SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS + Intel Arc A350M

Get a comprehensive performance analysis of your gaming rig with detailed benchmarks, bottleneck detection, and upgrade recommendations

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
89%
VS
GPU
92%
PROCESSOR

AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS

29,955 Benchmark Score
Top 11% 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

# AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS + Intel Arc A350M

This pairing combines AMD's Zen 4 mobile architecture with Intel's entry-level Alchemist discrete GPU in a laptop configuration. The CPU is a strong 8-core/16-thread part with a 35W TDP, while the GPU is a 4GB GDDR6 solution aimed at 1080p gaming at medium settings. The data shows this is a balanced mid-range mobile platform, with the CPU landing in the 81st percentile of all CPUs and the GPU in the 70th percentile of all GPUs. The combined percentile of 76 reflects a system that handles productivity tasks well but is limited by GPU memory and bandwidth in gaming. No measured FPS data exists for this exact combination, so all gaming frame rates discussed here are estimates derived from the benchmark scores and should be treated as approximations.

CPU Analysis

The AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS is built on TSMC's 4nm process with Zen 4 architecture, code-named Phoenix. It packs 8 cores and 16 threads, a base clock of 3.80 GHz, and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. The 25,000 million transistors occupy a 178 mm² die, and the cache layout includes 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 16 MB shared L3. This is a mobile-first design on AMD Socket FP8, with dual-channel DDR5 memory support and an 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth. ECC memory is supported, which is unusual for a consumer mobile chip.

Benchmark results show a strong all-rounder. In Cinebench R23, the CPU scores 15,102 multi-core and 1,761 single-core. The single-core score is about 8.6x lower than the multi-core score, indicating excellent scaling across the 8 cores. Geekbench results echo this, with 11,846 multi-core and 2,031 single-core. The 3DMark tests reveal thread scaling: 1,904 for 2 threads, 3,651 for 4 threads, 6,092 for 8 threads, and 7,314 for 16 threads. The jump from 8 to 16 threads (from 6,092 to 7,314) is modest, suggesting that the 8 cores provide most of the performance, with hyperthreading adding roughly 20% at the top end.

PassMark scores reinforce the productivity focus. Multi-thread score is 28,633, single-thread is 3,753, and integer math hits 98,682. Floating-point math is 59,921, which is lower than integer performance but still solid. Data compression scores 345,536 and encryption 20,627. The extended instructions score of 25,747 indicates good AVX-512 or similar vector processing capability. The 81st percentile ranking places this CPU above most desktop and mobile processors, and the average benchmark score of 29,955 puts it on par with the AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS (0% delta) and just ahead of the Ryzen 7 5800XT (0.3% ahead) and Ryzen 7 7840H (0.3% ahead). The Ryzen 5 9600X trails by 0.8%.

For real workloads, this means the 7840HS handles heavy multi-threaded tasks like video encoding, 3D rendering, and software compilation with ease. The single-core performance is equally competitive, so everyday tasks and lightly-threaded applications will feel snappy. The 35W TDP is noteworthy—this is a high-performance part that can sustain its boost clocks in a thin chassis, though sustained all-core loads may push thermal limits.

Balance and Bottleneck

The balance here is asymmetric: the CPU is significantly stronger than the GPU relative to their respective markets. The CPU's 81st percentile ranking versus the GPU's 70th percentile means that in gaming, the GPU will almost always be the limiting factor, especially at higher resolutions or with demanding settings. The GPU's 4 GB VRAM and 112.0 GB/s bandwidth are tight for modern titles, so texture-heavy games will hit memory limits before the GPU's compute is fully utilized.

The CPU's 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth is higher than the GPU's 112.0 GB/s, which is unusual—the GPU should ideally have far more bandwidth to feed its shading units. This mismatch suggests that in gaming, the CPU can feed frames faster than the GPU can render them, leading to CPU-bound scenarios in lighter titles. In productivity tasks, the GPU's 3.379 TFLOPS FP32 performance is adequate for acceleration, but the CPU will still carry most of the load in single-threaded applications.

The 3DMark thread scaling shows the CPU's strength: 2-thread score of 1,904, 4-thread of 3,651, 8-thread of 6,092, and max-thread of 7,316. This near-linear scaling up to 8 threads indicates that the CPU can handle heavily threaded workloads without bottlenecks. The GPU's benchmark scores (Geekbench OpenCL 24,546 and Vulkan 24,747) are close to the CPU's average benchmark score of 29,955, but they are not directly comparable. In practice, the GPU will be the bottleneck in gaming, while the CPU will be the bottleneck in GPU-accelerated compute if the workload is memory-bound on the GPU side.

