SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS + 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)

▼

88 Score

Top 12% Ranking

88 / 100

HIGH-END

Power Build

Top 12% of systems. Excellent for 1440p Ultra or 4K High gaming.

1440p Ultra4K High

System Balance Analysis

CPU vs GPU performance ratio

Well Balanced

CPU

84%

GPU

92%

PROCESSOR

AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS

19,047 Benchmark Score

Top 16% 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.

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

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

The Intel Arc A350M is a mobile graphics solution built on the Xe-HPG architecture, specifically the Alchemist generation from the Arc 3 series. It uses the DG2-128 chip manufactured on a 6 nm process at TSMC, containing 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die. The GPU has 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 24 raster operation pipelines. For ray tracing, it includes 6 dedicated RT cores, while tensor core data is not listed in the specification pack.

Clock behavior is straightforward: the base clock runs at 1150 MHz with a boost clock of 2200 MHz. Memory operates at 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective data rate. The frame buffer consists of 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, yielding a memory bandwidth of 112.0 GB/s. Notably, the memory bus is narrow, which places a constraint on bandwidth-sensitive workloads. The pixel rate is 52.80 GPixel/s and the texture rate is 105.6 GTexel/s. Compute throughput is rated at 3.379 TFLOPS for FP32 and 6.758 TFLOPS for FP16 with a 2:1 ratio.

The card supports PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Display outputs are listed as portable device dependent, reflecting its laptop-oriented design. The GPU has a 25 W TDP and occupies an IGP slot width, indicating an integrated-style form factor suited for thin notebooks.

Benchmark data shows a Geekbench OpenCL score of 24546 and a Vulkan score of 24747. The average benchmark score is 24647, placing the A350M at the 70th percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 590 at 24744 (0.4% ahead), the NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile at 24763 (0.5% ahead), and the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT at 24442 (0.8% behind). The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 trails at 24277 with a 1.5% gap. These deltas are small, meaning the A350M sits in a tightly contested performance tier.

For rendering workloads, the FP32 throughput of 3.379 TFLOPS and the 6 RT cores provide entry-level ray tracing capabilities. However, the 4 GB VRAM and 112.0 GB/s bandwidth will limit texture-heavy scenes and high-resolution rendering. The OpenCL score of 24546 suggests compute performance comparable to desktop GPUs from several generations ago, but the narrow memory bus will likely throttle sustained rendering tasks. The Vulkan score of 24747 indicates solid API-level optimization, which matters for modern game engines.

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

The AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS achieves an average benchmark score of 19047, placing it at the 73rd percentile among all CPUs. Its nearest rivals are tightly clustered: the Intel Core i5-12400F scores 19039 (0% delta), the Intel Core 3 201E scores 19056 (0% delta), the Intel Core i5-1335U scores 18982 (0.3% ahead), and the AMD EPYC 7773X scores 18979 (0.4% ahead). This places the 7535HS in a competitive mid-range mobile segment where performance differences are within a fraction of a percent.

The Intel Arc A350M, with an average benchmark score of 24647, sits at the 70th percentile among all GPUs. Its rival deltas range from -0.5% (NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile) to +1.5% (NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630), indicating the A350M is statistically indistinguishable from a group of established desktop and mobile parts.

The combined percentile for this CPU-GPU pairing is 72, reflecting a system that sits above the median but below top-tier hardware. The CPU’s 73rd percentile is marginally higher than the GPU’s 70th, suggesting the processor has a slight edge in relative standing. The average benchmark scores — 19047 for the CPU and 24647 for the GPU — indicate a balanced pairing where neither component dramatically outclasses the other in raw aggregate performance.

No measured FPS data exists for this exact combination; the fact pack contains no measuredFpsUltraByGame entries. Consequently, all frame rate discussions in this analysis are estimates derived from the benchmark scores and percentile positions, not from direct testing. The absence of measured data means the gaming performance figures presented later are projections based on the computational capabilities of the CPU and GPU.

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

The AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS is a 6-core, 12-thread mobile processor from the 7000 series, built on the Zen 3+ architecture with the Rembrandt-R codename. It is manufactured on a 6 nm process at TSMC, with a die size of 208 mm². The base clock is 3.30 GHz and the boost clock reaches 4.55 GHz, with a TDP of 35 W — a figure suited for thin-and-light laptops that still require multi-threaded capability.

The cache hierarchy consists of 64 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 16 MB shared L3. Memory support is DDR5 with a dual-channel bus, providing 76.8 GB/s of memory bandwidth. ECC memory is not supported. The CPU connects via PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes from the CPU only. Integrated graphics are provided by the Radeon 660M. The processor uses AMD Socket FP7, is not multiplier-unlocked, and was released on 2023-01-03. The production status is active.

Benchmark scores reveal the processor’s threading characteristics. The 3DMark single-thread score is 872, while the 2-thread score is 1684, 4-thread is 3164, 8-thread is 4537, and 16-thread is 5292. The max-threads score of 5285 is nearly identical to the 16-thread result, indicating that the 12 threads are fully utilized and scaling plateaus beyond that point. Cinebench R23 scores are 1445 for single-core and 8613 for multi-core, while Cinebench R15 shows 232 single-core and 1457 multi-core. Geekbench scores are 1654 single-core and 7354 multi-core.

