SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: AMD Ryzen 7 5825C + Intel Arc A370M

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)

▼

83 Score

Top 17% Ranking

83 / 100

HIGH-END

Power Build

Top 17% of systems. Excellent for 1440p Ultra or 4K High gaming.

1440p Ultra4K High

System Balance Analysis

CPU vs GPU performance ratio

Well Balanced

CPU

73%

GPU

93%

PROCESSOR

AMD Ryzen 7 5825C

3,579 Benchmark Score

Top 27% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

Intel Arc A370M

29,175 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

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

# Performance Analysis: AMD Ryzen 7 5825C + Intel Arc A370M

This pairing combines AMD's 8-core Zen 3 mobile processor with Intel's entry-level Arc 3 discrete GPU in a laptop configuration. The FACT PACK contains no measured FPS rows for this exact combination, so all frame-rate discussion below is estimated from the benchmark scores rather than direct gameplay data. The CPU sits at the 55th percentile of all processors, the GPU at the 74th percentile of all GPUs, and the combined platform lands at the 65th percentile overall.

Gaming Performance — measured FPS by game and resolution from measuredFpsUltraByGame

No measured FPS data exists for this CPU+GPU combination. The `measuredFpsUltraByGame` field is empty, meaning there are no verified frame rates at any resolution or quality preset for this specific pairing. Consequently, all gaming expectations must be derived from the synthetic benchmark scores and the relative position of each component against its rivals.

The Intel Arc A370M produces a Geekbench Vulkan score of 28,673 and an OpenCL score of 29,676, with an average benchmark score of 29,175. That places it at the 74th percentile of all GPUs, which is a strong position for an entry-level mobile part. The GPU's nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH, scores 29,197 — a delta of -0.1%, meaning the A370M is essentially tied with that part. The AMD Radeon RX 470 scores 28,996, putting it 0.6% behind the A370M. This cluster of scores suggests the A370M delivers performance comparable to a mid-range desktop GPU from several generations ago, which translates to playable 1080p gaming at medium-to-high settings in most titles, with ultra settings likely reserved for lighter or older games.

The CPU side reinforces this picture. The Ryzen 7 5825C's Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 12,376 and single-core score of 1,747 indicate a capable processor for gaming workloads, though the GPU will be the primary bottleneck in most graphically intensive scenarios. Estimated frame rates at 1080p ultra would likely land in the 40-60 FPS range for modern AAA titles, dropping to 30-45 FPS at 1440p ultra, and potentially exceeding 60 FPS in esports titles like CS:GO or Valorant where the CPU's strong single-core performance can shine. At 4K, expect sub-30 FPS in demanding games, as the 4 GB VRAM and 112 GB/s bandwidth will limit texture quality and resolution scaling.

The 8 RT cores on the A370M provide hardware ray tracing support, but with only 4.198 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, ray-traced workloads will be modest. Estimated performance with ray tracing enabled at 1080p would likely see frame rates drop by 30-50%, making it viable only in less demanding implementations or at lower settings.

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

The CPU's Cinebench results paint a clear picture of a balanced mobile processor. In Cinebench R15, the Ryzen 7 5825C scores 1,247 multi-core and 175 single-core. The R20 run shows 5,197 multi-core and 733 single-core. The R23 results are 12,376 multi-core and 1,747 single-core. The average benchmark score across all tests is 3,579, placing it at the 55th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core i9-9980HK, scores 3,577 — a delta of just 0.1%, meaning the Ryzen 7 5825C is statistically identical to a high-end 2018 Intel laptop chip. The AMD Ryzen 7 2700E scores 3,603, putting the 5825C 0.7% behind, and the Intel Xeon E5-2678 v3 scores 3,608, a 0.8% gap. The Intel Xeon E-2286G scores 3,610, a 0.9% difference. These tight margins indicate the 5825C competes directly with older high-core-count desktop and mobile parts, despite its 15W TDP.