Gaming Performance

No measured FPS rows exist for this exact combination, so the following frame rates are estimates based on the GPU's benchmark scores and the CPU's known capabilities. Treat these as approximations, not guaranteed results. The Intel Arc A350M sits in the 70th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 24,647. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 590 (0.4% faster), NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile (0.5% faster), AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT (0.8% slower), and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 (1.5% slower). This places it in the same performance class as a desktop RX 590 or GTX 1630, which are entry-level 1080p cards from their generation.

At 1080p with ultra settings, expect around 30-45 FPS in modern AAA titles. The GPU's 4 GB VRAM will be the primary constraint—games that require more than 4 GB will stutter or drop textures. At 1440p, frame rates will fall to 20-30 FPS in most titles, and the VRAM limit will be even more restrictive. The GPU's 64-bit memory bus and 112.0 GB/s bandwidth are low for a discrete card, so memory-heavy scenes will show performance dips. The CPU is more than capable of pushing 100+ FPS in esports titles, but the GPU will limit those to around 60-80 FPS at 1080p medium settings. For older or less demanding games, the A350M can deliver playable frame rates, but this is not a high-refresh gaming platform.

Who Should Build It

This is a laptop configuration, so the target user is someone who needs a portable machine with strong CPU performance and light-to-moderate GPU acceleration. The CPU's 81st percentile ranking and 8-core/16-thread design make it ideal for content creators who edit video, compile code, or run virtual machines. The 16 MB L3 cache and 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth support these workloads well. Students and office workers will find the single-core score of 3,753 (PassMark) more than adequate for document editing, spreadsheets, and web browsing.

Gamers at 1080p who are willing to lower settings will find this playable for most titles, but the 4 GB VRAM and 70th percentile GPU ranking mean it is not for enthusiasts. Small business workstations that run productivity suites, accounting software, or light CAD will benefit from the CPU's multi-threaded muscle. Developers will appreciate the fast compilation times—the Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 15,102 is comparable to many desktop CPUs from a few years ago. The GPU can handle light rendering tasks via OpenCL or Vulkan, but it is not a substitute for a dedicated workstation GPU.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU's average benchmark score is 29,955, which places it in the 81st percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS with an identical average score of 29,955 (0% delta). The Ryzen 7 5800XT scores 29,879 (0.3% behind), the Ryzen 7 7840H scores 29,868 (0.3% behind), and the Ryzen 5 9600X scores 29,713 (0.8% behind). This puts the 7840HS at the top of its immediate competitive set, with a slight edge over desktop parts like the 5800XT.

The GPU's average benchmark score is 24,647, placing it in the 70th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals show a tight cluster: the AMD Radeon RX 590 scores 24,744 (0.4% faster), the NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile scores 24,763 (0.5% faster), the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT scores 24,442 (0.8% slower), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 scores 24,277 (1.5% slower). This means the A350M performs essentially like a desktop RX 590, which is a 2018-era card. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 24,546 and Vulkan score of 24,747 confirm that the GPU handles both compute APIs similarly.

The combined percentile of 76 reflects a system where the CPU outperforms the GPU relative to their respective markets. The CPU is a top-tier mobile part, while the GPU is mid-range at best. This imbalance means that in mixed workloads—like gaming while streaming or rendering while browsing—the CPU will rarely be the bottleneck, but the GPU will limit visual fidelity and frame rates.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The CPU uses AMD Socket FP8, which is a mobile-only socket. Upgrading the CPU in a laptop is generally not feasible, as the chip is soldered or BGA-mounted. The memory support is dual-channel DDR5 with ECC capability, and the memory bandwidth is 89.6 GB/s. The CPU provides 20 PCIe Gen 4 lanes, which is sufficient for a discrete GPU and NVMe storage. The GPU is connected via PCIe 4.0 x8, which is half the lanes of a typical desktop x16 connection but adequate for a 25W part.

The GPU has a TDP of 25W and is marked as end-of-life, with a release date of March 29, 2022. It has no suggested PSU requirement, which is typical for a laptop component. The CPU's TDP is 35W, so the combined power draw is low, allowing for a compact cooling solution. For a sensible next upgrade, users should look at a laptop with a newer GPU, as the A350M is end-of-life and its 4 GB VRAM is the main limitation. The CPU itself is still competitive, but the platform (socket FP8) is not upgradeable, so any upgrade would require a new system. The PCIe 4.0 x8 interface on the GPU is not a bottleneck, but future GPUs would need a x16 connection for full bandwidth.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: Not recommended. The GPU's 70th percentile ranking and 4 GB VRAM will keep frame rates below 60 FPS at 1080p in most modern titles, even with settings lowered. The CPU can easily push high frame rates, but the GPU holds it back.

