SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: AMD Ryzen 3 8440U + AMD Radeon 8050S

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)

▼

90 Score

Top 10% Ranking

90 / 100

ULTIMATE READY

Apex Performer

Top 10% 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

82%

GPU

97%

PROCESSOR

AMD Ryzen 3 8440U

16,663 Benchmark Score

Top 18% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

AMD Radeon 8050S

62,108 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 AMD Ryzen 3 8440U paired with the AMD Radeon 8050S is a laptop-class combination that leans decisively on its graphics side. The combined percentile of 80 places this pairing in the upper fifth of all builds in the database, but that figure is carried almost entirely by the GPU, which sits at the 89th percentile against all GPUs, while the CPU rests at a more modest 70th percentile against all CPUs. The result is an unbalanced but interesting configuration: strong graphics throughput for an integrated solution, attached to a four-core mobile processor that is competitive only within its own thin-and-light class. This page analyzes what that mismatch means in practice.

FAQ

Q: What is the AMD Ryzen 3 8440U + AMD Radeon 8050S build class?

A: This is a laptop-class pairing. The Ryzen 3 8440U is a mobile-segment processor built on the FP7 socket, and the Radeon 8050S is an integrated graphics solution (IGP) based on AMD's Strix Halo chip with RDNA 3.5 architecture.

Q: How powerful is the CPU in this build?

A: The Ryzen 3 8440U has 4 cores and 8 threads, a 3.00 GHz base clock, and a 4.70 GHz boost clock, built on TSMC's 4 nm process using Zen 4 (Hawk Point) architecture. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score is 10884 and its single-core score is 1536, placing it at the 70th percentile versus all CPUs.

Q: How does the GPU perform?

A: The Radeon 8050S scores 65818 in Geekbench OpenCL and 58398 in Geekbench Vulkan, giving an average benchmark score of 62108 and an 89th percentile position against all GPUs. It delivers 11.47 TFLOPS of FP32 compute with 2048 shading units.

Q: Are there measured FPS figures for this combination?

A: No. The FACT PACK contains no measured FPS data for this exact pairing, so all frame-rate discussion on this page is estimated from benchmark scores rather than measured in-game results.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its rivals?

A: The nearest rivals are the Intel Core Ultra 5 115U (within 0.5 percent), the Intel Core i5-1235U (within 0.6 percent), the AMD Ryzen 3 7335U (within 1 percent), and the Intel Core i3-12100E (within 1.1 percent). All four sit marginally above it in average score, but the gaps are effectively negligible.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does the CPU support?

A: The Ryzen 3 8440U supports DDR5 on a dual-channel memory bus with 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth. This matters especially because the Radeon 8050S uses system-shared memory.

Q: Is the CPU unlocked for overclocking?

A: No. The multiplier is locked, and as a 28 W TDP mobile part there is no overclocking headroom to exploit.

GPU Analysis

The Radeon 8050S is the defining component of this build. It is built on the Strix Halo chip, uses RDNA 3.5 architecture, and is manufactured on TSMC's 4 nm node with a 308 mm² die. Its raw specifications read like a mid-range discrete mobile GPU rather than a typical integrated solution: 2048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, 64 render output units, and 32 ray tracing cores. The clock structure spans from a 1295 MHz base to a 2800 MHz boost, and the card produces a pixel rate of 179.2 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 358.4 GTexel/s.

Compute throughput is the headline. The 8050S delivers 11.47 TFLOPS of FP32, with FP16 running at the same rate in a 1:1 configuration. For rendering workloads, this is the number that matters most: GPU renderers that scale with FP32 throughput will treat this as a serious mid-tier accelerator, not a convenience iGPU. The Geekbench results confirm it — 65818 in OpenCL and 58398 in Vulkan, averaging 62108. That average puts the 8050S at the 89th percentile of all GPUs in the database, and its nearest rivals make the positioning concrete: it sits 0.3 percent ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M, 2.5 percent behind the Radeon Pro Vega 56, 2.6 percent behind the RX 7600M, and 2.7 percent behind the RX 9060 XT LP. Those are professional and gaming mobile parts the 8050S effectively matches.

The critical caveat is memory. The 8050S uses system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth, meaning its effective performance ceiling is tied to the dual-channel DDR5 subsystem of the host CPU — 89.6 GB/s in this configuration. A GPU with this level of compute throughput can be starved by that bandwidth ceiling in texture-heavy scenarios, and that interdependency is the single most important design constraint of this pairing. Ray tracing capability exists — 32 RT cores with DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) support, plus Vulkan 1.4 and OpenGL 4.6 — so hardware-accelerated ray tracing is available, though RT workloads are precisely the ones most sensitive to memory bandwidth limits. The GPU's 55 W TDP is another distinguishing figure, substantially above the CPU's 28 W, which further underlines that this is a graphics-forward design.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming. With an 89th-percentile GPU driving the graphics side, this build can plausibly target high-refresh play at 1080p in most titles, and the compute throughput suggests headroom beyond that in lighter engines. However, the 70th-percentile, four-core CPU will limit frame rates in CPU-bound titles, and no measured FPS data exists to verify specific targets — frame expectations here are estimates from benchmark scores only.

