SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: AMD Ryzen 5 8400F + AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT

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

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
86%
VS
GPU
93%
PROCESSOR

AMD Ryzen 5 8400F

25,005 Benchmark Score
Top 14% Market Ranking
View Full Specs →
GRAPHICS CARD

AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT

26,011 Benchmark Score
Top 7% 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 5 8400F and AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT form a desktop pairing that lands in the upper-midrange of the benchmark database. The CPU, built on the Zen 4 architecture, and the GPU, based on RDNA 2.0, combine for a combined percentile of 74, placing this build ahead of roughly three-quarters of all recorded configurations. The measured data shows a system that is well-balanced for 1080p and 1440p gaming, with a clear performance ceiling that emerges at higher resolutions and in multi-threaded professional workloads.

Balance and Bottleneck

Analysis of the benchmark data reveals a system where the graphics card is typically the primary limiting factor in modern gaming, particularly as resolution increases. The CPU’s single-thread score of 951 in 3dmark places it in a strong position for gaming, and its performance does not appear to be a significant constraint at 1080p. For instance, in Counter-Strike 2, the build achieves 195 FPS at 1920x1080, but this drops to 129 FPS at 2560x1440 and 72 FPS at 3840x2160, a scaling pattern that points to GPU limitation. The GPU’s average benchmark score of 26011 and its 71st percentile ranking support this, indicating it is a competent but not top-tier part.

The CPU’s multi-threaded performance, with a 3dmark max threads score of 6165, shows it can feed the GPU adequately in most scenarios. However, in lighter titles like Valorant, the CPU’s ceiling becomes apparent. The build hits 448 FPS at 1080p, but this only scales to 382 FPS at 1440p, suggesting that at such high frame rates, the CPU’s single-thread performance is the limiting factor. Conversely, in a heavy title like Cyberpunk 2077, where the build manages 58 FPS at 1080p, the GPU is clearly the bottleneck, as the frame rate drops to 43 FPS at 1440p and 28 FPS at 4K.

The balance shifts when considering the CPU’s 77th percentile versus the GPU’s 71st percentile. The CPU is relatively stronger than the GPU, meaning that in CPU-bound scenarios, the system will not be fully utilizing the graphics card. This is observable in esports titles where frame rates are extremely high. The average FPS across all measured games is 127, which indicates a capable gaming machine, but the data also shows that the GPU will be the first component to struggle if the user pushes for higher resolutions or maximum settings in demanding games.

Benchmark Performance

The Ryzen 5 8400F delivers a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 20851 and a single-core score of 2943. These figures place the CPU at the 77th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 25005. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F, scores 24964, representing a negligible 0.2% difference, confirming that these two chips are essentially peer performers. The Intel Core i7-13620H is also close, with a score of 24911, or 0.4% behind. The data shows the 8400F is not a performance outlier but rather a solid mid-pack processor.

The GPU, the Radeon RX 6750 XT, achieves an average benchmark score of 26011, placing it at the 71st percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are notably older or mobile parts. The AMD Radeon R9 M395X scores 25891, just 0.5% lower, and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile scores 25740, which is 1.1% lower. This positions the RX 6750 XT as a modern desktop card that outperforms some older high-end and recent mobile solutions, but it is not in the same league as current top-tier desktop GPUs.

The combined picture is one of consistency. The CPU’s percentile (77) is slightly higher than the GPU’s (71), creating a pairing where the processor has a small amount of headroom over the graphics card. In practical terms, this means the build will rarely be CPU-limited in GPU-intensive tasks, but the GPU will be the component that determines the maximum graphical settings and resolution the user can enjoy. The combined percentile for the build is 74, which is a useful single metric for comparing this configuration to others in the database.

CPU Analysis

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Zen 4 architecture, codenamed Phoenix. It has a base clock of 4.20 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz, with a 65 W TDP. The chip is manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC, containing 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die. This is a modern, power-efficient design that offers a substantial upgrade in instructions per clock over older AMD architectures.

In synthetic benchmarks, the CPU shows a clear scaling pattern from 2 threads to 8 threads. The 3dmark scores are 1874 for 2 threads, 3563 for 4 threads, and 5275 for 8 threads. This near-linear scaling indicates that the processor can effectively utilize its cores in multi-threaded workloads. The max threads score of 6165 is only slightly higher than the 8-thread score, which is typical for a 6-core part with 12 threads, as the software often cannot perfectly distribute work across all logical processors.

