SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: AMD Ryzen 5 5600G + NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation

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)

▼

92 Score

Top 8% Ranking

92 / 100

ULTIMATE READY

Apex Performer

Top 8% 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

85%

GPU

99%

PROCESSOR

AMD Ryzen 5 5600G

21,088 Benchmark Score

Top 15% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation

135,218 Benchmark Score

Top 1% 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

This pairing combines AMD’s 6-core Zen 3 desktop APU with NVIDIA’s professional Ada Lovelace workstation GPU. The data shows a system with a clear performance split: the CPU holds a 74th percentile rank among all processors, while the GPU sits at the 95th percentile among all graphics cards. No measured FPS rows exist for this exact combination in the FACT PACK, so all gaming discussion below is framed as estimates derived from the benchmark scores, not from direct testing. The combined percentile for the pairing is 85, indicating a desktop-class build where the graphics subsystem is the dominant performance driver.

GPU Analysis — VRAM, bandwidth, clocks, RT/tensor hardware, what the benchmark scores mean for rendering

The RTX 4000 Ada Generation is a workstation-class GPU built on the Ada Lovelace architecture, using the AD104 chip fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The die contains 35,800 million transistors across a 294 mm² area, yielding a transistor density of 121.8 million per mm². This is a substantial piece of silicon, and the specifications reflect its professional intent. The GPU features 20 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 160-bit bus, delivering 360.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Memory clocks run at 2250 MHz, with 18 Gbps effective data rate. The base clock is 1500 MHz, boosting to 2175 MHz. The memory configuration is notable for its capacity: 20 GB is a large pool for a single-slot card, suggesting workloads that require holding large datasets or scenes in VRAM.

The compute configuration is robust. There are 6144 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units. The RT cores number 48, and the tensor cores number 192. Pixel rate is 139.2 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 417.6 GTexel/s. Floating-point performance is rated at 26.73 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16 (at a 1:1 ratio), indicating that mixed-precision work does not incur a throughput penalty. The GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, making it fully current for modern graphics APIs. Display output is handled by four DisplayPort 1.4a connectors.

Benchmark results place this GPU in an elite tier. The Geekbench OpenCL score is 146593, and the Vulkan score is 123842. The average benchmark score is 135218, which puts it at the 95th percentile of all GPUs. Comparing to nearest rivals, the data shows a tight cluster at the top. The NVIDIA A10M scores 135230, a delta of 0% — essentially identical performance. The AMD Radeon PRO W6800 scores 135396, just 0.1% higher. The AMD Radeon Pro W6800X Duo scores 135774, 0.4% higher, and the AMD Radeon PRO V620 scores 136472, 0.9% higher. This means the RTX 4000 Ada Generation is statistically indistinguishable from its closest competitors in raw compute benchmarks, sitting in a performance band where fractional percentage differences separate the top workstation cards.

For rendering workloads, the implications are clear. The 20 GB VRAM capacity is a major asset for GPU-accelerated rendering, where scenes with high-resolution textures, complex geometry, and large lightmaps can exceed the memory capacity of consumer cards. The 360.0 GB/s bandwidth ensures data can feed the 6144 shading units without stalling. The 48 RT cores provide hardware acceleration for ray-traced rendering, and the 192 tensor cores support AI-accelerated denoising and upscaling techniques. The FP32 and FP16 throughput being identical at 26.73 TFLOPS is unusual and beneficial — many GPUs halve FP16 throughput, but this card maintains full rate, which accelerates workloads that use mixed precision. The 139.2 GPixel/s pixel rate and 417.6 GTexel/s texture rate indicate strong fill-rate capabilities for high-resolution rendering passes.

Gaming Performance

No measured FPS data exists for this CPU+GPU combination in the FACT PACK, so all frame rates discussed here are estimates based on the benchmark scores. The GPU’s average benchmark score of 135218 places it at the 95th percentile, which in gaming terms suggests it can handle modern titles at high settings. However, the RTX 4000 Ada Generation is a workstation card, not a consumer GeForce product, even though it shares the Ada Lovelace architecture and the 40-series designation. Its driver optimization and feature set are tuned for professional applications, which can sometimes reduce gaming performance compared to consumer counterparts with similar silicon.

The estimated gaming capability is strong but nuanced. At 1080p, the GPU’s 26.73 TFLOPS FP32 performance and 64 ROPs suggest it can push very high frame rates in most titles, likely exceeding 100 FPS on ultra settings in esports and lighter titles. At 1440p, the 360.0 GB/s bandwidth and 20 GB VRAM help maintain performance in memory-heavy scenes, with estimates in the 60-100 FPS range for demanding AAA games. At 4K, the 139.2 GPixel/s pixel rate becomes more relevant, and the card likely delivers 30-60 FPS in the most graphically intensive titles on ultra settings, with lower settings enabling higher rates. The 48 RT cores enable ray tracing, though the workstation driver stack may not extract the same gaming performance as a GeForce driver would.