The GPU's Geekbench scores are equally revealing. The OpenCL score of 29,676 and Vulkan score of 28,673 yield an average of 29,175, placing the A370M at the 74th percentile of all GPUs. The nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH, is 0.1% ahead, while the AMD FirePro W8000 is 0.1% ahead, the AMD Radeon RX 470 is 0.6% behind, and the AMD Radeon RX 6800M is 1% behind. The presence of the RX 6800M — a high-end mobile GPU — within 1% of the A370M in this particular benchmark is notable, though it likely reflects the Geekbench compute workload favoring the A370M's architecture rather than real-world gaming parity.

Combined, the CPU at the 55th percentile and GPU at the 74th percentile produce a platform at the 65th percentile overall. This suggests the GPU is the stronger component relative to its peers, while the CPU is mid-pack. For gaming, the GPU will dictate most frame rates. For productivity, the CPU's 8 cores and 16 threads provide solid multi-threaded performance, though it trails more modern parts in single-threaded tasks.

FAQ

Q: Is the Intel Arc A370M faster than the AMD Radeon RX 470?

A: Yes, marginally. The A370M has an average benchmark score of 29,175, while the RX 470 scores 28,996, giving the A370M a 0.6% lead.

Q: How does the Ryzen 7 5825C compare to the Intel Core i9-9980HK?

A: The two are essentially tied. The Ryzen 7 5825C has an average benchmark score of 3,579, while the i9-9980HK scores 3,577, a delta of just 0.1%.

Q: What is the CPU's single-core performance in Cinebench R23?

A: The Ryzen 7 5825C scores 1,747 in Cinebench R23 single-core, which is a solid result for a 15W mobile processor.

Q: Does the A370M support hardware ray tracing?

A: Yes, the GPU includes 8 RT cores, and its API support includes DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), which mandates ray tracing support.

Q: What memory type does the Ryzen 7 5825C support?

A: The CPU supports DDR4 memory in a dual-channel configuration, with a memory bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s.

Q: How much VRAM does the A370M have?

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

Q: Is the Ryzen 7 5825C faster than the AMD Ryzen 7 2700E?

A: No, the 5825C is 0.7% behind the 2700E in average benchmark score — 3,579 versus 3,603 — though the difference is negligible in practice.

Balance and Bottleneck

The data shows a clear imbalance between the CPU and GPU in this pairing. The GPU at the 74th percentile is significantly stronger relative to its peers than the CPU at the 55th percentile. In gaming workloads, this means the CPU is unlikely to be the limiting factor at standard resolutions; the A370M will constrain frame rates first. The estimated FPS scaling supports this: at 1080p ultra, the GPU's compute throughput (4.198 TFLOPS FP32) and memory bandwidth (112 GB/s) will cap performance well before the CPU's 8 cores and 4.5 GHz boost clock become a constraint.

For CPU-bound scenarios, the picture reverses. The Ryzen 7 5825C's Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 12,376 places it near the Intel Core i9-9980HK, but its single-core score of 1,747 is modest by modern standards. In lightly-threaded workloads like legacy games or certain productivity apps, the CPU could become the bottleneck, holding back the GPU's potential. However, in most modern games that utilize multiple threads, the 8-core/16-thread configuration provides ample headroom.

The memory subsystem also factors into the balance. The CPU's dual-channel DDR4 support with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth is adequate for its class, but the GPU's 64-bit memory bus with 112 GB/s bandwidth is narrow for a discrete part. This means that in memory-intensive scenarios, such as high-resolution textures or compute workloads, the GPU may stall waiting for data, potentially offsetting some of its compute advantage. The PCIe Gen 3 x8 interface on the CPU side further limits the GPU's data transfer speed, though the A370M's PCIe 4.0 x8 bus suggests the GPU is capable of higher throughput than the CPU can provide.

Overall, the platform is GPU-limited in gaming, CPU-limited in single-threaded productivity, and roughly balanced in multi-threaded workloads. The 65th combined percentile reflects this middling balance — neither component is the clear star, but both are competent for their respective tasks.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: The A370M's 74th percentile position and estimated 1080p performance around 40-60 FPS at ultra settings mean that 144Hz displays will only be fully utilized in esports titles. The CPU's single-core score of 1,747 in Cinebench R23 is sufficient to drive high frame rates in games like CS:GO, but the GPU will cap most AAA titles well below 100 FPS.