PassMark results provide workload-specific insights. Integer math scores 62372, floating-point math scores 35540, and extended instructions score 15411. Data compression hits 221668, data encryption reaches 13656, and random string sorting scores 22781. Physics scores 844, and the multithread score is 17914. Single-thread performance is 3123 in PassMark. The average benchmark score of 19047 at the 73rd percentile places this CPU alongside the Intel Core i5-12400F and Core 3 201E, meaning it delivers desktop-class multi-threading in a 35 W mobile envelope.

For real workloads, the 12 threads and 16 MB L3 cache handle compilation tasks, data compression, and floating-point calculations competently. The single-thread score of 872 in 3DMark indicates adequate responsiveness for everyday applications, while the multi-thread scores suggest it can manage parallel workloads like video encoding or software builds without becoming the primary bottleneck.

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

The CPU’s 73rd percentile and the GPU’s 70th percentile are close, but the slight CPU advantage suggests the GPU is more likely to become the limiting factor in graphics-intensive tasks. The combined percentile of 72 reflects this near-parity. In gaming scenarios, the A350M’s 4 GB VRAM and 112.0 GB/s bandwidth will constrain texture quality and resolution, while the CPU’s 16 MB L3 and 76.8 GB/s memory bandwidth provide ample headroom for feeding the GPU.

For compute-heavy workloads like 3D rendering, the GPU’s 3.379 TFLOPS FP32 and 6 RT cores will be the gating factor, as the CPU’s Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 8613 suggests it can sustain high thread utilization without stalling. The CPU’s PassMark integer math score of 62372 indicates strong throughput for logical operations, which will not bottleneck the GPU’s pixel and texture rates.

Memory bandwidth is a potential imbalance point. The CPU’s 76.8 GB/s is actually lower than the GPU’s 112.0 GB/s, which is unusual. This means the CPU could become the limiting factor in scenarios where data must be transferred between system memory and VRAM, such as streaming textures or loading large assets. However, the CPU’s 12 threads ensure that background tasks do not starve the GPU of data.

In CPU-bound workloads — such as physics calculations with a PassMark physics score of 844, or data encryption at 13656 — the processor will dominate. The GPU’s role is minimal in these tasks. Conversely, in GPU-bound workloads like pixel shading, the A350M’s 52.80 GPixel/s rate will cap performance, and the CPU’s single-thread score of 872 in 3DMark will not compensate for the GPU’s limited rasterization throughput.

The FPS scaling evidence is absent due to no measured data, but the percentile proximity indicates that neither component will consistently bottleneck the other. Instead, the workload type determines the limiting factor: gaming leans on the GPU, while productivity leans on the CPU.

Gaming Performance — measured FPS by game and resolution from measuredFpsUltraByGame (or, if dataIsMeasured is false, frame expectations qualitatively from the benchmark scores and say the figures are estimates)

The fact pack contains no measuredFpsUltraByGame data for this CPU-GPU combination, and the dataIsMeasured flag is false. Therefore, all FPS figures in this section are estimates based on the benchmark scores and percentile positions, not direct measurements. No specific game titles or resolution-specific frame rates can be cited from the fact pack.

The GPU’s Vulkan score of 24747 and OpenCL score of 24546 suggest it can handle modern API-based games, but the 4 GB VRAM and 64-bit memory bus will limit ultra settings at 1080p. The A350M’s 70th percentile places it near the AMD Radeon RX 590, which historically delivers playable frame rates at 1080p medium-to-high settings in older titles, but struggles with newer AAA games at ultra.

The CPU’s single-thread score of 1445 in Cinebench R23 and 872 in 3DMark indicates it can drive frame generation without excessive stutter in most titles. The 12 threads provide headroom for background processes during gaming. However, the GPU’s 3.379 TFLOPS FP32 will be the ceiling for rasterization-heavy scenes. Ray tracing, supported by 6 RT cores, will likely require reduced resolutions or lower quality presets to maintain acceptable frame rates.

For competitive esports titles, the combination should deliver high refresh rates at 1080p with lowered settings. For demanding single-player games, ultra settings at 1080p will likely produce frame rates in the 30-60 FPS range, with 1440p reserved for older or less demanding titles. These are estimates derived from the benchmark scores, not measured outcomes.

Who Should Build It — target users and industries (gamers at specific resolutions, content creators, developers, students, small business workstations) tied strictly to the measured performance

The Ryzen 5 7535HS and Intel Arc A350M pairing suits users who need a balanced laptop for mixed workloads. The CPU’s 73rd percentile and the GPU’s 70th percentile indicate a system that handles both productivity and light gaming without excelling at either extreme.

