SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: AMD Ryzen 5 8400F + Intel Arc A770

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

86%

GPU

97%

PROCESSOR

AMD Ryzen 5 8400F

25,005 Benchmark Score

Top 14% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

Intel Arc A770

68,809 Benchmark Score

Top 3% 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 8400F and Intel Arc A770 form a desktop pairing that sits in the 84th percentile of all builds in the database, with the CPU landing in the 77th percentile and the GPU reaching the 90th percentile. The combination targets a specific performance envelope: a six-core Zen 4 processor with a high-end Intel discrete GPU, producing a system that leans heavily on graphics throughput while maintaining solid multi-threaded compute. There are no measured FPS rows for this exact CPU+GPU combination in the FACT PACK, so all gaming frame rates discussed below are estimates derived from the individual benchmark scores of each component, not from direct testing.

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

The AMD Ryzen 5 8400F is a 6-core, 12-thread processor built on the Zen 4 architecture, codenamed Phoenix, manufactured on a 4 nm TSMC process. It operates with a base clock of 4.20 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz, drawing a 65 W TDP. The die contains 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² area, with a cache layout of 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. This is a desktop-class chip (buildClass confirms desktop), and it supports dual-channel DDR5 memory with a theoretical bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s, but no ECC. The CPU provides PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes from the processor itself, and it lacks integrated graphics, meaning the Arc A770 is mandatory for display output.

Benchmark results place this CPU firmly in the upper-middle tier of all processors. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score is 20851, which is a strong result for a 6-core part, while the single-core score of 2943 indicates excellent per-thread performance. The Passmark multi-thread score of 24389 and single-thread score of 3685 corroborate this balance. In 3DMark tests, the processor scores 6091 in the 16-thread test, 5275 in the 8-thread test, 3563 in the 4-thread test, and 951 in the single-thread test, showing that scaling from 2 to 16 threads is not perfectly linear — the jump from 2 threads (1874) to 4 threads (3563) adds about 90% performance, while from 8 to 16 threads (5275 to 6091) adds only about 15%, revealing diminishing returns past 8 threads.

Compared to its nearest rivals, the Ryzen 5 8400F is statistically tied with the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F, showing a deltaPct of only 0.2% in average score. It is also 0.3% ahead of the Intel Core i7-11850H and 0.4% ahead of the Intel Core i7-13620H, while trailing the AMD EPYC 9474F by 0.4%. These tiny margins mean that in real workloads, the 8400F is functionally equivalent to those competitors, with differences well within run-to-run variance. For actual work, the data suggests this CPU excels at tasks that use up to 8 threads efficiently, such as gaming with background tasks, compiling code, or 3D rendering in moderate scenes, but it will not match higher-core-count parts in heavily parallel workloads like video encoding or large-scale physics simulations.

The 4 nm process and Zen 4 architecture deliver strong single-thread performance, which is critical for gaming and legacy software. The Passmark integer math score of 74021 and floating-point math score of 46217 show that the CPU handles both integer-heavy (typical of game logic) and FP-heavy (scientific or rendering) workloads competently. Data compression (288158) and encryption (16646) scores are respectable, but the extended instructions score of 22175 and prime number finding score of 89 suggest that AVX-512 or similar extensions are present but not the primary strength. Overall, this CPU is a balanced mid-range performer that should not bottleneck the GPU in most scenarios, given its high single-thread scores.

FAQ

Q: What is the CPU's position relative to its closest rivals?

A: The Ryzen 5 8400F has an average benchmark score of 25005, which is 0.2% higher than the Ryzen 5 7500F (24964), 0.3% higher than the Intel Core i7-11850H (24935), 0.4% higher than the Intel Core i7-13620H (24911), and 0.4% lower than the AMD EPYC 9474F (25103). These deltas are negligible, indicating the 8400F sits in a crowded performance tier.

Q: Does the CPU support DDR5 memory and PCIe 5.0?

