SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: AMD Ryzen 7 7700X + Intel Arc A310

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

91%

GPU

85%

PROCESSOR

AMD Ryzen 7 7700X

35,909 Benchmark Score

Top 9% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

Intel Arc A310

7,550 Benchmark Score

Top 15% 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 7700X and Intel Arc A310 represent a pairing of extremes: a high-end 8-core desktop processor from AMD’s 7000 series paired with an entry-level, low-power graphics card from Intel’s Arc 3 lineup. This combination targets users who prioritize CPU-heavy workloads and require only basic to moderate graphical capabilities. The data shows a processor that ranks in the 85th percentile among all CPUs, paired with a GPU that sits in the 40th percentile among all GPUs, resulting in a combined percentile of 63 for the system. This analysis walks through the platform, benchmark performance, gaming expectations, and usage scenarios based strictly on the provided specifications and scores.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The AMD Ryzen 7 7700X is built for the AMD Socket AM5 platform, which is a modern desktop socket supporting DDR5 memory exclusively. The memory support is dual-channel, with a theoretical memory bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s, and it includes ECC memory support, a feature often sought after for workstation-class stability. The CPU provides PCIe Gen 5 connectivity with 24 lanes from the processor itself, offering substantial bandwidth for high-speed storage and expansion cards. The platform’s architecture, Zen 4, is fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC, with a transistor count of 6,570 million on a 71 mm² die.

For power delivery, the CPU has a TDP of 105 W. The Intel Arc A310, in contrast, has a much lower TDP of 30 W and requires no external power connectors, being a single-slot card that draws power solely from the PCIe slot. The suggested PSU for the entire system is 200 W, which is modest given the CPU’s TDP. This indicates that a standard desktop power supply with adequate headroom for the 105 W CPU and the 30 W GPU will suffice, leaving room for other components like storage and cooling. The absence of power connectors on the GPU simplifies installation, but the system’s total power draw will be dominated by the CPU.

A sensible next upgrade for this platform would be to replace the GPU with a more powerful model, as the Arc A310 is the clear bottleneck in most graphical workloads. The PCIe Gen 5 lanes from the CPU ensure that any modern GPU will have ample bandwidth, and the 200 W suggested PSU headroom suggests that a GPU with a higher power draw would necessitate a PSU upgrade. The AM5 socket also supports future CPU upgrades within the same generation, but the 7700X’s strong multi-threaded performance means that the CPU is unlikely to be the limiting factor for most users. Upgrading the GPU would provide the most significant performance uplift for gaming and graphics-intensive tasks.

Benchmark Performance

The AMD Ryzen 7 7700X demonstrates robust performance across a variety of benchmark suites. In 3DMark, the CPU scores 8,859 in the 16-thread test and 8,852 in the max-thread test, showing excellent scaling from 8 cores and 16 threads. The single-thread score is 1,090, while the 2-thread and 4-thread scores are 2,112 and 4,074, respectively, indicating strong per-core performance. Cinebench R23 results show a multi-core score of 19,088 and a single-core score of 1,987, while Cinebench R15 yields 3,113.5 multi-core and 315 single-core. Geekbench reports a multi-core score of 12,451 and a single-core score of 2,289.

The PassMark suite further details the CPU’s capabilities: a multi-thread score of 35,686, a single-thread score of 4,190, and a single-thread (alternate) score of 4,190. Specific workload scores include data compression at 420,240, data encryption at 24,732, extended instructions at 32,033, floating-point math at 68,986, integer math at 112,601, and random string sorting at 49,782. The physics score is 2,007, and the find prime numbers score is 180. The CPU’s average benchmark score is 35,909, placing it in the 85th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5845 with an average score of 35,802 (0.3% lower), the Intel Core 7 250H at 35,728 (0.5% lower), the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 at 35,719 (0.5% lower), and the Intel Core Ultra 9 185H at 35,670 (0.7% lower). These margins are narrow, meaning the 7700X is effectively tied with these competitors in average performance, though it holds a slight edge.

The Intel Arc A310’s benchmark results are considerably more modest. In Geekbench, it scores 30,607 in OpenCL and 28,964 in Vulkan. PassMark scores include 5,433 for G3D, 2,157 for GPU compute, and lower scores for older DirectX versions: 69 for DirectX 9, 31 for DirectX 10, 33 for DirectX 11, and 29 for DirectX 12. The G2D score is 625. The GPU’s average benchmark score is 7,550, placing it in the 40th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon R7 250 with an average score of 7,557 (0.1% higher), the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 at 7,580 (0.4% higher), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 at 7,472 (1.0% lower), and the AMD Radeon HD 8850M at 7,447 (1.4% lower). This places the Arc A310 in the same performance tier as these older or lower-end cards, with the GTX 1650 being slightly slower in average score.

