SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: AMD Ryzen 5 7520C + Intel Arc A350M

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)

▼

80 Score

Top 20% Ranking

80 / 100

HIGH-END

Power Build

Top 20% of systems. Excellent for 1440p Ultra or 4K High gaming.

1440p Ultra4K High

System Balance Analysis

CPU vs GPU performance ratio

CPU Bottleneck

CPU

68%

GPU

92%

Your CPU is limiting system performance. Consider upgrading to a faster processor to better utilize your GPU.

PROCESSOR

AMD Ryzen 5 7520C

2,127 Benchmark Score

Top 32% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

Intel Arc A350M

24,647 Benchmark Score

Top 8% 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

Strong Performance

Excellent for 1440p gaming. Most games will run at high/ultra settings smoothly.

Bottleneck Detected

CPU Bottleneck - Upgrading the weaker component will improve overall performance.

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 5 7520C and Intel Arc A350M form a laptop-class pairing that sits in the 58th percentile overall, a mid-range position that suggests a system built for balanced everyday and creative work rather than extreme performance. The data shows a CPU that trades blows with near-identical rivals and a GPU that punches above its apparent class, but the combination raises immediate questions about which component governs real-world tasks and where the ceiling truly lies.

Balance and Bottleneck

The performance relationship between the Ryzen 5 7520C and the Arc A350M is not a simple story of one component dominating the other. The CPU holds a 46th percentile rank among all processors, while the GPU reaches the 70th percentile among all graphics cards, indicating that the graphics solution is the stronger half of this pairing by a meaningful margin. This gap is substantial enough that demanding graphical workloads will likely be constrained by the GPU, but the CPU’s own modest standing means it is not a passive partner.

Looking at the CPU’s benchmark averages, a pattern of balanced but unspectacular compute emerges. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 7355 places it within striking distance of the Intel Core i7-1160G7, which averages 2124 across all tests compared to the Ryzen’s 2127, a delta of just 0.2%. This near-parity with a low-power mobile chip suggests the 7520C is firmly in the efficient, thin-and-light class. The single-core Cinebench R23 result of 1038 reinforces this, as it is a figure typical of a power-conscious design rather than a performance monster.

The GPU, however, tells a different story. With an average benchmark score of 24647, the Arc A350M sits within 0.4% of the AMD Radeon RX 590 and 0.5% of the NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile, both of which are considerably larger, higher-power parts. This implies that the A350M’s efficiency and modern architecture allow it to compete with older desktop-class GPUs, making it the clear performance leader in this system. For gaming, the balance tilts heavily toward the GPU being the limiting factor at higher resolutions and quality settings, while the CPU may become the constraint in lighter, CPU-bound titles or at lower settings where frame rates climb high enough to expose its single-thread limits.

The FPS data for this exact combination is not measured, so all frame rate discussions are estimates based on the benchmark scores. The data strongly suggests that a user pushing ultra settings at 1080p will find the GPU working at its maximum, with the CPU providing adequate but unremarkable support. Conversely, in esports titles with low graphical demands, the CPU’s 46th percentile ranking will likely cap the achievable frame rates before the GPU reaches its own limit.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: The Arc A350M’s 70th percentile GPU rank and proximity to the RX 590 suggest it can handle 1080p gaming at moderate to high settings, but the lack of measured FPS data means figures are estimates. The CPU’s 1038 single-core score in Cinebench R23 indicates it can keep up with the GPU in most titles, but 144Hz or higher refresh rates may be out of reach in demanding games.

Streaming: The CPU’s 8 threads and Zen 2 architecture provide a baseline for encoding, but the 15W TDP and 4-core design will struggle with software encoding while gaming. The GPU’s modern Xe-HPG architecture with dedicated RT cores may offload some encoding work, but the lack of tensor cores and the modest 3.379 TFLOPS FP32 throughput limit its compute headroom for simultaneous streaming and gaming.

Video editing: The CPU’s Cinebench R23 multicore score of 7355 places it above the Atom C5125 by 0.3% but below the Ryzen 3 5300U by 0.4%, indicating it is a competent but not exceptional editor for 1080p timelines. The GPU’s 112.0 GB/s memory bandwidth and 4 GB VRAM will accelerate effects and rendering in GPU-accelerated applications, but large projects may exceed the VRAM capacity.