Streaming. Streaming adds encoding overhead on top of gaming load, and with only 4 cores and 8 threads, the 8440U has little spare capacity to dedicate to a stream. The GPU's compute headroom is real, but the CPU side of the equation makes simultaneous play-and-stream a compromised scenario on this pairing.

Video editing. The GPU's OpenCL score of 65818 is genuinely useful for timeline effects, color grading, and GPU-accelerated preview. The constraint is elsewhere: video editing also hammers multi-core CPU throughput, where the Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 10884 defines a modest ceiling. Basic editing will feel responsive; heavy multi-cam or 4K scrubbing will lean hard on the CPU's limits.

3D rendering. This is the scenario where the pairing is most coherent. GPU renderers scale with FP32 throughput, and 11.47 TFLOPS is mid-tier-discrete territory. The Vulkan score of 58398 also supports modern viewport work. CPU-based rendering, by contrast, will be slow — 4571 in Cinebench R20 multi-core tells that story plainly.

Software development. Compilation benefits from both single-thread speed and core count. The 8440U's single-thread figures are respectable for its class — 3648 in PassMark single-thread, 645 in Cinebench R20 single-core — so interactive development work feels snappy. Large parallel builds will hit the four-core wall, but for typical application development this is adequate.

Student and office work. This is comfortably within the build's capabilities. Browsing, documents, video calls, and light photo editing are trivial loads for a 70th-percentile CPU, and the strong iGPU means even casual GPU-accelerated tasks — browser compositing, light image work — are handled with margin to spare.

Balance and Bottleneck

This is an unbalanced build, and the data quantifies the imbalance precisely. The GPU sits at the 89th percentile of all GPUs; the CPU sits at the 70th percentile of all CPUs. A gap of nearly twenty percentile points means the graphics subsystem is pulling a class of performance the processor cannot always feed.

The bottleneck flips depending on workload. In gaming, the CPU is the likely limiter. Four cores and eight threads is the floor of modern gaming requirements, and its PassMark physics score of 685 is a direct indicator: physics tests are CPU-bound, and that score defines how much simulation, draw-call, and logic throughput the build can deliver per frame. The GPU could render more frames than the CPU can orchestrate in many titles, particularly at lower resolutions where the CPU load per frame is highest. Because there is no measured FPS data for this pairing, this assessment is inferred from the benchmark scores rather than observed frame rates.

In rendering and compute, the balance reverses — the GPU becomes the workhorse and the CPU the supporting cast. A Geekbench OpenCL score of 65818 against a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 10884 describes a machine where GPU-accelerated work flies and CPU-only work crawls by comparison. The practical rule for users of this build: choose software that offloads to the GPU, because the CPU cannot substitute for it.

Memory is the third leg of the triangle. The 8050S's system-shared memory design means both components draw from the same dual-channel DDR5 pool with 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth. Workloads that are bandwidth-hungry on both sides simultaneously — gaming with high texture detail, for instance — will contend for that shared resource. PCIe is also limited: the CPU provides Gen 4 with 14 lanes from the CPU only, while the GPU lists a PCIe 5.0 x16 bus interface, a mismatch that is mostly academic in a soldered laptop design but illustrates that the platform was not built around expansion.

Who Should Build It

Strictly speaking, nobody builds this — it is a laptop-class pairing, and the analysis therefore addresses who should buy a machine configured this way. The combined percentile of 80 makes it a strong overall laptop, but the right buyer is defined by the shape of that performance, not just its level.

The primary audience is mobile gamers who prioritize graphics capability over CPU-heavy titles. Players of GPU-bound games — single-player adventures, racing titles, visually rich open-world games — will get the most from the 89th-percentile GPU. Competitive players of CPU-heavy esports titles should temper expectations: the four-core CPU and its 685 physics score cap the frame ceiling regardless of GPU strength.

The second audience is entry-to-mid-level content creators whose software is GPU-accelerated. Video editors working with GPU-accelerated codecs and effects, and 3D artists using GPU renderers, will find 11.47 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput genuinely productive. Creators whose workflows are CPU-render-bound should look elsewhere — Cinebench R23 multi-core of 10884 is the hard limit.

Developers and students round out the audience. The single-thread performance (PassMark single-thread 3648) keeps interactive work responsive, and the memory bandwidth supports snappy multitasking. Small-business workstation users doing office productivity, video conferencing, and light creative work are well served. What no buyer should expect is heavy multitasking or parallel compile farms: eight threads is eight threads.

Gaming Performance

An important disclosure first: no measured FPS data exists for this exact CPU+GPU combination. Every frame-rate statement in this section is an estimate derived from the benchmark scores, not an in-game measurement.

