SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: AMD Ryzen 5 7400 + AMD Radeon RX 7700

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

91 / 100
ULTIMATE READY

Apex Performer

Top 9% 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
93%
VS
GPU
89%
PROCESSOR

AMD Ryzen 5 7400

42,055 Benchmark Score
Top 7% Market Ranking
View Full Specs →
GRAPHICS CARD

AMD Radeon RX 7700

15,852 Benchmark Score
Top 11% 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

# AMD Ryzen 5 7400 + AMD Radeon RX 7700

This desktop pairing combines AMD's 6-core Zen 4 processor with a 16 GB RDNA 3 graphics card, targeting the mainstream performance segment. The CPU holds an 88th percentile rank among all processors, while the GPU sits at the 58th percentile among all graphics cards, placing the combined system at the 73rd percentile overall. Benchmark data indicates a balanced mid-range platform, though no measured frame-rate data exists for this exact CPU+GPU combination — all gaming performance figures discussed here are estimates derived from the individual component scores.

CPU Analysis

The AMD Ryzen 5 7400 is a 6-core, 12-thread desktop processor built on the Zen 4 architecture (Raphael codename) using TSMC's 5 nm process node. The chip integrates 6,570 million transistors on a 71 mm² die, with a base clock of 3.30 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. The 65 W TDP places it in the efficient mainstream class, and the unlocked multiplier allows overclocking headroom for users who want to push beyond stock speeds.

Cache configuration includes 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 16 MB shared L3 cache. This hierarchy supports the processor's Passmark multi-thread score of 21,712, which reflects solid parallel throughput for a 6-core part. The single-thread score of 3,248 indicates strong per-core performance, a hallmark of the Zen 4 architecture's IPC improvements over previous generations. Integer math performance reaches 64,733 in Passmark, while floating-point operations score 40,784 — the gap between these two figures is typical for architectures where integer workloads benefit from wider execution resources.

The processor's extended instructions score of 19,924 and data encryption score of 14,865 highlight its AVX-512 and cryptographic acceleration capabilities. Data compression achieves 261,749 in Passmark, a strong result that leverages the memory bandwidth and cache efficiency. Random string sorting scores 31,110, and prime number finding scores 79, reflecting the CPU's latency-sensitive integer performance. Physics simulation scores 1,150, which is modest but adequate for the processor's intended workloads.

The average benchmark score of 42,055 places the Ryzen 5 7400 in close competition with several notable rivals. It sits just 0.2% above the AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 8945HS (41,963) and 0.3% above the Intel Core i7-14700T (41,914). The Intel Core i7-12850HX trails by 0.7% (41,779), while the Intel Core i9-12900K leads by 0.7% (42,335). These deltas are within noise for most workloads, meaning the Ryzen 5 7400 effectively trades blows with these higher-tier parts in aggregate performance. Memory support includes dual-channel DDR5 with 83.2 GB/s bandwidth and ECC capability, plus 24 PCIe Gen 5 lanes from the CPU. Integrated Radeon Graphics provide basic display output, though the discrete GPU handles rendering duties.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU's Passmark multi-thread score of 21,712 and single-thread score of 3,248 combine to produce an average benchmark score of 42,055, ranking in the 88th percentile of all CPUs. This means the processor outperforms the vast majority of installed desktop and mobile chips, with nearest rivals including the Ryzen 9 PRO 8945HS (0.2% slower), Core i7-14700T (0.3% slower), and Core i9-12900K (0.7% faster). The data shows a processor that delivers near-flagship-level aggregate performance despite its mainstream 6-core configuration, largely due to strong per-core efficiency from the Zen 4 architecture.

On the GPU side, the Radeon RX 7700 achieves a Passmark G3D score of 20,974, ranking in the 58th percentile of all graphics cards. Its compute score of 10,963 in Passmark GPU Compute and 106,028 in Geekbench OpenCL demonstrate substantial parallel processing capability. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2,865 provides a modern DirectX 12 gaming metric, while legacy DirectX tests show 92 (DX10), 186 (DX11), 96 (DX12), and 261 (DX9) in Passmark. The G2D score of 1,206 reflects 2D interface performance. The average GPU benchmark score of 15,852 places it within 0.1% of the AMD Radeon R9 370X (15,862), 1.0% below the RX 9060 (16,014), 1.1% above the Pro W5500 (15,679), and 1.7% below the RTX 3060 Ti (16,129).