3D rendering: The GPU’s 768 shading units and 3.379 TFLOPS FP32 performance, combined with 6 RT cores, make it capable of entry-level 3D work in applications that support DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4. The CPU’s 4 cores and 8 threads will be the bottleneck in CPU-based renders, as its Cinebench R15 multicore score of 741 is a modest figure.

Software development: The CPU’s 46th percentile ranking and close match to the Intel Core i7-1160G7 (0.2% delta) indicate it can handle compilation and IDE workloads reasonably well. The 8 threads and dual-channel LPDDR5 memory with 88.0 GB/s bandwidth provide adequate multitasking, though large codebases will compile slower than on more powerful desktop parts.

Student and office work: This pairing is well-suited for everyday tasks. The CPU’s 435 Cinebench R20 single-core score and the GPU’s general-purpose compute via OpenCL (24546) and Vulkan (24747) scores ensure smooth web browsing, document editing, and light media consumption. The 4 GB VRAM and 112.0 GB/s bandwidth are more than sufficient for 2D interfaces and basic photo editing.

CPU Analysis

The AMD Ryzen 5 7520C is a 4-core, 8-thread processor based on the Zen 2 architecture, specifically the Mendocino codename, manufactured on TSMC’s 6 nm process. This is a mobile-focused design with a 15W TDP, a base clock of 2.80 GHz, and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. The 6 nm process node and 100 mm² die size indicate a chip built for efficiency over brute force, and the benchmark results reflect this.

In Cinebench R20, the CPU scores 3089 in multicore and 435 in single-core. The single-core score of 435 is particularly telling, as it is a low figure that places the chip firmly in the entry-level mobile segment. The multicore-to-single-core ratio suggests that the 8 threads provide a moderate scaling benefit, but the underlying cores are not powerful individually. This means that lightly-threaded applications, such as web browsing or office suites, will feel responsive but not exceptionally fast, while heavily-threaded workloads like video encoding will use all 8 threads but still finish slower than a 6-core or 8-core desktop chip.

The 4 MB shared L3 cache and 512 KB L2 per core are modest by modern standards, and the dual-channel LPDDR5 memory bus with 88.0 GB/s bandwidth is a clear indicator of a power-constrained design. The 7520C’s nearest rival, the Intel Core i7-1160G7, scores 2124 on average versus the Ryzen’s 2127, a 0.2% difference that is effectively a statistical tie. This means that for most real-world applications, the 7520C will perform identically to that Intel part, which is a useful reference point for understanding its capabilities.

The integrated Radeon 610M graphics are present but are not the primary GPU in this pairing. The CPU’s PCIe support is limited to Gen 3 with 4 lanes, which is a notable constraint for connecting to the discrete GPU, though the Arc A350M uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, meaning the CPU’s Gen 3 lanes will cap the bandwidth available to the GPU. This is a potential bottleneck that the benchmark scores alone cannot fully quantify.

Who Should Build It

This pairing is squarely aimed at users who need a laptop for a mix of everyday productivity and light-to-moderate creative work. The 58th combined percentile and the GPU’s 70th percentile rank indicate that it is a capable system for 1080p gaming, particularly for users who are willing to lower settings from ultra to high or medium. The CPU’s 46th percentile means it will handle office applications, web browsing, and programming without issue, but it will not excel at heavy multitasking or CPU-intensive workloads.

Gamers at 1080p with a preference for esports titles will find the GPU sufficient, as its proximity to the RX 590 (0.4% delta) suggests it can push high frame rates in less demanding games. Content creators working with short 1080p videos or basic photo editing will benefit from the GPU’s 4 GB VRAM and 112.0 GB/s bandwidth, but they should avoid projects that require large textures or long render times. Software developers writing and compiling small-to-medium codebases will appreciate the 8 threads and the CPU’s parity with the i7-1160G7, but they may find the 4 cores limiting for parallel builds.

