SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS + 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)

▼

91 Score

Top 9% Ranking

91 / 100

ULTIMATE READY

Apex Performer

Top 9% 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

90%

GPU

92%

PROCESSOR

AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS

32,354 Benchmark Score

Top 10% 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

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 7 6800HS and Intel Arc A350M pairing represents a specific configuration found in compact laptops, combining a high-efficiency 8-core processor with an entry-level discrete graphics solution. This analysis examines the benchmark data to determine the capabilities and limitations of this mobile platform, focusing on where it excels and where its performance ceiling becomes apparent.

GPU Analysis

The Intel Arc A350M is a mobile graphics processor built on the Xe-HPG architecture, specifically from the Alchemist generation (Arc 3 Mobile). It utilizes the DG2-128 chip manufactured on a 6 nm process by TSMC, containing 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die. The GPU operates with a base clock of 1150 MHz and a boost clock of 2200 MHz, with memory running at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). The memory subsystem consists of 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 112.0 GB/s.

The GPU has 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 24 raster operations pipelines. For ray tracing, it includes 6 dedicated RT cores, while tensor core specifications are not listed. The pixel rate is 52.80 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 105.6 GTexel/s. Compute performance is rated at 3.379 TFLOPS for FP32 and 6.758 TFLOPS for FP16 with a 2:1 ratio. The interface is PCIe 4.0 x8, and the total board power is rated at 25 W.

Benchmark results for the Arc A350M show a Geekbench OpenCL score of 24546 and a Vulkan score of 24747. The average benchmark score across these tests is 24647, placing it at the 70th percentile of all GPUs. The nearest rival comparisons reveal a tight competitive cluster: the AMD Radeon RX 590 scores 24744 (0.4% higher), the NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile scores 24763 (0.5% higher), the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT scores 24442 (0.8% lower), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 scores 24277 (1.5% lower). This positions the Arc A350M in a performance band similar to desktop GPUs from several years prior, though the mobile form factor and 4 GB VRAM limit its practical application in modern titles with high-resolution textures.

The FP32 throughput of 3.379 TFLOPS indicates the GPU handles compute workloads modestly, while the 6 RT cores provide entry-level ray tracing support that can be enabled in games but likely with significant performance impact. The 112.0 GB/s memory bandwidth is a bottleneck for higher resolutions, as the narrow 64-bit bus constrains data throughput despite the relatively fast GDDR6 memory.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: At 1080p with competitive settings, the GPU’s 70th percentile position and scores near the GTX 1630 suggest it can handle esports titles at moderate frame rates, but the 4 GB VRAM and 112.0 GB/s bandwidth will limit texture quality. High-refresh 144 Hz monitors are likely beyond its reach in demanding titles, with the CPU’s strong single-thread performance being less relevant when GPU-bound.

Streaming: The CPU’s 35 W TDP and 8 cores with 16 threads provide adequate headroom for software encoding at reasonable quality settings. The Passmark data encryption score of 18104 indicates solid cryptographic throughput for stream encryption, while the integrated Radeon 680M offers a fallback for display output if the discrete GPU is occupied.

Video editing: The CPU’s Cinebench R23 multicore score of 11992 places it at the 83rd percentile of all CPUs, making it capable for timeline editing and export tasks in 1080p. The GPU’s 3.379 TFLOPS FP32 performance assists with effects and transitions, but the 4 GB VRAM may cause issues with larger projects or 4K timelines.

3D rendering: Cinebench R15 multicore score of 1987 and Passmark floating point math score of 47533 indicate the CPU can handle rendering workloads reasonably well for a mobile chip. The GPU’s Vulkan score of 24747 shows it can accelerate certain render engines, but the 6 RT cores and 3.379 TFLOPS are modest for GPU rendering, making CPU-based rendering the more reliable path.

Software development: The 8-core/16-thread configuration with a boost clock of 4.70 GHz provides responsive compilation times for most projects. The Passmark integer math score of 84228 and extended instructions score of 20114 support demanding build environments, while the 16 MB shared L3 cache helps with frequently accessed code modules.

Student and office work: The CPU’s single-thread Passmark score of 3184 ensures snappy application launches and document processing, while the GPU’s capabilities are largely unnecessary for these tasks. The Radeon 680M integrated graphics could handle these workloads with the discrete GPU disabled, potentially improving battery life in the 35 W TDP envelope.

CPU Analysis

The AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS is a mobile processor from the 6000 series, built on the Zen 3+ architecture with the Rembrandt codename. It is manufactured on a 6 nm process at TSMC with a die size of 208 mm². The processor features 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 3.20 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz. The thermal design power is 35 W, making it suitable for thin-and-light laptops. Cache configuration includes 64 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 16 MB shared L3. The CPU supports DDR5 memory in dual-channel mode with a bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s, and it includes integrated Radeon 680M graphics. The socket is AMD Socket FP7, and PCIe support is Gen 4 with 20 lanes from the CPU. The multiplier is locked, and the production status is active.

