SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: AMD Ryzen 7 5700U + 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

83%

GPU

92%

PROCESSOR

AMD Ryzen 7 5700U

18,176 Benchmark Score

Top 17% 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

The AMD Ryzen 7 5700U and Intel Arc A350M form a laptop-class pairing that sits in the 71st combined percentile of all builds, indicating a system positioned above the median for general productivity and light creative work, but not at the enthusiast tier. The CPU, a Zen 2 (Lucienne) part on TSMC’s 7 nm process, delivers eight cores and sixteen threads with a base clock of 1800 MHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz, while the GPU, an Intel Alchemist (Arc 3 Mobile) part on a 6 nm process, brings 768 shading units and 4 GB of GDDR6 memory. This is a mobile-focused combination where the 15 W TDP of the processor and 25 W TDP of the graphics chip dictate a power-conscious design, and the benchmark data reflects a system built for sustained multi-threaded work rather than raw gaming frame rates.

CPU Analysis

The Ryzen 7 5700U is an eight-core, sixteen-thread mobile processor based on the Zen 2 architecture, codenamed Lucienne, and manufactured by TSMC on a 7 nm process with 9,800 million transistors on a 156 mm² die. Its base clock of 1800 MHz and boost clock of 4.30 GHz are paired with a 15 W TDP, which is characteristic of a low-power ultraportable design. The cache hierarchy consists of 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a shared 8 MB of L3 cache, which is modest by desktop standards but adequate for the mobile segment. Memory support is limited to DDR4 on a dual-channel bus, providing a bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s, and the CPU exposes PCIe Gen 3 with 12 lanes.

In benchmark terms, the CPU’s average benchmark score of 18176 places it at the 72nd percentile of all CPUs, with its closest rivals being the Intel Core i7-1365U at 18177 (0% delta), the Intel Core i7-9700 at 18180 (0% delta), the AMD Ryzen 3 8300G at 18169 (0% delta), and the Intel Core 5 315 at 18188 (-0.1% delta). This indicates that the 5700U performs essentially identically to a modern low-power Intel part and a previous-generation desktop Core i7, which is a strong result for a 15 W mobile chip. The multi-threaded scores show a clear scaling pattern: 3DMark scores progress from 715 single-thread to 1345 at 2 threads, 2357 at 4 threads, 3685 at 8 threads, and 4331 at max threads, demonstrating that the eight-core design scales reasonably well with thread count, though the jump from 8 to 16 threads is modest (from 3685 to 4331), suggesting that simultaneous multi-threading provides only a marginal benefit in this synthetic workload.

Cinebench R23 results reinforce this picture: the multi-core score of 8650 is about 6.9 times the single-core score of 1258, which indicates efficient utilization of the eight cores. The Geekbench scores of 5323 multi-core and 1278 single-core align with the 3DMark and Cinebench data, showing a balanced design where single-thread performance is adequate for everyday tasks but not outstanding, while multi-thread performance is the CPU’s stronger suit. Passmark scores further detail the workload profile: integer math at 60037 and floating-point math at 33151 are strong, while find prime numbers at 29 and physics at 622 are notably lower, suggesting that the CPU excels at general arithmetic but is less optimized for specific scientific or physics simulation workloads. Data compression at 218853 and encryption at 12549 show that the CPU handles memory-intensive and cryptographic tasks competently, which is relevant for file archiving and secure communications.

Benchmark Performance

The combined CPU and GPU benchmark picture places this build at the 71st percentile overall, with the CPU at the 72nd percentile and the GPU at the 70th percentile. This near-parity in percentile positions indicates a balanced pairing where neither component is dramatically holding back the other in synthetic workloads. The CPU’s average benchmark score is 18176, while the GPU’s average benchmark score is 24647, with the GPU’s scores coming from Geekbench OpenCL at 24546 and Geekbench Vulkan at 24747. The GPU’s nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 590 at 24744 (-0.4% delta), the NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile at 24763 (-0.5% delta), the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT at 24442 (0.8% delta), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 at 24277 (1.5% delta). This places the Arc A350M in a peculiar position: it is roughly on par with a desktop RX 590, which is a much larger and more power-hungry card, but it also sits close to mobile workstation GPUs like the RTX A5000 Mobile, highlighting that the Arc A350M’s 25 W TDP delivers compute efficiency that belies its size.