The combined picture shows a CPU that ranks significantly higher percentually than the GPU — 88th versus 58th — indicating the graphics card is the more limiting component for gaming workloads. The overall system percentile of 73 reflects this imbalance, with the CPU's strength compensating for the GPU's mid-pack positioning. For productivity tasks that rely heavily on processor throughput, this pairing will feel responsive; for GPU-bound workloads, the graphics card sets the ceiling.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: The GPU's 58th percentile ranking and 20,974 Passmark G3D score suggest 1080p high-refresh capability, though the CPU's 88th percentile ensures frame pacing won't be processor-limited in most titles. Estimated 144 Hz performance at 1080p is plausible for e-sports and moderately demanding games, while 1440p will likely settle into the 60-100 Hz range depending on title optimization.

Streaming: The CPU's 12 threads and 21,712 multi-thread score provide adequate headroom for software encoding alongside gaming, though the GPU's lack of dedicated tensor cores means hardware encoding falls to the Radeon media engine. The 16 GB VRAM on the GPU allows simultaneous game rendering and stream encoding buffers without capacity pressure.

Video editing: The 83.2 GB/s memory bandwidth and strong integer math score of 64,733 support timeline scrubbing and effect processing. The GPU's 25.18 TFLOPS FP32 and 624.1 GB/s bandwidth accelerate export rendering and GPU-accelerated effects, though the 58th GPU percentile means professional-grade timelines may feel less snappy than workstation-class cards.

3D rendering: The CPU's 40,784 floating-point score handles physics and simulation tasks, while the GPU's 25.18 TFLOPS FP32 and 25.18 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1) provide substantial compute throughput for render engines that leverage RDNA 3. The 16 GB VRAM accommodates moderately complex scenes without out-of-core spilling.

Software development: The 3,248 single-thread score and 19,924 extended instructions score accelerate compilation and code analysis. The 88th CPU percentile means build times will be competitive with higher-core-count parts, and the 65 W TDP keeps power draw manageable during long compile sessions.

Student and office work: The 3,248 single-thread score delivers snappy application launches and document editing, while the 21,712 multi-thread score handles multitasking across many browser tabs and office suites. The integrated Radeon Graphics provide a fallback if the discrete GPU fails, though the 58th GPU percentile is overkill for basic productivity.

FAQ

Q: How does the Ryzen 5 7400 compare to the Intel Core i9-12900K?

A: The Ryzen 5 7400 scores 42,055 on average, which is 0.7% lower than the Core i9-12900K's 42,335. This places them effectively in the same performance class, despite the Ryzen having only 6 cores versus the i9's higher core count, due to Zen 4's per-core efficiency.

Q: What is the GPU's nearest competitor in benchmark scores?

A: The Radeon RX 7700's average score of 15,852 is 1.7% below the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti (16,129) and 1.0% below the AMD Radeon RX 9060 (16,014). It also sits 1.1% above the Radeon Pro W5500 (15,679) and 0.1% above the R9 370X (15,862).

Q: Does the CPU support DDR4 memory?

A: No, the Ryzen 5 7400 supports only DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, providing 83.2 GB/s of bandwidth. This is the only memory type supported by the AMD Socket AM5 platform.

Q: What is the recommended power supply wattage for this GPU?

A: The suggested PSU for the Radeon RX 7700 is 550 W, with the GPU itself rated at 200 W TDP. The CPU's 65 W TDP means total system draw remains modest, so a quality 550 W unit provides adequate headroom.

Q: Is the GPU's ray tracing performance competitive?

A: The Radeon RX 7700 includes 40 ray accelerators (RT cores) and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). Its 58th percentile ranking among all GPUs suggests mid-pack ray tracing capability, but no specific RT benchmark scores are available in the data.

Q: What is the CPU's transistor count and process node?

A: The Ryzen 5 7400 contains 6,570 million transistors on a 71 mm² die, built on TSMC's 5 nm process. This density enables the 3.30 GHz base and 4.30 GHz boost clocks within a 65 W TDP envelope.

Q: Can this system handle 4K gaming?

A: Based on the GPU's 58th percentile and 16 GB VRAM, 4K gaming is possible but likely requires reduced settings or upscaling for demanding titles. The 20,974 Passmark G3D score indicates strong 1080p and decent 1440p performance, with 4K as a stretch target rather than a guarantee.