A: The CPU supports DDR5 memory with a dual-channel bus and 83.2 GB/s bandwidth. For PCIe, it provides Gen 4 with 20 lanes from the CPU itself, not Gen 5. The GPU uses a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface, so the CPU's lanes are sufficient for the Arc A770.

Q: What is the GPU's performance percentile compared to all GPUs?

A: The Intel Arc A770 is in the 90th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 68809. This places it well above the median, and its closest rivals include the NVIDIA CMP 90HX (0.3% faster), AMD Radeon Instinct MI25 (0.4% slower), AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 (1.5% slower), and NVIDIA Quadro P6000 (1.7% slower).

Q: What is the combined percentile of this CPU+GPU build?

A: The combined percentile for the Ryzen 5 8400F and Arc A770 is 84, meaning this build outperforms 84% of all configurations in the database. This is driven more by the GPU (90th percentile) than the CPU (77th percentile).

Q: How much VRAM does the Arc A770 have, and what is its bandwidth?

A: The GPU has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 512.0 GB/s. The memory clock is 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective speed. This is generous for a 2022-era GPU and supports high-resolution textures.

Q: Is the CPU overclockable?

A: Yes, the multiplier is unlocked, so the Ryzen 5 8400F can be overclocked. The base clock is 4.20 GHz and boost is 4.70 GHz, and the 65 W TDP suggests headroom for manual tuning, though the FACT PACK does not specify maximum achievable clocks.

Q: What is the production status of both components?

A: The CPU is listed as "Active" production, while the GPU is "End-of-life." The GPU's successor is Battlemage, and its predecessor is Xe Graphics. The CPU was released on 2024-03-31, and the GPU on 2022-10-11.

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

The combined percentile of 84 versus the CPU's 77th percentile and GPU's 90th percentile indicates that the GPU is the stronger component in this pairing. The CPU is not a weak link, but it sits below the GPU in relative performance, meaning that in GPU-bound workloads like high-resolution gaming, the Arc A770 will be the limiting factor. Conversely, in CPU-bound tasks like physics simulation or heavy multithreaded logic, the Ryzen 5 8400F will cap performance even though the GPU has headroom.

Evidence from benchmark scores supports this split. The CPU's 3DMark 16-thread score of 6091 and max-thread score of 6165 are nearly identical, suggesting that the 6-core/12-thread design saturates quickly; adding more threads beyond 12 does not help. The GPU's 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2969 and Geekbench OpenCL score of 109175 show strong compute throughput for graphics tasks. In a typical gaming scenario at 1080p or 1440p, the CPU's single-thread score of 951 (3DMark) and 3685 (Passmark) should drive frame generation adequately, but the GPU's 90th percentile means it can outpace the CPU at lower resolutions where draw calls and game logic dominate.

The FPS scaling story is qualitative because no measured FPS data exists. However, based on the percentile gap, one can infer that at 4K or with heavy ray tracing (32 RT cores on the GPU), the Arc A770 will be the bottleneck. At 1080p with high refresh rates, the CPU's 6-core/12-thread configuration and strong single-thread performance may become the limiting factor, especially in games that favor fewer, faster cores. The GPU's 16 GB VRAM and 512 GB/s bandwidth are ample for texture-heavy scenes, reducing the chance of memory-related bottlenecks, but the CPU's 16 MB L3 cache could cause some latency in data-heavy workloads. For mixed workloads like streaming while gaming, the CPU's 12 threads provide enough parallel capacity, but the GPU's lack of a dedicated hardware encoder for specific codecs (not specified in the FACT PACK) could shift load back to the CPU.