The combined picture shows a system with exceptional CPU throughput but entry-level graphics. The CPU’s 85th percentile ranking means it outperforms 85% of all CPUs, making it a top-tier processor for compute-heavy tasks. The GPU’s 40th percentile ranking, however, indicates that it is below average, which will limit the system’s ability to handle graphically demanding applications. The combined percentile of 63 reflects this imbalance, positioning the build as a competent workstation or productivity machine rather than a gaming or high-end graphics system.

Gaming Performance

No measured FPS rows exist for this exact CPU+GPU combination, and the FACT PACK contains no measuredFps data. Therefore, all FPS discussion here is estimated from the benchmark scores and should be treated as approximations rather than empirical results. The Intel Arc A310’s PassMark G3D score of 5,433 and its DirectX 12 score of 29 suggest that it is a low-end GPU, comparable to the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650, which has a slightly lower average benchmark score. In modern games, such a GPU would be expected to handle esports titles and older games at lower resolutions and settings, but it would struggle with AAA titles at high or ultra settings.

Given the CPU’s high single-thread score of 4,190 in PassMark, the system will not be CPU-limited in most gaming scenarios, meaning the GPU will be the primary constraint. At 1080p resolution, the Arc A310 might achieve playable frame rates in games like CS:GO or League of Legends, which are not graphically intensive. However, for more demanding titles like Cyberpunk 2077 or Call of Duty, the GPU’s 4 GB of VRAM and limited compute power would likely result in low frame rates, even at medium settings. The DirectX 12 score of 29 is particularly low, indicating poor performance in modern APIs, which could lead to stuttering or low FPS in DirectX 12-based games.

The GPU’s 64-bit memory bus and 124.0 GB/s bandwidth further constrain performance, as these are low figures for modern games that require high memory throughput. The 4 GB GDDR6 memory is also a limitation, as many current games exceed this capacity at higher settings. Based on the benchmark scores, the estimated gaming experience would be suitable for light or older games, but not for high-refresh-rate gaming or modern AAA titles. Users expecting a gaming rig should consider this build inadequate for that purpose, as the GPU’s performance aligns with entry-level cards from several years ago.

FAQ

Q: What is the socket type for the AMD Ryzen 7 7700X?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 7700X uses the AMD Socket AM5, which supports DDR5 memory and PCIe Gen 5 connectivity.

Q: How much VRAM does the Intel Arc A310 have?

A: The Intel Arc A310 has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, with a memory bandwidth of 124.0 GB/s.

Q: What is the CPU’s multi-core performance in Cinebench R23?

A: The Ryzen 7 7700X scores 19,088 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, which is a strong result for an 8-core processor.

Q: How does the Intel Arc A310 compare to the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 in average benchmark score?

A: The Arc A310 has an average benchmark score of 7,550, which is 1% higher than the GTX 1650’s average score of 7,472.

Q: What is the suggested PSU wattage for this system?

A: The suggested PSU for the entire system is 200 W, which accounts for the CPU’s 105 W TDP and the GPU’s 30 W TDP.

Q: Does the CPU support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Ryzen 7 7700X has ECC memory support, which is beneficial for workstation stability.

Q: What is the process node for the Intel Arc A310?

A: The Intel Arc A310 is fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC, with a transistor count of 7,200 million.

GPU Analysis

The Intel Arc A310 is based on the Xe-HPG architecture, specifically the DG2-128 chip, and belongs to the Alchemist generation (Arc 3). It is built on a 6 nm process at TSMC, with 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die. The GPU has a base and boost clock of 1750 MHz, and its memory operates at 1937 MHz, which translates to 15.5 Gbps effective. The memory configuration is 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 124.0 GB/s. This is a low bandwidth figure, which will limit performance in memory-intensive tasks like high-resolution textures.

The GPU has 768 shading units, 32 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 16 render output units (ROPs). It also includes 6 ray tracing (RT) cores, which support hardware-accelerated ray tracing, though the low overall compute power means RT performance will be weak. The pixel rate is 28.00 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 56.00 GTexel/s. The FP32 performance is 2.688 TFLOPS, with FP16 performance at 5.376 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio). These numbers place the GPU in the entry-level segment, suitable for basic rendering and compute tasks but not for demanding workloads.