Streaming: The CPU's 8 cores and 16 threads, combined with a 35W TDP, can handle game capture and encoding while gaming, but the GPU's limited performance means you will be streaming at lower quality settings. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 15,102 indicates enough headroom for x264 encoding at medium preset.

Video editing: Strong. The CPU's multi-threaded performance (PassMark 28,633) will handle 1080p and some 4K editing in software like Premiere Pro. The GPU can accelerate effects via OpenCL, but its 4 GB VRAM limits complex timelines.

3D rendering: Good for CPU-based renderers like Blender's Cycles (CPU mode). The 8-core/16-thread design and 16 MB L3 cache provide solid performance. GPU rendering with the A350M is possible but slow due to the 3.379 TFLOPS FP32 throughput.

Software development: Excellent. The CPU's single-thread score of 3,753 (PassMark) and multi-thread score of 28,633 mean fast compilation and responsive IDEs. The 16 MB L3 cache and 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth reduce build times for large projects.

Student and office work: Overkill but efficient. The CPU's 35W TDP and integrated Radeon 780M graphics mean long battery life for light tasks. The discrete GPU is unnecessary for document editing, spreadsheets, or web browsing, but it does not hurt.

FAQ

Q: Is the Intel Arc A350M good for gaming?

A: It is entry-level. The GPU's average benchmark score of 24,647 places it in the 70th percentile, roughly on par with a desktop AMD Radeon RX 590. With 4 GB VRAM and 112.0 GB/s bandwidth, it can handle 1080p at medium settings for most games, but will struggle with high textures or 1440p.

Q: How does the AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS compare to the Ryzen 7 8845HS?

A: They are essentially identical. The 7840HS has an average benchmark score of 29,955, and the 8845HS scores the same, with a delta of 0%. There is no measurable performance difference between the two.

Q: Can this laptop handle video editing?

A: Yes, the CPU's Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 15,102 and PassMark multi-thread score of 28,633 provide strong performance for 1080p editing. The GPU can assist with effects via OpenCL (Geekbench OpenCL 24,546), but its 4 GB VRAM may limit complex projects.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of the CPU?

A: The CPU supports dual-channel DDR5 with a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. This is higher than the GPU's 112.0 GB/s bandwidth, which is unusual but not problematic.

Q: Is the GPU upgradeable?

A: No. The Intel Arc A350M is a mobile component with a 25W TDP, and it is marked as end-of-life. It is soldered to the motherboard, so any GPU upgrade requires a new laptop.

Q: Does the CPU support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS supports ECC memory, which is rare for a mobile processor. This makes it suitable for workstation-like tasks where data integrity is critical.

Q: How does the GPU compare to the NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile?

A: The RTX A5000 Mobile scores 24,763 in the average benchmark, which is 0.5% higher than the A350M's 24,647. The performance difference is negligible, despite the A5000 being a professional-grade GPU.

GPU Analysis

The Intel Arc A350M is based on the DG2-128 chip with Xe-HPG architecture, part of the Alchemist generation (Arc 3 Mobile). It is built on TSMC's 6nm process with 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 45.9M per mm². The GPU has 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 24 raster operation units. It includes 6 ray tracing cores, which support hardware-accelerated ray tracing in DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The memory subsystem is the weakest point: 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with a bandwidth of 112.0 GB/s. The memory clock is 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). This is insufficient for modern AAA games at high textures, which often require 6-8 GB. The GPU's pixel rate is 52.80 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 105.6 GTexel/s. The FP32 performance is 3.379 TFLOPS, with FP16 at 6.758 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio). The base clock is 1150 MHz, boosting to 2200 MHz.

Benchmark results show a Geekbench OpenCL score of 24,546 and Vulkan score of 24,747, which are nearly identical, indicating consistent performance across APIs. The average benchmark score of 24,647 places it in the 70th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 590, scores 24,744 (0.4% faster), meaning the A350M is essentially a modern equivalent of a 2018 desktop card. The NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile is 0.5% faster, the RX 6600 XT is 0.8% faster, and the GTX 1630 is 1.5% slower.

For rendering, the GPU's 3.379 TFLOPS FP32 performance is adequate for light 3D work, but the 4 GB VRAM limits scene complexity. The 6 RT cores provide ray tracing capability, but at this performance level, ray tracing will only be playable at low resolutions and settings. The 112.0 GB/s bandwidth is a bottleneck for compute tasks that require frequent memory access. The GPU's TDP of 25W is very low, which is why it is designated as an IGP (integrated graphics package) despite being a discrete chip. The PCIe 4.0 x8 interface is sufficient for this performance level. In summary, the A350M is a capable entry-level GPU for 1080p gaming and light compute, but its 4 GB VRAM and narrow memory bus are significant limitations for modern workloads.