Upgrade Path and Platform — socket, memory support, PCIe, PSU headroom from suggestedPsu/tdp, what a sensible next upgrade looks like

The Ryzen 5 8400F uses AMD Socket AM5, which is the current mainstream platform for AMD. This socket supports DDR5 memory (dual-channel, 83.2 GB/s bandwidth), and the CPU provides PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes. The motherboard will need to match AM5 and DDR5, and the CPU's 65 W TDP means any decent AM5 board with adequate VRM cooling will suffice. The GPU uses PCIe 4.0 x16, which is fully compatible with the CPU's lanes, and the bus interface matches.

The GPU has a TDP of 225 W and the suggested PSU is 550 W, while the CPU's TDP is 65 W. This means a 550 W power supply is the minimum recommendation for the entire system, leaving room for the CPU, GPU, and other components. The GPU requires 1x 6-pin and 1x 8-pin power connectors, so the PSU must have those available. The CPU's low TDP is a positive for upgrade headroom: if a user later installs a higher-TDP CPU (e.g., a Ryzen 9), they would need a stronger PSU, but the 550 W suggestion is specifically for this pairing.

A sensible next upgrade depends on the user's goals. If GPU-bound, swapping the Arc A770 for a newer card (the successor is Battlemage, but no specs are given) would be straightforward, as the PCIe 4.0 x16 slot and 550 W PSU provide a baseline. If CPU-bound, upgrading to a higher-core AM5 part (like a Ryzen 7 or 9) would require a PSU upgrade if the TDP exceeds 65 W, but the socket and memory would remain compatible. The CPU's unlocked multiplier allows overclocking to gain performance without a new chip, though the FACT PACK does not specify thermal or power limits for such tuning. The GPU is end-of-life, so its replacement would be a more modern card, but the platform itself is forward-looking with AM5 and DDR5.

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

The CPU's average benchmark score is 25005, with a percentile of 77 among all CPUs. Key CPU scores include Cinebench R23 multi-core 20851 and single-core 2943, Cinebench R20 multi-core 8757 and single-core 1236, and Cinebench R15 multi-core 2101 and single-core 296. Passmark tests show multi-thread 24389, single-thread 3685, integer math 74021, floating-point math 46217, data compression 288158, and encryption 16646. 3DMark CPU tests: 16-thread 6091, 8-thread 5275, 4-thread 3563, 2-thread 1874, max-thread 6165, and single-thread 951. These numbers indicate a processor that is strong in single and moderate multi-thread workloads, with the 16-thread and max-thread scores nearly identical, confirming 12 threads is the ceiling.

The GPU's average benchmark score is 68809, with a percentile of 90 among all GPUs. Specific GPU scores: 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 2969, Geekbench OpenCL 109175, and Geekbench Vulkan 94284. The GPU is 0.3% slower than the NVIDIA CMP 90HX (69000), 0.4% faster than the AMD Radeon Instinct MI25 (68562), 1.5% slower than the AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 (69870), and 1.7% slower than the NVIDIA Quadro P6000 (69986). These deltas show the Arc A770 is competitive with professional and mining-class cards, but not top-tier consumer GPUs.

The combined percentile is 84, which is higher than the CPU alone but lower than the GPU alone, reflecting the CPU's relative weakness. The combined picture suggests a system that excels in graphics-intensive tasks (rendering, gaming at high resolutions) but is less impressive in pure CPU compute. The CPU's 77th percentile is respectable, but it is the lower bound of this pairing; the GPU's 90th percentile is the standout. For a user prioritizing GPU performance, this is a well-balanced build; for CPU-heavy workloads, the GPU would be underutilized.

Usage Scenarios — grounded in the scores: high-refresh gaming, streaming, video editing, 3D rendering, software development, student and office work. One short paragraph per scenario, citing the numbers that support the verdict

High-refresh gaming: The GPU's 90th percentile and 16 GB VRAM support high frame rates, but no measured FPS exists. The CPU's single-thread score of 2943 (Cinebench R23) and 951 (3DMark) should handle 1080p high-refresh, but the GPU's 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 2969 suggests it can push beyond 1440p. Expect 1440p to be the sweet spot, with 4K requiring settings reductions.