Benchmark results demonstrate a strong multi-threaded performer: Cinebench R23 multicore scores 11992, while single-core scores 1455. Geekbench multicore reaches 9515 with a single-core score of 1652. Passmark tests show a multithread score of 22801, single-thread score of 3184, integer math at 84228, floating point math at 47533, extended instructions at 20114, and data compression at 292698. The average benchmark score across all tests is 32354, placing the CPU at the 83rd percentile of all CPUs.

The nearest rival comparisons show the Ryzen 7 6800HS sits in a tight performance cluster: the Intel Core i5-14400F scores 32279 (0.2% lower), the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 7645 scores 32446 (0.3% higher), the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U scores 32233 (0.4% lower), and the Intel Core i9-11900 scores 32226 (0.4% lower). This indicates the 6800HS delivers desktop-class multi-threaded performance in a 35 W mobile envelope, making it a versatile processor for a wide range of tasks.

The 6 nm process and Zen 3+ architecture contribute to efficient power scaling, while the 76.8 GB/s memory bandwidth supports the 16 threads in data-intensive workloads. The Passmark physics score of 1009 is notably low, suggesting the processor may throttle under sustained AVX or physics-heavy loads, but the overall benchmark picture is one of balanced capability.

FAQ

Q: What is the CPU's performance percentile compared to all processors?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS sits at the 83rd percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 32354.

Q: How does the Intel Arc A350M compare to the AMD Radeon RX 590?

A: The Arc A350M scores 24647 on average, while the RX 590 scores 24744, representing a 0.4% difference in favor of the RX 590.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of the GPU?

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

Q: Does the CPU support ECC memory?

A: No, ECC memory support is not available on the AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS.

Q: What is the TDP of the CPU and GPU respectively?

A: The CPU has a TDP of 35 W, while the GPU has a TDP of 25 W, making this a low-power mobile combination.

Q: What DirectX version does the GPU support?

A: The Intel Arc A350M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), along with OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: How does the CPU compare to the Intel Core i9-11900?

A: The Ryzen 7 6800HS has an average score of 32354, while the Core i9-11900 scores 32226, a 0.4% difference in favor of the Ryzen.

Benchmark Performance

The combined benchmark picture for this laptop platform is defined by a strong CPU paired with a modest GPU. The CPU’s average benchmark score of 32354 places it at the 83rd percentile, while the GPU’s average score of 24647 places it at the 70th percentile. The combined percentile for the pairing is 77, indicating the system overall outperforms 77% of configurations in the database.

The CPU’s nearest rival, the Intel Core i5-14400F, scores 32279 with a delta of 0.2%, confirming the 6800HS delivers comparable multi-threaded performance to a modern desktop mid-range processor. The GPU’s nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 590, scores 24744 with a delta of -0.4%, showing the Arc A350M performs within a fraction of a desktop GPU from an older generation.

Geekbench data highlights the asymmetry: CPU multicore of 9515 and single-core of 1652 are strong for a mobile chip, while GPU OpenCL of 24546 and Vulkan of 24747 are moderate. This creates a platform where CPU-bound tasks like compilation, compression, and productivity software will feel responsive, but GPU-bound tasks like gaming at high settings will hit a ceiling. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 11992 reinforces the CPU’s capability, while the GPU’s 3.379 TFLOPS FP32 performance indicates the graphics component is the limiting factor in visually intensive workloads.

Gaming Performance

No measured FPS data exists for this exact CPU+GPU combination, as the FACT PACK contains no measuredFps rows. All FPS figures discussed here are estimated from the benchmark scores and should be treated as approximations rather than measured results.

Based on the GPU’s 70th percentile position and its proximity to the GTX 1630 (1.5% lower) and RX 590 (0.4% higher), the Arc A350M can be expected to handle 1080p gaming at low to medium settings in modern titles. The 4 GB VRAM and 112.0 GB/s memory bandwidth will constrain texture detail and resolution scaling, with 1440p likely requiring significant settings reductions or being impractical in demanding games.

For esports titles like CS:GO or League of Legends, the CPU’s strong single-thread performance (Passmark single-thread score of 3184) combined with the GPU’s moderate compute power could deliver playable frame rates, potentially exceeding 60 FPS at 1080p with competitive settings. For AAA games, the 3.379 TFLOPS FP32 throughput suggests 30-60 FPS at 1080p low-medium presets, with ray tracing features—supported by the 6 RT cores—likely causing substantial frame rate drops if enabled.

The CPU’s boost clock of 4.70 GHz helps maintain frame pacing in CPU-bound scenarios, but the GPU is typically the bottleneck in gaming workloads. The combined percentile of 77 suggests this platform is not designed for high-refresh or high-fidelity gaming, but rather for casual play and older titles.

Balance and Bottleneck

The performance data clearly indicates the GPU is the primary bottleneck in this pairing. The CPU sits at the 83rd percentile, while the GPU sits at the 70th percentile—a 13-percentage-point gap that manifests in GPU-bound workloads. The CPU’s average score of 32354 versus the GPU’s 24647 further quantifies this disparity, with the CPU offering roughly 31% more compute headroom relative to its peer group.