The CPU side matters here. The Ryzen 5 5600G scores 872 in 3dmark_single_thread and 5455 in 3dmark_max_threads. These scores are moderate — the single-thread score is low compared to modern high-end CPUs, which can limit frame pacing in CPU-bound scenarios. At lower resolutions like 1080p, the CPU is more likely to become the limiting factor in frame rate, especially in titles with heavy physics or AI simulations. At 4K, the GPU becomes the bottleneck more often, making the CPU’s lower single-thread performance less impactful. Overall, the data suggests this pairing is better suited to 1440p and 4K gaming, where the GPU’s strengths are fully utilized and the CPU’s limitations are less exposed.

CPU Analysis — cores, clocks, architecture, what the benchmark scores mean for real workloads

The AMD Ryzen 5 5600G is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Zen 3 architecture, codenamed Cezanne. It runs on the AMD Socket AM4 platform and is manufactured on a 7 nm process at TSMC, with 10,700 million transistors on a 180 mm² die. Base clock is 3.90 GHz, boost clock is 4.40 GHz, and TDP is rated at 65 W. The cache hierarchy includes 64 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. Memory support is DDR4, dual-channel, with a bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s. It does not support ECC memory. PCIe support is Gen 3, with 16 lanes from the CPU. The integrated graphics are Radeon Vega 7, though this is largely irrelevant given the discrete RTX 4000 Ada GPU. The launch MSRP was $259. The multiplier is unlocked, allowing overclocking. Release date was April 12, 2021, and it remains in active production.

Benchmark scores show a processor that is competitive in its class but not a top-tier performer. In Cinebench R23, it scores 10551 multi-core and 1409 single-core. Geekbench scores are 8428 multi-core and 1801 single-core. 3DMark results range from 872 single-thread to 5451 for 16 threads and 5455 for max threads. PassMark scores include 19717 multi-thread, 3177 single-thread, 67344 integer math, 37830 floating-point math, 249302 data compression, 15247 data encryption, 17334 extended instructions, and 25354 random string sorting. The average benchmark score is 21088, placing the CPU at the 74th percentile of all processors.

Nearest rival comparisons show the 5600G sits in a dense cluster. The Intel Core i3-1220P scores 21066, just 0.1% lower. The Intel Core Ultra 7 256V scores 21112, 0.1% higher. The AMD Ryzen 5 7530U scores 21133, 0.2% higher. The Intel Core Ultra 7 155U scores 21174, 0.4% higher. These deltas are negligible, meaning the 5600G is essentially tied with these competitors in average benchmark performance. This is noteworthy because the 5600G is a 2021 desktop part, while its rivals include newer mobile processors. The data suggests that for multi-threaded workloads, the 5600G holds its own against much newer silicon.

For real workloads, the CPU’s profile is well-rounded. The PassMark integer math score of 67344 and floating-point score of 37830 indicate solid general-purpose compute. Data encryption at 15247 and extended instructions at 17334 show competent cryptographic and SIMD performance. The 16 MB L3 cache is modest by modern standards, but the Zen 3 architecture’s efficiency compensates. The 51.2 GB/s memory bandwidth is a limitation for memory-intensive tasks, but it is adequate for most productivity applications. The 65 W TDP is low, making this an efficient processor that is easy to cool in compact desktop builds. The 6-core/12-thread configuration is well-suited to multi-threaded productivity tasks like video editing, software compilation, and 3D rendering, though it will not match high-core-count workstation CPUs.

Balance and Bottleneck — which component limits which workload, using percentiles and FPS scaling as evidence

The performance asymmetry between the CPU and GPU is stark. The GPU sits at the 95th percentile, while the CPU sits at the 74th percentile. This 21-point gap indicates that in most workloads, the GPU is the far more capable component. The combined percentile of 85 reflects a system where the GPU boosts the overall performance tier above what the CPU alone would suggest.

In gaming, the bottleneck shifts with resolution. At 1080p, the CPU’s 3dmark_single_thread score of 872 and 3dmark_2_threads score of 1705 become increasingly relevant. Many games are single-thread or lightly-threaded, and the CPU’s modest single-thread performance will likely limit frame rates below what the GPU could theoretically deliver. The estimated FPS at 1080p would be constrained by the CPU in CPU-bound titles, potentially capping at lower rates than the GPU’s 26.73 TFLOPS suggests. At 1440p and 4K, the GPU’s pixel rate of 139.2 GPixel/s and bandwidth of 360.0 GB/s become the limiting factors, and the GPU is more fully utilized. The data implies that the system is well-balanced for 1440p gaming, where neither component is drastically over- or under-powered relative to the other.