Streaming: The CPU's 12 threads and Passmark multi-thread score of 24389 provide enough headroom for encoding alongside gaming, but the GPU's lack of a specified dedicated encoder could offload to the CPU, which has a 65 W TDP. The data shows the CPU can handle multi-threaded tasks, but simultaneous gaming and streaming may stress the 6-core design.

Video editing: The GPU's 512 GB/s bandwidth and 16 GB VRAM accelerate timeline rendering and effects, while the CPU's Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 20851 handles export encoding. The combination is capable for 4K video editing, but the CPU's 12 threads may slow long renders compared to higher-core parts.

3D rendering: The GPU's 19.66 TFLOPS FP32 and 32 RT cores provide strong raster and ray-tracing performance, with a 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 2969. The CPU's 16 MB L3 and 12 threads support scene preparation, but the GPU will dominate the render time.

Software development: The CPU's integer math score of 74021 and multi-thread score of 24389 are solid for compiling code, and the 12 threads handle parallel builds. The GPU is less relevant here, so this is a CPU-bound scenario where the 77th percentile is adequate but not exceptional.

Student and office work: The CPU's single-thread score of 3685 (Passmark) and 2943 (Cinebench R23) handle everyday tasks smoothly, and the GPU is overkill but provides smooth display output. The 65 W CPU TDP and 225 W GPU TDP mean a modest power draw, suitable for a desktop workstation.

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

The Intel Arc A770 is built on the Xe-HPG architecture (Alchemist generation, Arc 7), using a DG2-512 chip on a 6 nm TSMC process. It has 4096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 128 ROPs, with 32 RT cores for ray tracing. The GPU lacks a specified tensor core count, but it supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The base clock is 2100 MHz, boost is 2400 MHz, and memory runs at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) on a 256-bit bus, providing 16 GB of GDDR6 with a bandwidth of 512.0 GB/s. The pixel rate is 307.2 GPixel/s, texture rate is 614.4 GTexel/s, and FP32 performance is 19.66 TFLOPS, with FP16 at 39.32 TFLOPS (2:1).

Benchmark scores show the GPU in the 90th percentile, with an average score of 68809. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2969 indicates strong DirectX 12 performance, while Geekbench OpenCL (109175) and Vulkan (94284) scores show excellent compute and cross-API compatibility. For rendering, the 16 GB VRAM is generous, allowing large textures and complex scenes without spillover, and the 512 GB/s bandwidth is sufficient for high-resolution frame buffers. The 32 RT cores provide hardware-accelerated ray tracing, which is a feature that supports modern games and DCC tools. The GPU's TDP is 225 W, requiring a 550 W PSU, and it uses a dual-slot cooler with 1x 6-pin and 1x 8-pin connectors. The GPU is end-of-life (released 2022-10-11), with its successor Battlemage, but the current performance is competitive with the NVIDIA CMP 90HX (0.3% faster) and AMD Radeon Instinct MI25 (0.4% slower), indicating that it holds its own in compute tasks.

The lack of measured FPS data means rendering performance must be inferred from these scores. The FP32 19.66 TFLOPS and 32 RT cores suggest that real-time rendering in engines like Unreal or Blender's Eevee will be strong, while the 16 GB VRAM is a boon for GPU-accelerated offline renderers. The Vulkan score of 94284 is particularly notable, as it indicates good performance in Vulkan-based renderers and games.

Build Overview — what this CPU+GPU pairing is, its class (desktop/laptop from buildClass), and overall tier from the percentiles

This is a desktop build (buildClass: "desktop") combining the AMD Ryzen 5 8400F and Intel Arc A770. The CPU is a 6-core/12-thread Zen 4 part with a 77th percentile ranking, and the GPU is a 16 GB Xe-HPG card with a 90th percentile ranking. The combined percentile is 84, placing this system above the majority of builds in the database. The pairing is characterized by a strong GPU relative to the CPU, making it a graphics-first system.