Streaming: The Ryzen 7 5825C's 8 cores and 16 threads provide enough headroom for x264 encoding at moderate presets while gaming, though the GPU's lack of dedicated tensor cores means no NVENC-like acceleration. The A370M's compute scores suggest it can handle light encoding tasks, but the CPU will likely be the primary encoder, and its 15W TDP may limit sustained performance.

Video editing: The CPU's Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 12,376 indicates decent rendering capability for 1080p and light 4K editing. The GPU's 4 GB VRAM and 112 GB/s bandwidth are adequate for previewing and effects, but the narrow memory bus may cause slowdowns with complex timelines or high-bitrate footage.

3D rendering: The CPU's 16 threads deliver solid CPU-based rendering performance, rivaling the Intel Xeon E5-2678 v3 in multi-core workloads. The GPU's 4.198 TFLOPS FP32 and 8.397 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1) provide some GPU-accelerated rendering capability, but the 4 GB VRAM limits scene complexity.

Software development: The 8-core/16-thread configuration excels at compilation and parallel build tasks, with the Cinebench R20 multi-core score of 5,197 indicating strong throughput. The single-core score of 733 in R20 is adequate for IDE responsiveness and code analysis.

Student and office work: This pairing is overkill for basic productivity. The CPU's 55th percentile position and the GPU's compute power are far beyond what word processing or spreadsheet tasks require, but the 15W CPU TDP and 35W GPU TDP suggest good battery life for all-day use.

Who Should Build It

The target user for this pairing is a laptop buyer who needs a balance of CPU and GPU performance without a premium price tier. The GPU's 74th percentile ranking makes this suitable for gamers who play at 1080p with medium-to-high settings and accept occasional drops to lower presets in demanding titles. The 4 GB VRAM means users should avoid 4K gaming or heavy texture modding.

Content creators working with 1080p video or light 3D work will find the CPU's 8 cores and 16 threads sufficient for rendering, while the GPU accelerates effects and previews. The combined 65th percentile indicates a well-rounded machine for mainstream creative work, though professionals handling 4K timelines or complex scenes should look higher.

Software developers benefit from the multi-threaded compilation performance, and the CPU's position near the Intel Core i9-9980HK means it can handle large codebases. Students and office workers will find the performance headroom future-proof, though the discrete GPU is unnecessary for their workloads. Small business workstations that occasionally run compute-heavy tasks, such as CAD or data analysis, would also find this pairing capable.

GPU Analysis

The Intel Arc A370M is built on the DG2-128 chip using the Xe-HPG architecture, fabricated on TSMC's 6 nm process with 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die. The GPU operates at a base clock of 1550 MHz and boosts to 2050 MHz, with memory running at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). It packs 1,024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 32 raster output pipelines, along with 8 RT cores for hardware ray tracing.

Memory consists of 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, yielding 112.0 GB/s of bandwidth. This is the most significant limitation for modern gaming, as texture-heavy titles at high resolutions will exceed the VRAM capacity, causing stuttering or reduced texture quality. The pixel rate is 65.60 GPixel/s and the texture rate is 131.2 GTexel/s, both of which are respectable for the entry-level class.

Compute performance is rated at 4.198 TFLOPS FP32 and 8.397 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1), which explains the strong Geekbench OpenCL score of 29,676. The Vulkan score of 28,673 indicates solid driver-level optimization for modern APIs, supported by DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The 74th percentile ranking places it above many older discrete GPUs, and its proximity to the AMD Radeon RX 470 (0.6% ahead) suggests it can handle 1080p gaming at medium-to-high settings in most titles.

For rendering workloads, the A370M's FP32 and FP16 performance can accelerate viewport previews and GPU-based rendering, though the 4 GB VRAM and 64-bit bus will limit scene complexity and texture resolution. The 8 RT cores offer ray tracing capability, but the relatively low compute throughput means ray-traced effects should be used sparingly.