Students and office workers will find this system more than adequate, as the CPU’s Cinebench R23 multicore score of 7355 is enough for document editing, spreadsheets, and remote desktop work. Small business workstations that need a compact, efficient design for data entry, email, and light database work will also be well-served. The key limitation is the 4-core CPU, which will be the bottleneck in any scenario that demands sustained multi-threaded performance.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The Ryzen 5 7520C uses the AMD Socket FT6, which is a laptop-specific BGA socket, meaning the CPU is soldered and cannot be upgraded. This is a critical constraint: what you buy is what you keep for the processor. The memory support is limited to LPDDR5, which is also typically soldered on mobile platforms, so there is no upgrade path for RAM capacity or speed beyond what is installed at purchase.

The GPU, being a mobile part, is also non-upgradeable. The Arc A350M uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, but the CPU only provides PCIe Gen 3 with 4 lanes, which means the GPU is already running at a bandwidth limitation. This is a permanent bottleneck that cannot be addressed. The CPU’s TDP is 15W, and the GPU’s TDP is 25W, for a combined thermal envelope of 40W, which is modest and suggests that the system’s power supply is likely sized for efficiency rather than headroom.

The suggested PSU is null in the data, which is common for laptop components, so any discussion of PSU headroom is qualitative. The practical upgrade path is therefore not internal but external: users can connect peripherals, external displays, or storage via the available ports, but the core compute platform is fixed. A sensible next upgrade would be a completely new laptop with a newer CPU and GPU, as there is no way to meaningfully improve this system’s performance without replacing it.

Gaming Performance

The FACT PACK contains no measured FPS data for this exact CPU and GPU combination, and the measuredFpsUltraByGame field is empty. Therefore, all frame rate figures are estimates derived from the benchmark scores, and they should be treated as indicative rather than precise. The GPU’s average benchmark score of 24647 places it in the 70th percentile, with a 0.8% lead over the Radeon RX 6600 XT and a 1.5% lead over the GeForce GTX 1630, which are useful reference points for expected gaming performance.

Given the GPU’s proximity to the RX 590 (0.4% delta) and the RTX A5000 Mobile (0.5% delta), this system is likely capable of running most modern games at 1080p with medium to high settings, targeting 40-60 FPS in AAA titles. Esports titles like CS:GO or Valorant, which are less GPU-intensive, could see higher frame rates, potentially exceeding 100 FPS, but the CPU’s 1038 single-core Cinebench R23 score will be the limiting factor here. The 4 GB VRAM is sufficient for 1080p textures, but it will be a constraint at 1440p or with high-resolution texture packs.

The GPU’s 6 RT cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate support mean that ray-traced effects are possible, but at a significant performance cost given the 3.379 TFLOPS FP32 throughput. Users should expect to enable RT only in lighter titles or at lower resolutions. Overall, this is a 1080p gaming system that prioritizes efficiency and portability over raw frame rates.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU’s benchmark results show a consistent pattern across Cinebench versions. In Cinebench R15, it scores 741 in multicore and 104 in single-core. In R20, the scores are 3089 and 435, respectively. In R23, the multicore score is 7355 and the single-core is 1038. These numbers indicate that the multicore performance scales well with the number of threads, but the absolute values are low, placing the CPU in the 46th percentile among all CPUs. Its average benchmark score is 2127, which is nearly identical to the Intel Core i7-1160G7 (2124, 0.2% delta) and the Intel Atom C5125 (2122, 0.3% delta), suggesting that the 7520C is essentially interchangeable with these parts in most workloads.

The GPU’s benchmark performance is more impressive. It scores 24546 in Geekbench OpenCL and 24747 in Geekbench Vulkan, with an average of 24647, placing it in the 70th percentile among all GPUs. This is a strong showing for a mobile part, as it edges out the Radeon RX 590 by 0.4% and the RX 6600 XT by 0.8%, while trailing the RTX A5000 Mobile by just 0.5%. The combined picture is a system where the GPU is the star, delivering desktop-class compute performance in a 25W package, while the CPU provides just enough support to avoid being a complete bottleneck in gaming but falls short in CPU-heavy tasks.

The combined percentile of 58 reflects this imbalance: the system is better than average overall, but the CPU drags it down from what the GPU alone could achieve. For a user prioritizing graphics performance in a thin-and-light laptop, this pairing makes sense; for one needing strong CPU compute, it does not.