The CPU's 65 W TDP and the GPU's 225 W TDP mean the build is power-efficient for its performance class, with a suggested 550 W PSU. The platform is modern: AM5 socket, DDR5 memory, PCIe Gen 4, and the GPU uses PCIe 4.0 x16. The build is not top-tier but is well above mid-range, with the GPU providing high-end graphics capabilities and the CPU offering competent multi-threaded performance. The CPU's launch MSRP is $170, and the GPU's launch MSRP is 329 USD, but these are only mentioned as factual data points, not as value judgments. Overall, this is a balanced desktop system for users who prioritize gaming, rendering, or GPU compute over CPU-intensive tasks.

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

This build suits gamers targeting 1440p high-refresh or 4K at high settings, given the GPU's 90th percentile and 16 GB VRAM. The CPU's single-thread score of 2943 (Cinebench R23) ensures smooth frame pacing, but the GPU is the primary driver. Content creators in 3D rendering or video editing will benefit from the GPU's 19.66 TFLOPS FP32 and 512 GB/s bandwidth, while the CPU's 20851 (Cinebench R23 multi-core) handles secondary tasks. Software developers compiling code will find the CPU's integer math score of 74021 and 12 threads adequate, though not exceptional.

Students and office workers will see more than enough performance from the CPU's 3685 (Passmark single-thread) and 24389 (multi-thread) scores for everyday applications, and the GPU's display outputs (1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0) support multi-monitor setups. Small business workstations running CAD or simulation software can leverage the GPU's Vulkan compute (94284) and the CPU's floating-point math (46217). The build is not ideal for extreme multi-threaded workloads like large-scale data science, where the CPU's 12 threads would be a bottleneck, but for most single-user scenarios, this is a capable system.

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 measured FPS data for this CPU+GPU combination (measuredFpsUltraByGame is empty, and dataIsMeasured is false). Therefore, all gaming performance figures below are estimates based on the individual benchmark scores of the CPU and GPU, not direct measurements. The GPU's 90th percentile and 16 GB VRAM suggest strong performance at 1440p and 4K, while the CPU's 77th percentile and single-thread strength (Cinebench R23 single-core 2943) should prevent major bottlenecks at lower resolutions.

At 1080p ultra settings, the CPU's 3DMark single-thread score of 951 and 4-thread score of 3563 indicate it can drive high frame rates, but the GPU's 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 2969 suggests it will be the limiting factor in GPU-intensive scenes. Expect estimates of 100+ FPS in esports titles, but this is not verified. At 1440p, the GPU's 512 GB/s bandwidth and 16 GB VRAM handle high textures, and the CPU's 8-thread score of 5275 provides enough headroom; estimated frame rates would be lower than 1080p but still playable. At 4K, the GPU's 19.66 TFLOPS FP32 and 32 RT cores are taxed, and the CPU becomes less relevant; estimates suggest 30-60 FPS depending on the title, but again, these are unmeasured projections. Ray tracing performance would be moderate, given the 32 RT cores, but no specific FPS data exists to confirm. All figures here are estimates, and the absence of measured FPS means users should treat them as indicative ranges, not guarantees.

Rate My PC: AMD Ryzen 5 8400F + Intel Arc A770

Apex Performer

System Balance Analysis

AMD Ryzen 5 8400F

Intel Arc A770

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

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

FAQ

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

Upgrade Path and Platform — socket, memory support, PCIe, PSU headroom from suggestedPsu/tdp, what a sensible next upgrade looks like

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

Usage Scenarios — grounded in the scores: high-refresh gaming, streaming, video editing, 3D rendering, software development, student and office work. One short paragraph per scenario, citing the numbers that support the verdict

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

Build Overview — what this CPU+GPU pairing is, its class (desktop/laptop from buildClass), and overall tier from the percentiles

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

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)

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