In compute workloads, the situation is different. For GPU-accelerated rendering, the RTX 4000 Ada Generation is the clear workhorse, with its 6144 shading units and 48 RT cores providing massive parallel throughput. The CPU’s role is to feed the GPU with data, and its 51.2 GB/s memory bandwidth and 16 MB L3 cache are sufficient for this task in most scenarios. For CPU-bound workloads like software compilation or data compression, the CPU becomes the limiting factor. The PassMark data compression score of 249302 is strong, but the 6-core/12-thread configuration will still be slower than higher-core-count alternatives. The system’s overall performance in mixed workloads will be dictated by whichever component is tasked with the primary compute load.

Benchmark Performance — exact CPU and GPU scores, percentile positions, and what the combined picture is

The CPU’s average benchmark score is 21088, placing it at the 74th percentile of all CPUs. The GPU’s average benchmark score is 135218, placing it at the 95th percentile of all GPUs. The combined percentile of the pairing is 85. These numbers tell a consistent story: this is a system with a very strong GPU and a competent but not exceptional CPU.

In detail, the CPU’s Cinebench R23 scores of 10551 multi-core and 1409 single-core indicate a solid mainstream processor. The Geekbench scores of 8428 multi-core and 1801 single-core corroborate this. The 3DMark results show good scaling from 2 threads (1705) to 8 threads (4694) to 16 threads (5451), indicating that the 6-core/12-thread design efficiently utilizes additional threads. The PassMark multi-thread score of 19717 is respectable, and the single-thread score of 3177 is competitive for its era.

The GPU’s Geekbench OpenCL score of 146593 and Vulkan score of 123842 demonstrate strong compute performance across different APIs. The average score of 135218 places it in a dead heat with its nearest rivals — the NVIDIA A10M at 135230 (0% delta), the AMD Radeon PRO W6800 at 135396 (-0.1%), the AMD Radeon Pro W6800X Duo at 135774 (-0.4%), and the AMD Radeon PRO V620 at 136472 (-0.9%). This indicates that the RTX 4000 Ada Generation is firmly in the top tier of workstation GPUs, with no single competitor holding a meaningful advantage.

The combined picture is of a system that excels in GPU-bound tasks. For 3D rendering, video encoding, and GPU-accelerated compute, the 95th-percentile GPU will deliver outstanding performance. For CPU-bound tasks, the 74th-percentile CPU will deliver average-to-good performance. The combined 85th percentile suggests that in most real-world workloads, the system will perform in the upper tier of desktop machines, with the GPU carrying the performance load.

Who Should Build It

This pairing targets users whose workloads are heavily GPU-accelerated but who do not require top-tier CPU performance. The target audience includes 3D artists and animators working with GPU renderers that leverage the 20 GB VRAM and 48 RT cores. Video editors using GPU-accelerated effects and color grading will benefit from the 95th-percentile GPU performance. Data scientists and researchers running GPU-accelerated machine learning inference or simulation will find the 192 tensor cores valuable. The 6-core CPU is sufficient for driving these workloads without being a bottleneck in most cases.

Content creators who work at 1440p or 4K resolution will find the GPU’s capability well-matched to their needs. The estimated gaming performance at these resolutions is strong, and the workstation-class drivers provide stability for long rendering sessions. Software developers who compile code and run tests will appreciate the CPU’s 12 threads and moderate single-thread performance, though they may find the CPU limiting for very large builds. Students and small business users in engineering, architecture, or media production fields can use this system for both professional applications and occasional gaming. The 65 W CPU TDP and 130 W GPU TDP make this a relatively power-efficient build that does not require exotic cooling or a massive power supply.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: At 1080p, the CPU’s single-thread score of 872 may limit frame rates in CPU-bound titles, likely preventing consistent 144 Hz gameplay in demanding games. At 1440p, the GPU’s 95th-percentile performance suggests frame rates in the 60-144 Hz range for most titles on high settings, making this a viable high-refresh setup at that resolution.

Streaming: The CPU’s 6 cores and 12 threads provide enough headroom for software encoding at moderate bitrates, while the GPU’s 26.73 TFLOPS and 192 tensor cores can handle NVENC-style encoding if the workstation driver exposes it. The 74th-percentile CPU may struggle with simultaneous gaming and streaming at high quality settings, but the system is capable for a single-PC streaming setup.

Video editing: The GPU’s 20 GB VRAM and 417.6 GTexel/s texture rate are excellent for 4K timeline editing, effects, and color grading. The CPU’s Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 10551 is adequate for encoding and export tasks, though not exceptional. The system will handle 4K video editing with ease, with potential slowdowns only in very heavy multi-layer compositions.

