PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook

This comparison brings together gaming FPS, productivity performance, platform differences, power efficiency, pricing context, and upgrade path so you can see which CPU actually makes more sense.

Core Ultra 7 265F

2025

Why buy it

✅+0.3% higher Geekbench single-core performance for gaming and desktop responsiveness.
✅Costs $81 less on MSRP ($369 MSRP vs $450 MSRP).
✅Delivers 22.4% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 133.2 vs 108.8 PassMark/$ ($369 MSRP vs $450 MSRP).
✅20% more PCIe lanes (24 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌18.2% higher power demand at 65W vs 55W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core Ultra 7 265HX can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core Ultra 7 265HX

2025

Why buy it

✅Draws 55W instead of 65W, a 10W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU, while Core Ultra 7 265F needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench single-core performance for gaming (2,990 vs 3,000).
❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (17,417 vs 20,000).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 108.8 vs 133.2 PassMark/$ ($450 MSRP vs $369 MSRP).

Core Ultra 7 265F

2025

Core Ultra 7 265HX

2025

Why buy it

✅+0.3% higher Geekbench single-core performance for gaming and desktop responsiveness.
✅Costs $81 less on MSRP ($369 MSRP vs $450 MSRP).
✅Delivers 22.4% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 133.2 vs 108.8 PassMark/$ ($369 MSRP vs $450 MSRP).
✅20% more PCIe lanes (24 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Why buy it

✅Draws 55W instead of 65W, a 10W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU, while Core Ultra 7 265F needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌18.2% higher power demand at 65W vs 55W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core Ultra 7 265HX can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench single-core performance for gaming (2,990 vs 3,000).
❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (17,417 vs 20,000).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 108.8 vs 133.2 PassMark/$ ($450 MSRP vs $369 MSRP).

Quick Answers

So, is Core Ultra 7 265F better than Core Ultra 7 265HX?

Yes. Core Ultra 7 265F is the better overall CPU here. You are getting a 0.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 14.8% better Geekbench multi-core, 0.4% higher PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which makes it the stronger all-around choice.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core Ultra 7 265F is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 0.3% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core Ultra 7 265F is the better fit. You are getting 14.8% better Geekbench multi-core, backed by 20 cores and 20 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Core Ultra 7 265F is the smarter buy today. Core Ultra 7 265F is $81 cheaper on MSRP at $369 MSRP versus $450 MSRP, and it gives you a 0.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 22.4% better value on MSRP (133.2 vs 108.8 PassMark/$), so the better CPU is not just faster, it is also the cleaner value play on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Core Ultra 7 265F is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting more multi-core headroom with 20 cores / 20 threads instead of 20/20. That extra compute headroom should age better as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Games Benchmarks

Paired with RTX 4090

To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.

Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

Core Ultra 7 265F Benchmark Check

Core Ultra 7 265HX Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core Ultra 7 265F	Core Ultra 7 265HX
1080p
low	280 FPS	280 FPS
medium	273 FPS	273 FPS
high	227 FPS	228 FPS
ultra	191 FPS	192 FPS
1440p
low	226 FPS	226 FPS
medium	194 FPS	194 FPS
high	155 FPS	156 FPS
ultra	135 FPS	136 FPS
4K
low	151 FPS	151 FPS
medium	129 FPS	129 FPS
high	99 FPS	100 FPS
ultra	87 FPS	87 FPS

Open Core Ultra 7 265F Open Core Ultra 7 265HX

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core Ultra 7 265F	Core Ultra 7 265HX
1080p
low	695 FPS	696 FPS
medium	593 FPS	595 FPS
high	498 FPS	499 FPS
ultra	448 FPS	450 FPS
1440p
low	605 FPS	607 FPS
medium	539 FPS	540 FPS
high	452 FPS	453 FPS
ultra	384 FPS	385 FPS
4K
low	356 FPS	357 FPS
medium	324 FPS	325 FPS
high	305 FPS	305 FPS
ultra	266 FPS	266 FPS

Open Core Ultra 7 265F Open Core Ultra 7 265HX

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core Ultra 7 265F	Core Ultra 7 265HX
1080p
low	839 FPS	839 FPS
medium	685 FPS	685 FPS
high	610 FPS	610 FPS
ultra	522 FPS	522 FPS
1440p
low	727 FPS	727 FPS
medium	596 FPS	596 FPS
high	519 FPS	519 FPS
ultra	441 FPS	441 FPS
4K
low	515 FPS	515 FPS
medium	434 FPS	434 FPS
high	394 FPS	394 FPS
ultra	336 FPS	336 FPS