For real-world workloads, the Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 20851 is a strong indicator of productivity performance. This level of output is suitable for video editing and 3D rendering tasks, though it will not match the performance of higher-core-count CPUs. The single-core score of 2943 in Cinebench R23 demonstrates excellent responsiveness for everyday tasks and gaming. The PassMark single-thread score of 3685 reinforces this, showing that the Zen 4 architecture provides a robust foundation for applications that rely on single-thread performance. The CPU’s 77th percentile ranking means it is better than most, but it is not a flagship part.

Usage Scenarios

High-Refresh Gaming: This build is well-suited for 1080p high-refresh gaming. In esports titles, the data shows exceptional performance, with Valorant hitting 448 FPS and Counter-Strike: Global Offensive reaching 432.7 FPS at 1080p. Even more demanding competitive titles like Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six Siege achieve 232 FPS at 1080p. The CPU’s strong single-thread performance and the GPU’s capability ensure that these frame rates are consistently high.

Streaming: The 6-core, 12-thread CPU provides a reasonable foundation for streaming. The 3dmark max threads score of 6165 indicates that the CPU has enough parallel processing power to handle game encoding alongside gameplay, though users may need to rely on the GPU’s hardware encoders for the best results. The GPU’s compute score of 9550 in PassMark suggests it can assist with encoding tasks without severely impacting gaming performance.

Video Editing: The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 20851 indicates that this CPU can handle video editing projects, including 1080p and some 1440p timelines. The PassMark data encryption score of 16646 and floating point math score of 46217 show that the CPU is capable of handling the mathematical operations required for video processing. However, for very long 4K projects or complex effects, users might find the 6-core limit a constraint.

3D Rendering: The CPU’s multi-threaded capabilities are adequate for occasional 3D rendering. The Cinebench R20 multi-core score of 8757 and R15 multi-core score of 2101 show that the CPU can complete render tasks, but it will be slower than higher-core-count alternatives. The GPU’s 13.31 TFLOPS of FP32 performance provides a significant boost for GPU-accelerated renderers, making this a viable entry-level 3D workstation.

Software Development: The CPU’s single-thread performance, with a 3dmark single-thread score of 951, ensures snappy compilation of smaller projects and responsive IDE use. The PassMark integer math score of 74021 and data compression score of 288158 are strong indicators of performance for code compilation and data processing tasks. The 12 threads allow for parallel builds on larger projects, making this a competent development machine.

Student and Office Work: This build is far more powerful than necessary for standard office tasks. The single-thread performance ensures that document editing, web browsing, and spreadsheet work are instantaneous. The 12 GB of VRAM on the GPU is irrelevant for these tasks, but the overall system responsiveness will be excellent. The 65 W CPU TDP also means the system will not generate excessive heat or noise in a quiet office environment.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The Ryzen 5 8400F uses the AMD Socket AM5 platform, which is a current-generation socket. This provides a clear upgrade path to more powerful processors in the same family without requiring a motherboard change. The platform supports DDR5 memory with a dual-channel memory bus and a memory bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s. The CPU provides 20 PCIe Gen 4 lanes, which is sufficient for a modern graphics card and a fast NVMe SSD.

The GPU uses a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface, which is fully compatible with the CPU’s PCIe lanes. The suggested power supply for this build is 600 W, while the GPU has a 250 W TDP and the CPU has a 65 W TDP. This leaves a reasonable amount of headroom for other components, but it is not excessive. The GPU requires a 1x 6-pin and 1x 8-pin power connector, which are standard on most modern power supplies.

A sensible next upgrade for this system would be a higher-tier GPU. Since the CPU is at the 77th percentile and the GPU is at the 71st, the processor has more headroom to support a more powerful graphics card. The AM5 platform also allows for a future CPU upgrade, such as a higher-core-count Ryzen 7000 or 8000 series part, which would further improve multi-threaded performance for productivity tasks. The DDR5 memory support ensures that the platform will remain relevant for several years.

GPU Analysis

The AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT is based on the Navi 22 chip and the RDNA 2.0 architecture. It is manufactured on a 7 nm process at TSMC, with 17,200 million transistors on a 335 mm² die. The GPU has a base clock of 2150 MHz, a game clock of 2495 MHz, and a boost clock of 2600 MHz. It features 2560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operation units.

The memory subsystem is a key strength of this card. It has 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 432.0 GB/s. This is a substantial amount of VRAM for the card’s class, allowing it to handle high-resolution textures in modern games without running out of memory. The memory clock is 2250 MHz, or 18 Gbps effective.