For the CPU, the 3DMark 16-thread score of 4330 and max-thread score of 4331 are nearly identical, indicating that the CPU is fully saturated at 16 threads and that the 8-core/16-thread configuration is the ceiling for this design. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 8650 is a useful reference for real-world rendering: this level of performance is roughly half of what a modern desktop 8-core CPU might achieve, but for a laptop at 15 W, it is competitive with Intel’s low-power offerings, as evidenced by the 0% delta to the Core i7-1365U. The Geekbench multi-core score of 5323 similarly shows that this CPU is in the same class as the Core i7-9700, a desktop part from 2018, which confirms the efficiency of the Zen 2 architecture in a mobile envelope. The combined picture is a system that can handle multi-threaded productivity tasks like video encoding or software compilation with reasonable speed, but it will not break records in single-threaded latency-sensitive workloads.

Usage Scenarios

For high-refresh gaming, the data suggests this pairing is not ideal. The GPU’s 70th percentile position and its 4 GB VRAM capacity indicate that it can handle esports titles at lower settings, but the lack of measured FPS data for this combination means any specific frame rate expectations are estimates. The CPU’s single-thread score of 715 in 3DMark is moderate, which may limit performance in games that are heavily dependent on single-core speed, but the 8-core configuration provides headroom for background tasks.

Streaming is a more viable scenario. The CPU’s 16 threads and Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 8650 suggest that it can handle x264 encoding at moderate presets while simultaneously running a game, though the GPU’s lack of dedicated encoder data in the fact pack means reliance on the CPU for streaming duties is the primary path. The Passmark data compression score of 218853 indicates strong memory throughput, which is beneficial for streaming workloads that involve significant data movement.

Video editing in applications like Premiere Pro or DaVinci Resolve would benefit from the CPU’s multi-threaded performance, with Cinebench R23 multi-core at 8650 providing a baseline for export times. The GPU’s 3.379 TFLOPS FP32 performance and 112 GB/s memory bandwidth can accelerate effects and timeline rendering, but the 4 GB VRAM may be a limiting factor for large projects or 4K footage. For 3D rendering in Blender or similar, the CPU’s 16 threads will handle CPU-based rendering, while the GPU’s Vulkan score of 24747 suggests it can contribute to GPU-accelerated rendering, though its modest compute resources (768 shading units) mean it will not be a primary renderer.

Software development is a strong use case for this CPU. The Geekbench multi-core score of 5323 and Passmark integer math score of 60037 indicate that compilation tasks, which are often multi-threaded, will perform adequately. The 8 MB L3 cache is sufficient for most codebases, and the 15 W TDP means the laptop can sustain long builds without thermal throttling, which is a common issue in high-power mobile CPUs.

For student and office work, this system is more than sufficient. The CPU’s single-thread performance (Geekbench 1278, Cinebench R23 single-core 1258) handles web browsing, document editing, and spreadsheet calculations smoothly. The integrated Radeon Graphics 512SP in the CPU provides a fallback for display output, though the discrete Arc A350M will handle any graphics-accelerated tasks. The 72nd CPU percentile and 70th GPU percentile mean this system is above average for general productivity, making it a reliable choice for coursework and office applications.

Who Should Build It

This pairing is targeted at users who need a laptop for multi-threaded productivity but are not primarily focused on gaming. The CPU’s 72nd percentile and the GPU’s 70th percentile indicate a balanced system for content creators who work with video, photos, or code. Gamers at 1080p with low-to-medium settings will find the Arc A350M capable of running esports titles, but the 4 GB VRAM and 64-bit memory bus (112 GB/s bandwidth) will struggle with modern AAA games at high details. Content creators working with 1080p video or moderate 3D scenes will benefit from the CPU’s 16 threads and the GPU’s compute capabilities, where the Geekbench OpenCL score of 24546 indicates solid acceleration in GPU-accelerated filters and effects.

Software developers, particularly those working on multi-threaded applications or building large codebases, will appreciate the CPU’s Passmark integer math score of 60037 and the 16 threads available. The 15 W TDP ensures that the laptop remains cool and quiet during long compilation sessions, which is a significant advantage over higher-power CPUs that may throttle. Students and small business workstations will find this system more than adequate for all typical office tasks, with the CPU’s single-thread performance (Geekbench 1278) handling everyday applications with ease, and the GPU providing enough power for presentations, light photo editing, or occasional video playback. The lack of a launch MSRP in the data means pricing cannot be discussed, but the component class (laptop) and power envelope suggest a mid-range ultraportable or thin-and-light design.