With that caveat stated, the estimates are reasonably directional. The Radeon 8050S's average benchmark score of 62108, its 89th percentile position, and its proximity to the Radeon RX 7600M (only 2.6 percent behind) and the RX 9060 XT LP (2.7 percent behind) suggest graphics performance in the territory of mid-range discrete mobile GPUs. At 1080p with ultra settings, that class of GPU typically delivers playable-to-high frame rates in most modern AAA titles, and very high frame rates in older or lighter engines. At 1440p, expect playable rates in most titles with some settings reductions; the system-shared memory and its 89.6 GB/s bandwidth ceiling will be the first thing to bite at higher resolutions and texture quality settings.

The CPU introduces the variance. Games that are GPU-bound will track the GPU's capability; games that scale with core count, simulation depth, or draw-call throughput will be held back by the four-core, eight-thread 8440U and its 685 PassMark physics score. High-refresh 1080p gaming in demanding engines is the scenario where the CPU bottleneck will be most visible.

Ray tracing is supported via the 32 RT cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) support, but RT-enabled gaming at ultra settings should be treated as a stretch scenario: the memory bandwidth constraint compounds the computational cost of ray tracing, and the estimated frame rates in RT modes will fall well below rasterized performance.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU's benchmark sheet tells a consistent story of a capable thin-and-light processor. In the Cinebench lineage, multi-core scores run 1097 (R15), 4571 (R20), and 10884 (R23), with single-core equivalents of 154, 645, and 1536. The PassMark suite fills out the picture: 12805 multi-thread, 3648 single-thread, 37468 integer math, 23017 floating point math, 146273 data compression, 8012 data encryption, 17725 string sorting, 11059 extended instructions, and 43 for find-prime-numbers. The average benchmark score across the suite is 16663, and the percentile versus all CPUs is 70.

Rival context makes that number meaningful. The Intel Core Ultra 5 115U averages 16753 — just 0.5 percent higher. The Intel Core i5-1235U averages 16770, a 0.6 percent gap. The AMD Ryzen 3 7335U sits 1 percent ahead at 16827, and the Intel Core i3-12100E is 1.1 percent ahead at 16853. In other words, the 8440U is statistically inseparable from its direct competitive set — every rival is within roughly one percent, which is within run-to-run variance for most of these tests.

The GPU's sheet is shorter but stronger. Geekbench OpenCL at 65818 and Geekbench Vulkan at 58398 average to 62108, an 89th-percentile result against all GPUs. Its rivals — the Radeon Pro W6600M (0.3 percent behind the 8050S), Radeon Pro Vega 56 (2.5 percent ahead), RX 7600M (2.6 percent ahead), and RX 9060 XT LP (2.7 percent ahead) — bracket it tightly on the stronger side except for the W6600M.

The combined percentile of 80 is the summary verdict: a laptop that, taken as a whole, outperforms 80 percent of builds in the database, with performance concentrated in graphics compute rather than CPU throughput.

Build Overview

This is a laptop-class pairing: a mobile AMD Ryzen 3 8440U processor on Socket FP7 combined with the integrated AMD Radeon 8050S graphics solution. Both components are Active production parts from AMD, both built on TSMC's 4 nm process. The CPU is a Zen 4 (Hawk Point) design released in December 2023; the GPU is an RDNA 3.5 design on the Strix Halo chip released in January 2025, succeeding the Polaris Mobile lineage and belonging to the Navi Mobile (RX 8000M) generation.

The pairing's tier is best read from the percentiles. Combined at the 80th percentile, it is an upper-tier laptop overall. The GPU's 89th percentile says the graphics capability approaches the top tenth of all GPUs in the database — remarkable for an integrated solution with a 55 W TDP and no power connectors. The CPU's 70th percentile says the processor is good-but-not-great, sitting in the same band as its sub-one-percent-distant rivals. The architecture of the pairing is therefore clear: a graphics-forward laptop where the iGPU is the star, the CPU is a competent supporting player, and the 89.6 GB/s shared DDR5 memory subsystem is the connective tissue that determines how much of the GPU's potential is realizable in any given workload. For users whose software runs on the GPU, this is a much stronger machine than its CPU suggests; for everyone else, it is precisely as strong as its CPU suggests.

Rate My PC: AMD Ryzen 3 8440U + AMD Radeon 8050S

Apex Performer

System Balance Analysis

AMD Ryzen 3 8440U

AMD Radeon 8050S

Market Position

Game Performance Benchmarks

Cyberpunk 2077

Red Dead Redemption 2

Microsoft Flight Simulator

Control

Call of Duty: Warzone

Fortnite

Performance Insights

Optimal Performance

4K Gaming Ready

Performance Tiers Explained

Ultimate

High-End

Mid-Range

Entry Level

Legacy

FAQ

GPU Analysis

Usage Scenarios

Balance and Bottleneck

Who Should Build It

Gaming Performance

Benchmark Performance

Build Overview

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