The GPU’s benchmark scores reflect this positioning. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 30,607 and Vulkan score of 28,964 indicate moderate compute capability, but the PassMark DirectX scores are very low, with DirectX 11 at 33 and DirectX 12 at 29. The G3D score of 5,433 is the primary gaming metric, and it aligns with the GPU’s 40th percentile ranking. The nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon R7 250 and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650, both of which are older or lower-tier cards. For rendering, the GPU’s FP32 performance of 2.688 TFLOPS is insufficient for professional 3D rendering or video editing tasks that rely heavily on GPU acceleration. The RT cores are present but underpowered, so ray-traced effects will be slow. Overall, the Arc A310 is best suited for light 2D work, basic video playback, and older games, rather than modern graphics-intensive applications.

Who Should Build It

This build targets users who need a powerful CPU for multi-threaded workloads but have minimal graphics requirements. The Ryzen 7 7700X’s 85th percentile CPU ranking makes it ideal for content creators, software developers, and students who run CPU-bound applications like code compilation, data analysis, or 3D modeling (CPU-based). The 8 cores and 16 threads, combined with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 19,088, provide ample performance for video encoding, rendering, and virtual machines. The GPU, however, limits the system to basic graphical tasks, so it is not suitable for gamers or professionals who rely on GPU acceleration.

For small business workstations, the CPU’s ECC memory support and high integer math score of 112,601 make it a reliable choice for database management or financial modeling. The GPU’s 40th percentile ranking means it can handle office productivity software, spreadsheets, and web browsing without issue. Students in engineering or computer science fields would benefit from the CPU’s compile times and simulation performance, but they would need to avoid GPU-intensive software like CAD with real-time rendering. Content creators who work with video editing software that primarily uses CPU encoding would see good performance, but GPU-accelerated effects would be slow. The system is a poor fit for gamers, as the Arc A310’s DirectX 12 score of 29 and low VRAM would result in subpar frame rates in modern titles. Instead, it suits users who prioritize CPU compute and treat graphics as a secondary concern.

Balance and Bottleneck

The data clearly shows a significant imbalance between the CPU and GPU. The Ryzen 7 7700X ranks in the 85th percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel Arc A310 ranks in the 40th percentile of all GPUs. This disparity means the GPU is the primary bottleneck in any workload that involves graphics or GPU compute. In gaming, the CPU’s high single-thread performance (PassMark single-thread score of 4,190) would easily keep up with the GPU’s output, but the GPU’s low G3D score of 5,433 would cap frame rates. The FPS scaling would be limited by the GPU, meaning that even at lower resolutions, the Arc A310 would struggle to maintain high frame rates in demanding games.

In CPU-bound workloads like 3D rendering (CPU-based), video encoding, or software compilation, the CPU would be the limiting factor only if the task exceeds its capabilities. However, with 8 cores and 16 threads, the 7700X is capable of handling most productivity tasks, so the GPU’s role is minimal. For tasks that use GPU acceleration, such as rendering in Blender or video effects in Adobe Premiere, the Arc A310’s low FP32 performance (2.688 TFLOPS) and limited VRAM would cause significant slowdowns, making the GPU the bottleneck. The system’s combined percentile of 63 reflects this imbalance, with the CPU dragging the overall score up and the GPU pulling it down.

The memory bandwidth of the GPU (124.0 GB/s) is also a constraint, as it is far lower than the CPU’s memory bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s, but the GPU’s bandwidth is still a limiting factor for texture loading and frame buffer operations. In summary, the CPU is a high-performance component that will rarely be the bottleneck, while the GPU will limit the system in any graphically intensive task. Users should expect the GPU to be the primary constraint in gaming and GPU-accelerated workloads.

Build Overview

This is a desktop build (buildClass: desktop) that pairs the AMD Ryzen 7 7700X with the Intel Arc A310. The CPU is a high-end desktop processor from AMD’s 7000 series, featuring 8 cores and 16 threads, based on the Zen 4 architecture (Raphael). It is fabricated on a 5 nm process and has a TDP of 105 W. The GPU is Intel’s entry-level Arc A310, based on the Xe-HPG architecture (Alchemist generation), with 4 GB of GDDR6 memory and a TDP of 30 W. The combined percentile of 63 places this system in the upper-mid tier of all desktop builds, but this ranking is heavily skewed by the CPU’s 85th percentile performance, which is offset by the GPU’s 40th percentile ranking.