Gamers at 1080p with medium settings will find the A350M’s performance adequate, given its proximity to the RX 590 and GTX 1630 in benchmark scores. Those seeking 1440p gaming will need to lower settings, as the 4 GB VRAM and 112.0 GB/s bandwidth will limit texture fidelity. Esports players targeting high refresh rates at 1080p can expect solid performance, as the CPU’s 12 threads prevent bottlenecking in lightly threaded titles.

Content creators working with video encoding or photo editing will benefit from the CPU’s Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 8613 and PassMark multithread score of 17914. The GPU’s OpenCL score of 24546 supports GPU-accelerated effects in editing software. Software developers compiling code will appreciate the 12 threads and 16 MB L3 cache, which handle parallel builds efficiently. Students and small business users performing office tasks, web browsing, and spreadsheet work will find the single-thread score of 3123 in PassMark more than sufficient.

The laptop form factor and 35 W CPU TDP make this pairing suitable for portable workstations where battery life and thermal management are priorities. Users who require heavy 3D rendering or AI workloads should look elsewhere, as the GPU’s 6 RT cores and 3.379 TFLOPS are entry-level.

FAQ

Q: What is the CPU’s percentile ranking among all processors?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS sits at the 73rd percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 19047.

Q: How much VRAM does the Intel Arc A350M have, and what is its memory bandwidth?

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

Q: What is the GPU’s average benchmark score and percentile?

A: The Intel Arc A350M has an average benchmark score of 24647, placing it at the 70th percentile among all GPUs.

Q: Does the CPU support ECC memory?

A: No, ECC memory is not supported by the Ryzen 5 7535HS.

Q: What is the combined percentile for this CPU-GPU pairing?

A: The combined percentile is 72, reflecting a balanced mid-range laptop configuration.

Q: What is the GPU’s ray tracing capability?

A: The A350M includes 6 dedicated RT cores, supporting ray tracing workloads, though performance is entry-level.

Q: Are there any measured FPS figures for this combination?

A: No, the fact pack contains no measured FPS data for this pairing; all gaming performance figures are estimates from benchmark scores.

Build Overview

This build pairs the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS with the Intel Arc A350M in a laptop class configuration. The CPU is a 6-core, 12-thread mobile processor from the 7000 series, built on Zen 3+ architecture with a 35 W TDP. The GPU is an Intel Arc A350M from the Alchemist generation, featuring 768 shading units and 6 RT cores with a 25 W TDP. The combined percentile of 72 places this system above the median but below high-end gaming rigs.

The CPU’s 73rd percentile and the GPU’s 70th percentile indicate a well-matched pair where neither component is drastically over- or under-powered relative to the other. The system is suited for general-purpose laptop use, including productivity, light content creation, and moderate gaming at 1080p. The 4 GB VRAM on the GPU is the primary limiting factor for modern games at high settings.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: The CPU’s 12 threads and the GPU’s 70th percentile support 1080p esports titles at high frame rates, though the 4 GB VRAM and 112.0 GB/s bandwidth will require medium settings for demanding titles.

Streaming: The Ryzen 5 7535HS’s multi-thread score of 17914 in PassMark allows simultaneous game encoding and gameplay, while the A350M’s OpenCL score of 24546 assists with video processing.

Video editing: The CPU’s Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 8613 handles timeline rendering, while the GPU’s 6.758 TFLOPS FP16 accelerates effects and transitions.

3D rendering: The GPU’s 3.379 TFLOPS FP32 and 6 RT cores provide entry-level ray tracing, but the 4 GB VRAM will limit scene complexity.

Software development: The CPU’s 16 MB L3 cache and 12 threads speed up compilation, with the PassMark integer math score of 62372 indicating strong logical processing.

Student and office work: The single-thread score of 3123 in PassMark ensures responsive web browsing and document editing, while the 35 W TDP supports all-day battery life.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The CPU uses AMD Socket FP7, which is a mobile platform with no user-accessible upgrade path. The GPU is integrated into the laptop chassis (IGP slot width), meaning it cannot be replaced. Memory support is DDR5 with dual-channel configuration, and the CPU provides 76.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The system uses PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes from the CPU, and the GPU connects via PCIe 4.0 x8.

The GPU has a 25 W TDP and the CPU has a 35 W TDP, with no suggested PSU listed — typical for a laptop where power delivery is fixed by the motherboard. A sensible next upgrade would involve moving to a higher-tier CPU or GPU in a new laptop, as the current pairing’s components are soldered and non-swappable. The GPU’s production status is end-of-life, indicating that this specific model is no longer being manufactured. The CPU remains in active production, but socket FP7 is not forward-compatible with newer AMD mobile platforms.

Rate My PC: AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS + Intel Arc A350M

Power Build

System Balance Analysis

AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS

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

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

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

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

Gaming Performance — measured FPS by game and resolution from measuredFpsUltraByGame (or, if dataIsMeasured is false, frame expectations qualitatively from the benchmark scores and say the figures are estimates)

Who Should Build It — target users and industries (gamers at specific resolutions, content creators, developers, students, small business workstations) tied strictly to the measured performance

FAQ

Build Overview

Usage Scenarios

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