FAQ

Q: What is the processor in this system and what are its core and thread counts?

A: The CPU is an AMD Ryzen 5 7520C with 4 cores and 8 threads, based on the Zen 2 architecture.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rival in benchmark scores?

A: The Ryzen 5 7520C has an average benchmark score of 2127, which is 0.2% higher than the Intel Core i7-1160G7’s 2124, making them statistically tied.

Q: What is the GPU’s memory configuration and bandwidth?

A: The Intel Arc A350M has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, with 112.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Does the CPU support ECC memory?

A: No, the Ryzen 5 7520C does not support ECC memory.

Q: What is the GPU’s percentile rank among all GPUs?

A: The Arc A350M is in the 70th percentile, with an average benchmark score of 24647.

Q: Is the CPU overclockable?

A: No, the multiplier is locked, so the CPU cannot be overclocked.

Q: What is the CPU’s TDP and process node?

A: The CPU has a 15W TDP and is manufactured on TSMC’s 6 nm process.

GPU Analysis

The Intel Arc A350M is based on the Xe-HPG architecture, specifically the DG2-128 chip, fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC with 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die. It features 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 24 raster output units, along with 6 dedicated ray tracing cores. The memory subsystem consists of 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, running at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) for a total bandwidth of 112.0 GB/s.

The clock speeds are a base of 1150 MHz and a boost of 2200 MHz, which are aggressive for a 25W TDP part. This high boost clock, combined with the modern architecture, explains its strong benchmark showing. The GPU’s FP32 throughput is 3.379 TFLOPS, and its FP16 performance is 6.758 TFLOPS (2:1). The pixel rate is 52.80 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 105.6 GTexel/s. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, making it feature-complete for modern games.

The benchmark scores reinforce the GPU’s capability. A Geekbench OpenCL score of 24546 and a Vulkan score of 24747 place it in the 70th percentile, with its nearest rival being the AMD Radeon RX 590 at 24744 (0.4% delta). This is a remarkable result for a mobile GPU, as the RX 590 is a desktop card with a much higher power draw. The 6 RT cores enable ray tracing, but the modest 3.379 TFLOPS FP32 means that RT workloads will be heavy. The 4 GB VRAM is the primary limitation for modern games at high resolutions, but for 1080p gaming, it is adequate.

Build Overview

This build pairs the AMD Ryzen 5 7520C with the Intel Arc A350M in a laptop form factor, as indicated by the buildClass of "laptop". The combined percentile of 58 places this system in the mid-range tier of all possible configurations, meaning it is better than the average laptop but not a high-end performer. The CPU is a 4-core, 8-thread Zen 2 part designed for efficiency, with a 46th percentile rank, while the GPU is a 70th percentile mobile part that delivers desktop-class graphics performance.

The pairing is a study in contrasts: a CPU that is average at best, and a GPU that is well above average. This makes the system ideal for users who value graphics and multimedia performance over CPU-intensive tasks. The 15W CPU and 25W GPU combined thermal envelope of 40W is a clear sign of a thin-and-light design, prioritizing battery life and portability over raw speed. The lack of measured FPS data means that gaming performance is an estimate, but based on the GPU’s benchmark scores, it is a competent 1080p gaming machine. For a laptop, this is a balanced configuration that will satisfy casual gamers and students, but it will frustrate power users who need heavy multi-threaded compute. The overall tier is mid-range, and the system is best viewed as a well-rounded multimedia laptop rather than a specialist tool.

Rate My PC: AMD Ryzen 5 7520C + Intel Arc A350M

Power Build

System Balance Analysis

AMD Ryzen 5 7520C

Intel Arc A350M

Market Position

Game Performance Benchmarks

Cyberpunk 2077

Red Dead Redemption 2

Microsoft Flight Simulator

Control

Call of Duty: Warzone

Fortnite

Performance Insights

Strong Performance

Bottleneck Detected

Performance Tiers Explained

Ultimate

High-End

Mid-Range

Entry Level

Legacy

Balance and Bottleneck

Usage Scenarios

CPU Analysis

Who Should Build It

Upgrade Path and Platform

Gaming Performance

Benchmark Performance

FAQ

GPU Analysis

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