Open Core Ultra 7 265F Open Core Ultra 7 265HX

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core Ultra 7 265F	Core Ultra 7 265HX
1080p
low	995 FPS	998 FPS
medium	901 FPS	903 FPS
high	782 FPS	784 FPS
ultra	709 FPS	712 FPS
1440p
low	814 FPS	817 FPS
medium	724 FPS	726 FPS
high	627 FPS	628 FPS
ultra	555 FPS	558 FPS
4K
low	555 FPS	557 FPS
medium	501 FPS	503 FPS
high	449 FPS	451 FPS
ultra	396 FPS	398 FPS

Open Core Ultra 7 265F Open Core Ultra 7 265HX

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core Ultra 7 265F and Core Ultra 7 265HX

Core Ultra 7 265F

The Core Ultra 7 265F is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 7 January 2025 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025) architecture. It features 20 cores and 20 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 5.3 GHz. L3 cache: 30 MB (total). L2 cache: 3 MB (per core). Built on 3 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1851. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-6400. Passmark benchmark score: 49,161 points. Launch price was $379.

Core Ultra 7 265HX

The Core Ultra 7 265HX is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2025-01-01. It is based on the Arrow Lake-HX (2025) architecture. It features 20 cores and 20 threads. Base frequency is 2.6 GHz, with boost up to 5.3 GHz. L3 cache: 30 MB (total). L2 cache: 3 MB (per core). Built on 3 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA2114. Thermal design power (TDP): 55 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-6400. Passmark benchmark score: 48,975 points. Launch price was $500.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Core Ultra 7 265F and Core Ultra 7 265HX share an identical 20-core/20-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 5.3 GHz on the Core Ultra 7 265F versus 5.3 GHz on the Core Ultra 7 265HX — identical boost frequencies (base: 2.4 GHz vs 2.6 GHz). The Core Ultra 7 265F uses the Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025) architecture (3 nm), while the Core Ultra 7 265HX uses Arrow Lake-HX (2025) (3 nm). In PassMark, the Core Ultra 7 265F scores 49,161 against the Core Ultra 7 265HX's 48,975 — a 0.4% lead for the Core Ultra 7 265F. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 3,000 vs 2,990, a 0.3% lead for the Core Ultra 7 265F that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 20,000 vs 17,417 (13.8% advantage for the Core Ultra 7 265F). Both processors carry 30 MB (total) of L3 cache.

Feature	Core Ultra 7 265F	Core Ultra 7 265HX
Cores / Threads	20 / 20	20 / 20
Boost Clock	5.3 GHz	5.3 GHz
Base Clock	2.4 GHz	2.6 GHz+8%
L3 Cache	30 MB (total)	30 MB (total)
L2 Cache	3 MB (per core)	3 MB (per core)
Process	3 nm	3 nm
Architecture	Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025)	Arrow Lake-HX (2025)
PassMark	49,161	48,975
Cinebench R23 Multi	25,459	—
Geekbench 6 Single	3,000	2,990
Geekbench 6 Multi	20,000+15%	17,417

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core Ultra 7 265F uses the LGA1851 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Core Ultra 7 265HX uses FCBGA2114 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR5-6400 memory speed. The Core Ultra 7 265F supports up to 256 GB of RAM compared to 192 GB — 28.6% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 24 (Core Ultra 7 265F) vs 20 (Core Ultra 7 265HX) — the Core Ultra 7 265F offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Z890,B860,H810 (Core Ultra 7 265F) and WM880,HM870 (Core Ultra 7 265HX).

Feature	Core Ultra 7 265F	Core Ultra 7 265HX
Socket	LGA1851	FCBGA2114
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0	PCIe 5.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-6400	DDR5-6400
Max RAM Capacity	256 GB+33%	192 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	24+20%	20

🔧

Advanced Features

Both processors feature an unlocked multiplier for overclocking. Only the Core Ultra 7 265HX supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Both support VT-x, VT-d virtualization. The Core Ultra 7 265HX includes integrated graphics (Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU), while the Core Ultra 7 265F requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core Ultra 7 265F targets High Performance Gaming.

Feature	Core Ultra 7 265F	Core Ultra 7 265HX
Integrated GPU	No	Yes
IGPU Model	None	Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU
Unlocked	Yes	Yes
AVX-512	No	Yes
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	VT-x, VT-d
Target Use	High Performance Gaming	—

💰

Value Analysis

The Core Ultra 7 265F launched at $369 MSRP, while the Core Ultra 7 265HX debuted at $450. On MSRP ($369 vs $450), the Core Ultra 7 265F is $81 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core Ultra 7 265F delivers 133.2 pts/$ vs 108.8 pts/$ for the Core Ultra 7 265HX — making the Core Ultra 7 265F the 20.2% better value option.