In gaming scenarios, the GPU’s 4 GB VRAM and 112.0 GB/s bandwidth will limit texture streaming and resolution, causing the CPU to wait on the GPU in most frames. The FPS scaling would show diminishing returns when lowering resolution, as the GPU’s pixel rate of 52.80 GPixel/s and texture rate of 105.6 GTexel/s cap output regardless of CPU capability.

Conversely, in CPU-bound workloads like data compression (Passmark score of 292698) or encryption (18104), the GPU is underutilized, and the CPU’s 8 cores and 16 threads can operate at full capacity. The 76.8 GB/s memory bandwidth supports this, though the 35 W TDP may cause throttling under sustained loads, as evidenced by the low Passmark physics score of 1009.

The balance point is productivity and content creation, where the CPU handles the heavy lifting and the GPU accelerates specific tasks like video encoding or effects rendering. For gaming, the balance skews toward the CPU being underutilized, making this a platform for light gaming rather than a gaming-first machine.

Build Overview

This is a laptop build (buildClass: laptop) combining the AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS with the Intel Arc A350M. The CPU is from the 6000 series with Zen 3+ architecture and Rembrandt codename, while the GPU is from the Alchemist generation with Xe-HPG architecture. The production status for the GPU is end-of-life, indicating this is a legacy configuration.

The combined percentile of 77 places this system in the upper-middle tier of all configurations in the database. The CPU’s 83rd percentile and GPU’s 70th percentile create a platform that excels in processor-intensive tasks but is modest in graphics performance. The 35 W CPU TDP and 25 W GPU TDP suggest this is designed for a thin-and-light chassis where power efficiency is prioritized over raw performance.

This pairing is notable for its asymmetry: a high-end mobile CPU married to an entry-level discrete GPU. The CPU alone could handle most productivity tasks, while the GPU adds modest gaming and compute acceleration over the integrated Radeon 680M. The result is a laptop that feels fast for daily use and professional workloads but falls short for gamers seeking high settings or high refresh rates.

Who Should Build It

The primary audience for this configuration is professionals and students who need strong CPU performance for productivity tasks in a portable form factor. The 83rd percentile CPU score supports software development, data analysis, and office applications with responsive performance, while the 70th percentile GPU provides enough acceleration for basic photo editing and light video work.

Software developers will benefit from the 8-core/16-thread CPU with 16 MB L3 cache, which handles compilation and container workloads efficiently. The Passmark integer math score of 84228 and extended instructions score of 20114 indicate strong support for code execution and modern instruction sets. The DDR5 memory support and 76.8 GB/s bandwidth ensure data-intensive tasks like database queries or large spreadsheet operations remain fluid.

Content creators working with 1080p video will find the Cinebench R23 multicore score of 11992 sufficient for export tasks, while the GPU’s Vulkan score of 24747 can accelerate effects and transitions. However, 4K workflows or heavy 3D rendering would strain the 4 GB VRAM and 3.379 TFLOPS FP32 throughput, making this unsuitable for professional-grade creative work.

Students and small business workstations will appreciate the balance of power and efficiency, with the 35 W CPU TDP enabling all-day battery life in a lightweight chassis. The GPU handles casual gaming and media playback, while the CPU ensures smooth multitasking across dozens of browser tabs, office documents, and communication tools.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The CPU uses AMD Socket FP7, which is specific to this mobile platform and does not offer upgrade options—the processor is soldered and not user-replaceable. Memory support is DDR5 in dual-channel configuration, with a bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s, and this is also typically fixed in laptops. The PCIe interface is Gen 4 with 20 lanes from the CPU, which provides adequate bandwidth for the GPU’s PCIe 4.0 x8 connection.

The GPU is listed with a TDP of 25 W and no suggested PSU requirement, as this is an IGP (integrated GPU) form factor in a laptop. The production status of end-of-life means no future driver optimizations are guaranteed, though the Vulkan 1.4 and DirectX 12 Ultimate support ensure compatibility with current software.

A sensible next upgrade would be to a newer laptop platform with a more recent CPU and GPU combination, as both components are bound to their respective sockets. The CPU’s active production status suggests it may still appear in new systems, but the GPU’s end-of-life status means this exact pairing is aging. Users seeking better gaming performance would need to move to a higher-tier GPU configuration, while those needing more CPU throughput would look to newer Zen 4 or Intel 13th/14th generation mobile processors. The 77th combined percentile indicates this system is still viable for everyday tasks, but it is not positioned for future-proofing.

Rate My PC: AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS + Intel Arc A350M

Apex Performer

System Balance Analysis

AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS

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

Optimal Performance

4K Gaming Ready

Performance Tiers Explained

Ultimate

High-End

Mid-Range

Entry Level

Legacy

GPU Analysis

Usage Scenarios

CPU Analysis

FAQ

Benchmark Performance

Gaming Performance

Balance and Bottleneck

Build Overview

Who Should Build It

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