3D rendering: This is the system’s sweet spot. The GPU’s 48 RT cores and 20 GB VRAM are ideal for ray-traced rendering, and the 26.73 TFLOPS FP32 performance ensures fast viewport and final-frame rendering. The CPU’s 10551 Cinebench R23 multi-core score is sufficient for scene preparation and CPU-based tasks, but the GPU will dominate render times.

Software development: The CPU’s 12 threads and PassMark integer math score of 67344 provide solid compilation throughput. The 51.2 GB/s memory bandwidth is adequate for most development workflows. The system will handle code editing, compilation, and testing without issues, though large parallel builds may take longer than on higher-core-count CPUs.

Student and office work: The CPU’s Geekbench single-core score of 1801 and multi-core score of 8428 are more than sufficient for office productivity, web browsing, and document creation. The GPU is overkill for these tasks, but the system will run them effortlessly. The 65 W CPU TDP and 130 W GPU TDP keep power consumption manageable for a workstation environment.

Build Overview

This is a desktop-class build pairing the AMD Ryzen 5 5600G with the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation. The CPU is a 6-core, 12-thread Zen 3 part on the AM4 socket, rated at 65 W TDP. The GPU is a single-slot workstation card with 20 GB GDDR6 memory, rated at 130 W TDP, with a suggested PSU of 300 W. The combined percentile of 85 places this build in the upper tier of desktop systems. The GPU’s 95th-percentile rank dominates the system’s performance profile, while the CPU’s 74th-percentile rank provides a solid but not leading foundation. This is not a balanced high-end gaming PC; it is a GPU-centric workstation with moderate CPU capability.

FAQ

Q: What is the combined performance percentile of this CPU and GPU pairing?

A: The combined percentile is 85, indicating the system performs in the upper tier of desktop builds.

Q: How does the RTX 4000 Ada Generation compare to its nearest GPU rival?

A: The GPU’s average benchmark score is 135218, while the closest rival, the NVIDIA A10M, scores 135230, a delta of 0%. The AMD Radeon PRO W6800 scores 135396, just 0.1% higher.

Q: What is the CPU’s multi-core performance in Cinebench R23?

A: The Ryzen 5 5600G scores 10551 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, and 1409 in single-core.

Q: How much VRAM does the GPU have and what is its memory bandwidth?

A: The GPU has 20 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 160-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 360.0 GB/s.

Q: Is ECC memory supported by the CPU?

A: No, the AMD Ryzen 5 5600G does not support ECC memory.

Q: What is the GPU’s FP32 performance in TFLOPS?

A: The RTX 4000 Ada Generation delivers 26.73 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, which is identical to its FP16 performance at a 1:1 ratio.

Q: What socket does the CPU use and what PCIe version does it support?

A: The CPU uses the AMD Socket AM4 and supports PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The CPU is on the AMD Socket AM4 platform, which supports DDR4 memory in dual-channel configuration. The CPU’s 65 W TDP and the GPU’s 130 W TDP combine for a total of 195 W, well below the suggested PSU requirement of 300 W. This leaves substantial headroom for additional components or overclocking. The CPU’s multiplier is unlocked, allowing for manual overclocking to extract more performance from the 3.90 GHz base and 4.40 GHz boost clocks. The platform uses PCIe Gen 3 for the CPU’s 16 lanes, while the GPU supports PCIe 4.0 x16 — the GPU will operate at PCIe Gen 3 speeds, which may slightly limit bandwidth in some workloads, though the 360.0 GB/s memory bandwidth is unaffected.

A sensible next upgrade path depends on the user’s priorities. For improved CPU performance, moving to a higher-core-count AM4 processor, such as a 12-core or 16-core Zen 3 part, would increase multi-threaded throughput without changing the motherboard or memory. The 74th-percentile CPU is the weaker link in this pairing, so a CPU upgrade would rebalance the system. For improved GPU performance, there is little room to grow — the RTX 4000 Ada Generation sits at the 95th percentile, and its nearest rivals are within 1% of its score. Upgrading the GPU would require moving to a higher-tier workstation card, but the data shows diminishing returns, as the current GPU is already in a statistical tie with the top competitors. Given the 300 W suggested PSU, there is ample power headroom for either upgrade path.

Rate My PC: AMD Ryzen 5 5600G + NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation

Apex Performer

System Balance Analysis

AMD Ryzen 5 5600G

NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation

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

GPU Analysis — VRAM, bandwidth, clocks, RT/tensor hardware, what the benchmark scores mean for rendering

Gaming Performance

CPU Analysis — cores, clocks, architecture, what the benchmark scores mean for real workloads

Balance and Bottleneck — which component limits which workload, using percentiles and FPS scaling as evidence

Benchmark Performance — exact CPU and GPU scores, percentile positions, and what the combined picture is

Who Should Build It

Usage Scenarios

Build Overview

FAQ

Upgrade Path and Platform

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