase. It can reveal an inconsistent run, but it is not a temperature sensor.

COMPLETEDNO SAMPLE WINDOW31 SEC DROPPED FRAMES87.53%
04 / ENVIRONMENTRUN CONTEXT

What the browser disclosed

Selected suite
Full system
Platform family
Windows
Logical processors
18
Browser RAM class
8 GB · rounded/capped
Graphics API
WebGL 2
Run quality
Limited · 32/100
Score fingerprint
adaptive-v2.0 / 1.2.1
Current adaptive scale
Provisional revision 4 / 28 August 2026
i
BROWSER BENCHMARK, NOT HARDWARE ATTESTATION

Read this result in its proper context.

It measures this browser’s execution path under the conditions of this run. Cooling, power mode, drivers, background processes and browser updates can change the outcome. CPU/GPU names may be supplied manually or matched to the catalog from a browser hint. Compare only matching suite, mode, engine version and graphics backend. NOT RUN categories were not measured and are not zero-performance results.

Read methodology & limitations ↗
05 / RAW RESULT DATAInspect JSON +
{
    "test_suite": "all",
    "test_mode": "quick",
    "duration_ms": 30517,
    "system": {
        "cpu_name": "Intel Core Ultra 5 245K",
        "gpu_name": "Intel Arc Graphics 24EU",
        "logical_cores": 18,
        "memory_gb": 8,
        "platform": "windows",
        "gpu_api": "webgl2",
        "processor_id": 30,
        "graphics_card_id": 2793
    },
    "metrics": {
        "stability": {
            "duration_seconds": 31,
            "completed": false,
            "dropped_frames_percent": 87.526
        },
        "cpu": {
            "single_core_ops_per_second": 715769671.031,
            "multi_core_ops_per_second": 6148823306.138,
            "compression_mb_per_second": 684.181
        },
        "memory": {
            "bandwidth_gbps": 55.456,
            "latency_ns": 17.851
        },
        "gpu": {
            "frames_per_second": 11.824,
            "compute_gflops": 1997.36,
            "frame_time_p95_ms": 282.868
        }
    },
    "raw_points": {
        "cpu": 30.69962498,
        "gpu": 3.32893333
    },
    "original_scores": {
        "cpu": 68,
        "gpu": 33,
        "memory": 92,
        "vram": null,
        "overall": 58,
        "grade": "D"
    },
    "current_scores": {
        "cpu": 68,
        "gpu": 33,
        "memory": 92,
        "vram": null,
        "overall": 58,
        "grade": "D",
        "snapshot_revision": 4
    },
    "runner_version": "1.2.1",
    "workload_signature": "browser-1.2",
    "scoring_version": "adaptive-v2.0"
}
SAME SUITE, FRESH CONDITIONS

Think this system can do better?

Close heavy apps, connect power, keep the tab visible and run the same Full system suite and Quick mode again.

Run it again