Gaming Performance

No measured FPS rows exist for this exact CPU+GPU combination; the FACT PACK contains no measured FPS data. Therefore, all frame rate expectations are estimates derived from the benchmark scores. The GPU’s average benchmark score of 24647 places it at the 70th percentile, which is comparable to a desktop RX 590 (delta -0.4%) or a GTX 1630 (delta 1.5%). For 1080p gaming, this suggests that the Arc A350M can achieve playable frame rates (30-60 FPS) in esports titles like Counter-Strike or League of Legends at medium settings, but for AAA games, the 4 GB VRAM and 64-bit memory bus will likely result in sub-30 FPS at high details. The CPU’s single-thread score of 715 in 3DMark is adequate but not exceptional, meaning that CPU-bound scenarios, such as physics-heavy games or open-world titles with many NPCs, may see frame rates limited by the processor in certain scenes. Given the GPU’s 3.379 TFLOPS FP32 performance, frame rates in modern games will be modest, and users should expect to lower settings to 720p or use upscaling techniques to achieve smooth gameplay. The lack of measured data means these are probabilistic estimates, not guarantees, but the percentile positions relative to known desktop GPUs provide a reasonable basis for these expectations.

GPU Analysis

The Intel Arc A350M is built on the Xe-HPG architecture, codenamed Alchemist (Arc 3 Mobile), and manufactured by TSMC on a 6 nm process with 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die. It features 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 24 ROPs, along with 6 ray tracing cores. The GPU’s base clock is 1150 MHz with a boost clock of 2200 MHz, and its memory operates at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) across a 64-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 112.0 GB/s. The 4 GB of GDDR6 memory is a significant limitation for modern workloads, as 4 GB is below the 6-8 GB typically recommended for current AAA games at 1080p high settings. The GPU’s FP32 performance is 3.379 TFLOPS, with FP16 at 6.758 TFLOPS (2:1), which is modest for a discrete GPU but respectable for a 25 W mobile part. The pixel rate of 52.80 GPixel/s and texture rate of 105.6 GTexel/s are in line with its shading unit count, indicating a balanced design for its class.

In benchmark terms, the GPU’s Geekbench OpenCL score of 24546 and Vulkan score of 24747 place it at the 70th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 590, is a desktop card with significantly higher power consumption and memory bandwidth, yet the Arc A350M is only 0.4% behind it in average score. This suggests that Intel’s architecture is highly efficient in compute workloads, but the 4 GB VRAM will be a bottleneck in rendering large scenes or textures. The GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, meaning it has feature parity with modern GPUs for ray tracing (via its 6 RT cores) and mesh shaders, but the low VRAM and modest compute resources will limit the practical use of these features. For rendering workloads, the GPU can accelerate effects in video editors or provide GPU-accelerated rendering in 3D applications, but the 3.379 TFLOPS FP32 is roughly half of what a mid-range desktop GPU offers, so it is best suited for light-to-moderate creative work rather than professional-grade rendering.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The CPU is socketed on AMD Socket FP6, which is a mobile-specific socket with no upgrade path to higher-tier desktop processors. The memory support is DDR4 on a dual-channel bus with a bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s, and the platform does not support ECC memory. The CPU exposes PCIe Gen 3 with 12 lanes, which is sufficient for a discrete GPU and one or two NVMe drives, but it limits the bandwidth available for high-end storage or external GPU enclosures. The GPU is a mobile part with a 25 W TDP and uses a bus interface of PCIe 4.0 x8, which is appropriate for its performance class. The system’s TDP values (15 W CPU, 25 W GPU) indicate a low-power design, and the fact pack lists no suggested PSU, so power supply headroom is not specified.

For a sensible next upgrade, the data suggests that the platform is at the end of its upgrade path. The Socket FP6 is not compatible with newer AMD mobile processors, so a CPU upgrade would require a new motherboard. The memory is DDR4, which is being phased out in favor of DDR5, but for this platform, upgrading to higher-capacity DDR4 modules (if the system supports it) would be the only memory improvement. The GPU is also soldered in most laptops, so a GPU upgrade is not feasible in the traditional sense. The most practical upgrade for this system is storage, as the PCIe Gen 3 lanes can support fast NVMe SSDs, and adding more RAM (if the system has an open slot) would benefit multi-threaded workloads, given the CPU’s 16 threads and the Passmark data compression score of 218853 that benefits from memory bandwidth. However, the platform’s overall ceiling is defined by the CPU’s 8-core/16-thread configuration and the GPU’s 4 GB VRAM, so users should view this as a complete system rather than a foundation for future expansion.