For ray tracing, the GPU has 40 dedicated RT cores. The 3dmark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2548 indicates that the card can handle DirectX 12 Ultimate titles, which include ray tracing features. However, the performance in ray-traced titles will be moderate. The GPU’s FP32 performance of 13.31 TFLOPS is respectable, and its FP16 performance of 26.62 TFLOPS (2:1) is useful for certain compute tasks. The PassMark G3D score of 20700 and GPU compute score of 9550 show that the card is a solid performer for both gaming and general-purpose compute. The card’s pixel rate of 166.4 GPixel/s and texture rate of 416.0 GTexel/s are strong figures for its tier.

Who Should Build It

The primary audience for this build is a gamer targeting high-refresh 1080p or smooth 1440p gameplay. The data shows that most games run at 60 FPS or above at 2560x1440, with titles like Call of Duty: Warzone hitting 128 FPS and Counter-Strike 2 reaching 129 FPS. For 4K gaming, the build is less suitable, with many demanding titles dropping below 60 FPS, such as Cyberpunk 2077 at 28 FPS.

Content creators who work on video editing or 3D rendering as a secondary task will find this build capable. The CPU’s multi-core score and the GPU’s compute performance allow for reasonable render times, though they are not professional-grade. Software developers will appreciate the CPU’s strong single-thread performance and the platform’s DDR5 support.

Students and small business users who want a system that can handle both work and play will find this build to be a good fit. It provides excellent responsiveness for productivity applications and can handle gaming during off-hours. The 12 GB of VRAM is also beneficial for users who dabble in machine learning or other GPU-accelerated tasks, as it allows for larger datasets to be loaded into memory.

Build Overview

This is a desktop build, as indicated by the build class. It pairs a 6-core Zen 4 CPU with a 12 GB RDNA 2.0 GPU. The combined percentile of 74 places this system in the upper-midrange of all builds in the database. The CPU’s 77th percentile and the GPU’s 71st percentile show that this is a well-matched pair, with the CPU having a slight edge in relative performance.

The build is best described as a high-performance 1080p gaming machine that can also handle 1440p with high settings. Its average FPS across all measured games is 127, which is a strong figure. It is not a top-tier enthusiast build, but it is a very capable system for the majority of users. The AM5 platform provides a future upgrade path, making this a sensible long-term investment.

FAQ

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

A: The combined percentile for this build is 74, meaning it outperforms 74% of all recorded desktop configurations in the database.

Q: How does the Ryzen 5 8400F compare to its nearest rival, the Ryzen 5 7500F?

A: The Ryzen 5 8400F has an average benchmark score of 25005, which is 0.2% higher than the Ryzen 5 7500F's score of 24964. This difference is negligible, making them effectively equal in performance.

Q: What is the maximum memory bandwidth supported by the CPU?

A: The CPU supports dual-channel DDR5 memory with a maximum bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s.

Q: Does the RX 6750 XT support hardware ray tracing?

A: Yes, the GPU has 40 dedicated RT cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), which includes hardware-accelerated ray tracing features.

Q: What is the suggested power supply wattage for this build?

A: The suggested PSU wattage for this build is 600 W, based on the GPU's 250 W TDP and the CPU's 65 W TDP.

Q: Is this build suitable for 4K gaming?

A: The data shows that this build is generally not suitable for 4K gaming at high settings, as many demanding titles like Cyberpunk 2077 (28 FPS) and Red Dead Redemption 2 (26 FPS) fall below 30 FPS at 3840x2160.

Q: What is the CPU's socket type and does it allow for future upgrades?

A: The CPU uses the AMD Socket AM5, which is a current-generation platform. This allows for upgrades to other AM5 processors without changing the motherboard.

Gaming Performance

The measured FPS data, confirmed as measured, shows that this build is a strong performer at 1080p and 1440p, but struggles at 4K. At 1920x1080, the build excels in esports and lighter titles. Valorant leads with 448 FPS, followed by Counter-Strike: Global Offensive at 432.7 FPS, and Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six Siege at 232 FPS. Minecraft also performs well at 192 FPS.

At 2560x1440, the build remains very capable. Valorant still achieves 382 FPS, while Counter-Strike 2 hits 129 FPS and Call of Duty: Warzone reaches 128 FPS. More demanding titles like Cyberpunk 2077 drop to 43 FPS, and Red Dead Redemption 2 to 39 FPS, but these are still playable with some settings adjustments.

At 3840x2160, the GPU becomes the clear bottleneck. Valorant is still playable at 305 FPS, and Call of Duty: Warzone at 108 FPS, but many games fall below 60 FPS. Counter-Strike 2 drops to 72 FPS, Cyberpunk 2077 to 28 FPS, and Ark: Survival Ascended to a slideshow-like 9 FPS. The data shows that 4K gaming is only viable for less demanding or older titles. The average FPS across all measured games is 127, but this figure is heavily weighted by the high performance in esports titles.