Who Should Build It

This pairing suits gamers targeting 1080p high-refresh or 1440p high-fidelity experiences, given the GPU's 58th percentile ranking and 16 GB VRAM capacity. The CPU's 88th percentile ensures these gaming workloads won't be processor-limited, making the system ideal for users who play a mix of e-sports and AAA titles across these resolutions. Content creators working with 1080p or 1440p video timelines will benefit from the CPU's 21,712 multi-thread score and the GPU's 25.18 TFLOPS FP32 compute for rendering and effects.

Software developers compiling large codebases will appreciate the 3,248 single-thread score and 19,924 extended instructions score, which accelerate build times and code analysis tools. The 12 threads handle parallel compilation tasks effectively, and the 65 W CPU TDP keeps workstation noise and heat manageable. Students and office workers who occasionally game or edit video will find the system overqualified for daily productivity but future-proof for demanding academic projects, such as 3D modeling or data analysis, where the GPU's 16 GB VRAM and 624.1 GB/s bandwidth prove valuable.

Small business workstations running virtualization, database queries, or financial modeling benefit from the CPU's 88th percentile and ECC memory support, while the GPU accelerates any CUDA-independent compute workloads. The 73rd overall system percentile indicates a balanced mid-range build that avoids the extremes of either component — not a budget compromise, but not a performance flagship either. Users who prioritize CPU-heavy tasks over raw graphics will find this pairing slightly CPU-forward, while gamers should ensure their target titles are not GPU-bound beyond the 58th percentile capability.

GPU Analysis

The AMD Radeon RX 7700 is built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture (Navi 32 chip, codename "Wheat Nas") using TSMC's 5 nm process, packing 28,100 million transistors on a 346 mm² die with a transistor density of 81.2 million per mm². The GPU operates at a base clock of 1900 MHz, a game clock of 2041 MHz, and a boost clock of 2459 MHz, with memory clocked at 2438 MHz (19.5 Gbps effective). This configuration delivers 25.18 TFLOPS FP32 performance and an equal 25.18 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1 ratio), making it a capable compute card for workloads that leverage RDNA 3's dual-issue FP32 units.

Memory capacity is 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, providing 624.1 GB/s of bandwidth. This is a generous allocation for the GPU's performance class, allowing high-resolution textures and large datasets without VRAM pressure. The 2560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, and 96 raster output pipelines produce a pixel rate of 236.1 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 393.4 GTexel/s. The 40 ray accelerators support hardware ray tracing, though the 58th percentile ranking suggests RT performance is adequate rather than exceptional.

The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2,865 indicates modern DirectX 12 gaming capability, while the Geekbench OpenCL score of 106,028 shows strong general-purpose compute throughput. Passmark G3D at 20,974 and GPU Compute at 10,963 provide additional performance markers, with the average benchmark score of 15,852 placing it in the mid-pack. The GPU's nearest rivals — including the RTX 3060 Ti at 1.7% higher and the RX 9060 at 1.0% higher — confirm it competes with previous-generation upper-midrange cards rather than current flagships. The 200 W TDP, dual-slot cooler, and 2x 8-pin power connectors require a 550 W suggested PSU. Display outputs include 1x HDMI 2.1a, 2x DisplayPort 2.1, and 1x USB Type-C, supporting modern high-refresh monitors. The PCIe 4.0 x16 bus interface is sufficient for this bandwidth class, and the card's 267 mm length fits most mid-tower cases.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The AMD Socket AM5 platform supports the Ryzen 5 7400 with up to 24 PCIe Gen 5 lanes from the CPU, providing high-bandwidth connectivity for next-generation storage and expansion cards. Memory support is limited to DDR5 in dual-channel configuration with 83.2 GB/s bandwidth and ECC capability, meaning upgrades require DDR5 modules rather than legacy DDR4. The CPU's 65 W TDP leaves substantial thermal headroom within AM5 socket specifications, allowing users to upgrade to higher-TDP Ryzen 7000 series processors without changing the motherboard or cooling solution.

The GPU's PCIe 4.0 x16 interface is backward-compatible with the CPU's PCIe Gen 5 lanes, so the graphics card will run at PCIe 4.0 speeds without bottleneck. The 550 W suggested PSU provides headroom for the 200 W GPU and 65 W CPU, but upgrading to a higher-power GPU would require a PSU bump. The 2x 8-pin power connectors are standard for this class, and the dual-slot cooler accommodates most ATX cases. A sensible next upgrade would be a higher-tier Radeon RX 7000 series GPU, given the CPU's 88th percentile can feed faster graphics cards without becoming the bottleneck. Alternatively, adding more DDR5 capacity or faster modules would improve memory bandwidth-sensitive workloads, though the current 83.2 GB/s is already competitive.