Build Overview

This is a laptop-class pairing, as indicated by the `buildClass` field. The AMD Ryzen 7 5825C is a mobile processor from the 5000 series, built on Zen 3 architecture with the Cezanne-U codename, while the Intel Arc A370M is a mobile discrete GPU from the Alchemist (Arc 3 Mobile) generation. The combined 65th percentile places this platform in the upper-mid range of all laptop configurations, with the GPU contributing more to the overall position than the CPU.

The CPU's 55th percentile and the GPU's 74th percentile create a system that is stronger in graphics than in processing, which is unusual for a laptop in this class. This makes it suitable for gaming and GPU-accelerated tasks, but less competitive for pure CPU workloads compared to laptops with higher-percentile processors.

The A370M is marked as end-of-life production status, meaning this pairing represents a specific point in Intel's discrete GPU roadmap. The Ryzen 7 5825C remains active, so the CPU has longer-term support. The 15W CPU TDP and 35W GPU TDP suggest a thin-and-light chassis design, prioritizing portability over sustained performance.

CPU Analysis

The AMD Ryzen 7 5825C is an 8-core, 16-thread processor based on the Zen 3 architecture, manufactured by TSMC on a 7 nm process. It uses the Cezanne-U codename and fits the AMD Socket FP6, with a base clock of 2000 MHz and a boost clock of 4.50 GHz. The die contains 10,700 million transistors on a 180 mm² area, with a 15W TDP that classifies it as an ultra-low-power mobile part.

Cache configuration includes 64 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 16 MB shared L3. Memory support is dual-channel DDR4 with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth, and the CPU provides PCIe Gen 3 with 8 lanes. The integrated Radeon Vega 8 graphics offer a fallback display option, though the discrete A370M will handle demanding graphics.

Benchmark results show a processor that punches above its power budget. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 12,376 is competitive with the Intel Core i9-9980HK (which scores 3,577 average versus 3,579 for the 5825C), despite the AMD part consuming far less power. The single-core R23 score of 1,747 is adequate but not class-leading, reflecting the 4.5 GHz boost clock that is high for a 15W part but limited by thermal and power constraints.

In real workloads, the 8-core/16-thread configuration handles multi-threaded tasks like video encoding, 3D rendering, and compilation with ease. The 55th percentile ranking means it outperforms roughly half of all CPUs, including many older desktop parts. The nearest rivals — all within 1% in average score — are a mix of high-end mobile and workstation CPUs, indicating that the 5825C occupies a sweet spot between power efficiency and performance.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The Ryzen 7 5825C uses the AMD Socket FP6, which is a mobile-only socket with no desktop equivalent. This means the CPU is not upgradeable in the traditional sense; users are limited to the processor soldered onto the laptop motherboard. The DDR4 memory support allows for capacity upgrades, but the dual-channel configuration is fixed. PCIe Gen 3 with 8 lanes from the CPU limits the bandwidth available to the GPU and other devices, though this is sufficient for the A370M's PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, which will operate at Gen 3 speeds.

The suggested PSU is not specified in the FACT PACK, so no power supply recommendation can be made. The CPU's 15W TDP and GPU's 35W TDP indicate a low overall system power draw, which is typical for a thin-and-light laptop. The A370M requires no external power connectors, as it draws power from the motherboard.

For a sensible next upgrade within this platform, the most impactful change would be increasing system RAM to the maximum supported capacity, as the 51.2 GB/s bandwidth is shared between the CPU and GPU. However, the GPU is end-of-life, and the CPU is active, so the platform is at a mature stage. Users seeking more graphics performance would need to move to a different laptop with a higher-percentile GPU, as the A370M's 4 GB VRAM and 64-bit bus are the primary bottlenecks. On the CPU side, the 5825C's 55th percentile position leaves room for improvement, but the socket is not upgradeable, so a full system replacement would be required.

Rate My PC: AMD Ryzen 7 5825C + Intel Arc A370M

Power Build

System Balance Analysis

AMD Ryzen 7 5825C

Intel Arc A370M

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

Gaming Performance — measured FPS by game and resolution from measuredFpsUltraByGame

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

FAQ

Balance and Bottleneck

Usage Scenarios

Who Should Build It

GPU Analysis

Build Overview

CPU Analysis

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