FAQ

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

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 5700U uses the Zen 2 architecture (codenamed Lucienne) on a 7 nm process from TSMC, with 9,800 million transistors on a 156 mm² die.

Q: How does the GPU compare to desktop graphics cards?

A: The Intel Arc A350M’s average benchmark score of 24647 places it at the 70th percentile, with a delta of -0.4% compared to the AMD Radeon RX 590 and +1.5% compared to the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630.

Q: What is the memory configuration of the GPU?

A: The GPU has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 112.0 GB/s and an effective memory clock of 14 Gbps.

Q: Is this system suitable for gaming?

A: The GPU’s 4 GB VRAM and 3.379 TFLOPS FP32 performance place it at the 70th percentile, which is suitable for esports titles at 1080p low-to-medium settings, but not for modern AAA games at high details.

Q: What is the CPU’s multi-threaded performance compared to its rivals?

A: The CPU’s average benchmark score of 18176 is identical (0% delta) to the Intel Core i7-1365U and Intel Core i7-9700, and 0.1% ahead of the Intel Core 5 315.

Q: Does the GPU support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the GPU has 6 ray tracing cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), but the modest compute resources (768 shading units) limit practical ray tracing performance.

Q: What is the overall performance tier of this build?

A: The build is in the laptop class with a combined percentile of 71, placing it above the median for all systems but below the enthusiast tier.

Balance and Bottleneck

The benchmark data shows a reasonably balanced pairing, with the CPU at the 72nd percentile and the GPU at the 70th percentile. This near-parity suggests that in most workloads, neither component will be the sole bottleneck. However, the nature of the bottleneck depends on the workload. In multi-threaded CPU-bound tasks like video encoding or software compilation, the CPU’s Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 8650 and Geekbench multi-core score of 5323 will be the limiting factor, as the GPU is not heavily utilized. In GPU-bound tasks like gaming or GPU-accelerated rendering, the GPU’s 4 GB VRAM and 112 GB/s bandwidth will be the constraint, particularly in scenarios with large textures or high resolutions.

The FPS scaling evidence is indirect, as no measured FPS data exists, but the GPU’s benchmark scores relative to desktop parts indicate that the GPU will be the primary limiter in gaming. The CPU’s single-thread score of 715 in 3DMark is sufficient for most games, but in CPU-heavy scenes, the 8-core configuration may not provide the single-thread boost needed to push high frame rates. The 3DMark scores show that the CPU scales from 715 (single-thread) to 4331 (max threads), a 6x increase, which indicates that the CPU is well-utilized in multi-threaded workloads. However, the fact that the 16-thread score (4330) is nearly identical to the max-thread score (4331) suggests that the CPU is saturated at 16 threads, and adding more threads would not help. This means that in workloads that can utilize more than 16 threads, the CPU will be the bottleneck, but for most consumer applications, this is not an issue.

Build Overview

This is a laptop-class build pairing the AMD Ryzen 7 5700U (8 cores, 16 threads, Zen 2, 15 W TDP) with the Intel Arc A350M (768 shading units, 4 GB GDDR6, 25 W TDP). The combined percentile of 71 places it above the median for all systems, with the CPU at the 72nd percentile and the GPU at the 70th percentile. This is a mid-tier mobile system designed for productivity, light content creation, and casual gaming. The CPU’s multi-threaded performance (Cinebench R23 8650, Geekbench 5323) is competitive with modern low-power Intel parts and previous-generation desktop CPUs, while the GPU’s compute performance (Geekbench OpenCL 24546) is on par with a desktop RX 590, albeit with half the VRAM. The system is best suited for users who prioritize CPU-heavy tasks like video editing, software development, and office work over gaming at high settings. The 15 W CPU and 25 W GPU TDPs indicate a power-efficient design that will likely run cool and quiet, making it a sensible choice for students, professionals, and small business workstations that require portability and sustained performance without the bulk of a gaming laptop.

Rate My PC: AMD Ryzen 7 5700U + Intel Arc A350M

Power Build

System Balance Analysis

AMD Ryzen 7 5700U

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

CPU Analysis

Benchmark Performance

Usage Scenarios

Who Should Build It

Gaming Performance

GPU Analysis

Upgrade Path and Platform

FAQ

Balance and Bottleneck

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