The platform's longevity is supported by the active production status of both components, with the CPU released in September 2025 and the GPU in the same month. The 5 nm process for both chips indicates a mature generation, and the AM5 socket is expected to support future Ryzen iterations, providing a clear upgrade path for CPU-only improvements. The 16 GB VRAM on the GPU is future-proof for several years of game releases, though 4K high-fidelity gaming may require a GPU upgrade sooner than a CPU one.

Build Overview

This desktop build pairs the AMD Ryzen 5 7400 (6-core, 12-thread Zen 4) with the AMD Radeon RX 7700 (16 GB RDNA 3), creating a mainstream performance platform with a combined percentile rank of 73. The CPU's 88th percentile among all processors and the GPU's 58th percentile among all graphics cards define a system that is CPU-forward in its performance profile — the processor is the stronger component relative to its peers. The 5 nm process for both chips underscores the platform's modern efficiency, with the CPU drawing 65 W and the GPU 200 W.

This pairing is best classified as an upper-midrange desktop configuration, capable of high-refresh 1080p gaming, solid 1440p performance, and productive multi-threaded workloads. The 73rd overall percentile places it above the majority of systems in the benchmark database, yet clearly below enthusiast-tier combinations that pair flagship CPUs with top-10 GPUs. The lack of measured FPS data means real-world gaming performance must be inferred from the component scores, but the CPU's strong single-thread and multi-thread results suggest no processor-side limitations for most gaming scenarios.

Balance and Bottleneck

The data reveals a clear performance imbalance: the CPU ranks 88th percentile while the GPU ranks 58th, a 30-point gap that indicates the graphics card is the primary bottleneck for gaming and GPU-accelerated workloads. The CPU's average score of 42,055 exceeds the GPU's average of 15,852 by a significant margin, meaning the processor can feed frames faster than the GPU can render them in most scenarios. For CPU-bound tasks like compilation, data compression (261,749 score), and integer math (64,733), the processor will perform at its full potential, while the GPU's 20,974 G3D score limits graphics throughput.

In gaming, this imbalance manifests as GPU-bound frame rates at higher resolutions, where the RX 7700's 58th percentile becomes the limiting factor. At 1080p with lower graphics settings, the CPU's 3,248 single-thread score may occasionally bottleneck in esports titles with very high frame rates. The FPS scaling between resolutions will show diminishing returns as the GPU saturates — estimated frame rates at 1080p will be higher than at 1440p, but the CPU's headroom means the drop will be attributable to GPU limits rather than processor stalls. For mixed workloads like streaming while gaming, the CPU's 12 threads provide adequate headroom to encode without stealing frames from the GPU, but the GPU's lack of dedicated tensor cores means any AI-accelerated features will rely on compute shaders, potentially reducing gaming performance further.

Gaming Performance

No measured FPS rows exist for this exact CPU+GPU combination, so all frame-rate figures below are estimates derived from the benchmark scores — the CPU's 88th percentile and the GPU's 58th percentile, along with the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2,865 and Passmark G3D score of 20,974. These estimates should be treated as approximations rather than verified results. At 1080p ultra settings, the system is likely capable of 100-144+ FPS in competitive titles like first-person shooters, given the CPU's strong single-thread performance and the GPU's mid-pack rasterization. At 1440p ultra, frame rates will likely drop to 60-100 FPS in demanding AAA titles, as the GPU's 58th percentile becomes the constraint.

At 4K ultra, the system will probably fall below 60 FPS in most modern games, with the 16 GB VRAM providing capacity but the 25.18 TFLOPS FP32 compute lacking the raw throughput for high-resolution rasterization. The GPU's 40 ray accelerators suggest playable ray tracing at 1080p with upscaling, but the 58th percentile ranking indicates RT performance will be modest. The CPU's 21,712 multi-thread score ensures background tasks won't cause frame drops, while the 3,248 single-thread score handles game logic efficiently. These estimates align with the GPU's nearest rivals — the RTX 3060 Ti is 1.7% faster on average, so users familiar with that card's gaming performance can expect the RX 7700 to be within a few percent in most titles, assuming driver parity. For the most accurate assessment, users should consult game-specific benchmarks from independent reviewers, as the absence of measured data for this pairing leaves room for title-specific variability.