The system’s overall tier is that of a productivity-focused desktop, capable of handling heavy CPU workloads but limited in graphics performance. The CPU’s average benchmark score of 35,909 is competitive with top-tier processors like the Intel Core Ultra 9 185H, which scores 35,670, while the GPU’s average score of 7,550 is comparable to the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650, which scores 7,472. This pairing is unusual in that it prioritizes CPU performance over GPU, making it suitable for tasks like software development, scientific computing, or server-like workloads, but not for gaming or GPU rendering. The build class is desktop, indicating a stationary, full-size system with upgrade potential, though the GPU would need to be replaced for any serious graphical work.

CPU Analysis

The AMD Ryzen 7 7700X is an 8-core, 16-thread processor from the 7000 series, based on the Zen 4 architecture, codenamed Raphael. It operates at a base clock of 4.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz, with a TDP of 105 W. The CPU is fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC, with 6,570 million transistors on a 71 mm² die. It has a cache hierarchy of 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 32 MB of shared L3 cache. The memory support is dual-channel DDR5 with a bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s, and it supports ECC memory. The CPU provides PCIe Gen 5 with 24 lanes, and it includes integrated Radeon Graphics, though this is not the primary GPU in this build.

Benchmark results show the CPU’s strengths. In 3DMark, the 16-thread score of 8,859 is nearly identical to the max-thread score of 8,852, indicating that the CPU scales well with all threads. The single-thread score of 1,090 is respectable, and the 8-thread score of 7,057 shows good performance in moderately threaded workloads. Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 19,088 is a strong indicator of multi-threaded performance, while the single-core score of 1,987 is competitive. Geekbench multi-core score of 12,451 and single-core score of 2,289 further confirm its capabilities. The PassMark scores are particularly telling: integer math at 112,601, floating-point math at 68,986, and data compression at 420,240 all point to excellent compute performance for tasks like encryption, scientific calculations, and file compression.

The CPU’s percentile rank of 85 means it outperforms 85% of all CPUs, and its average benchmark score of 35,909 places it just ahead of rivals like the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5845 (35,802) and the Intel Core 7 250H (35,728). For real workloads, this translates to fast compilation times, efficient video encoding (using CPU codecs), and smooth multitasking. The 8 cores and 16 threads are well-suited for parallel tasks, and the high boost clock of 5.40 GHz ensures responsive single-threaded performance. The CPU is a top-tier choice for productivity, but its performance is wasted when paired with a low-end GPU, as many modern applications offload graphics tasks to the GPU.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: This build is not suitable for high-refresh gaming. The Intel Arc A310’s G3D score of 5,433 and DirectX 12 score of 29 indicate that it cannot produce high frame rates in modern games. The CPU’s strong single-thread performance would not help, as the GPU would be the bottleneck, likely capping FPS well below 60 in demanding titles.

Streaming: Streaming involves both CPU encoding (e.g., x264) and GPU rendering. The CPU’s 8 cores and 16 threads, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 19,088, can handle software encoding while gaming, but the GPU’s low performance would result in poor game visuals. Streaming older or light games might work, but modern games would suffer.

Video editing: Video editing software like Adobe Premiere uses both CPU and GPU. The CPU’s high multi-threaded scores (PassMark multi-thread 35,686) would accelerate timeline scrubbing and export, but the GPU’s low FP32 performance (2.688 TFLOPS) would slow down effects and color grading. This build is best for CPU-heavy editing workflows with minimal GPU effects.

3D rendering: CPU-based rendering (e.g., Blender Cycles with CPU) would benefit from the CPU’s 16 threads, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 19,088. However, GPU-based rendering would be very slow due to the Arc A310’s low compute power. The system is viable for CPU rendering but not for GPU-accelerated rendering.

Software development: The CPU excels here, with a PassMark integer math score of 112,601 and data compression score of 420,240, making code compilation and file I/O fast. The GPU is irrelevant for most development tasks, so this build is excellent for developers who need rapid build times.

Student and office work: For typical office tasks like word processing, spreadsheets, and web browsing, the GPU is more than adequate, and the CPU’s power is overkill but ensures smooth multitasking. Students in engineering or computer science would benefit from the CPU’s compute power for simulations or coding, but they would need a better GPU for any graphics-heavy coursework.

The overall verdict is that this build is a CPU-centric workstation with limited graphics capability, best suited for productivity, development, and CPU-based compute tasks, while being inadequate for modern gaming or GPU-accelerated workloads.

Rate My PC: AMD Ryzen 7 7700X + Intel Arc A310

Power Build

System Balance Analysis

AMD Ryzen 7 7700X

Intel Arc A310

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

Upgrade Path and Platform

Benchmark Performance

Gaming Performance

FAQ

GPU Analysis

Who Should Build It

Balance and Bottleneck

Build Overview

CPU Analysis

Usage Scenarios

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