SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: AMD Ryzen 7 8700G + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090

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

94 / 100
ULTIMATE READY

Apex Performer

Top 6% 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%
VS
GPU
98%
PROCESSOR

AMD Ryzen 7 8700G

33,089 Benchmark Score
Top 10% Market Ranking
View Full Specs →
GRAPHICS CARD

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090

79,842 Benchmark Score
Top 2% 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 8700G and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 represent a fascinating pairing of a mainstream 8-core APU with the flagship of NVIDIA’s consumer GPU lineup. The data shows a desktop build that combines a power-efficient Zen 4 processor with a massive Blackwell 2.0 graphics card, creating a system with a stark contrast in component tiers. This analysis examines the benchmark scores, platform characteristics, and workload implications of this specific configuration.

CPU Analysis

The AMD Ryzen 7 8700G is built on the Zen 4 architecture using the Phoenix codename, manufactured on TSMC’s 4 nm process node. The chip contains 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 4.20 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. It integrates a Radeon 780M graphics solution, making it a unique hybrid part, but in this build, it serves purely as the processor. The CPU’s 65 W TDP is notably modest for a desktop part, which is a clear indicator of its efficiency-focused design.

Benchmark results place this CPU in the 83rd percentile among all processors, with an average benchmark score of 33089. The 3DMark multi-threaded scores show a scaling pattern: 1978 for 2 threads, 3825 for 4 threads, 6589 for 8 threads, and 7918 for 16 threads. This scaling is nearly linear up to 8 threads, after which the gains from 8 to 16 threads are minimal (6589 to 7918), suggesting the chip reaches a performance plateau when all cores are active. The single-thread 3DMark score of 1010 is modest compared to the multi-thread results, indicating that this CPU’s strength lies in multi-threaded workloads rather than raw single-core speed.

In Cinebench R23, the multicore score of 17128 and single-core score of 1817 provide a clear picture of its rendering capability. The ratio between these scores (roughly 9.4x) shows that the 8-core configuration scales well under full load. Geekbench scores of 14584 multicore and 2337 single-core reinforce this pattern. PassMark results are particularly revealing for content creation tasks: integer math scores 103107, floating point math scores 63815, and extended instructions score 29067. The data compression score of 386811 is exceptionally high, while data encryption at 22842 is relatively lower, suggesting that encryption workloads might not be this CPU’s primary strength.

The nearest rival comparisons show this CPU is statistically tied with several other processors. It matches the Intel Core i7-13650HX and AMD Ryzen 7 7745HX with a 0% delta, and it is essentially even with the AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D (0% delta). The AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 6950H is only 0.3% faster. This means the 8700G is not a performance outlier; it sits squarely in the middle of a competitive pack of mid-range to high-end processors. The inclusion of the 7800X3D in its nearest rivals is notable, as it suggests that for the average benchmark score, the 8700G’s lack of 3D V-Cache is offset by its higher clocks and architecture efficiency.

Gaming Performance

The FACT PACK contains no measured FPS rows for this exact combination of CPU and GPU. The dataIsMeasured flag is false, meaning all gaming performance discussion must be framed as estimates derived from the benchmark scores. This is a critical caveat: the figures presented here are projections, not observed results.

For gaming at 1080p, the bottleneck will almost certainly be the CPU. The 8700G’s single-thread score of 1010 in 3DMark and 1817 in Cinebench R23 are adequate, but the RTX 5090 is designed for extreme throughput. At this resolution, the CPU may struggle to feed the GPU enough frames, particularly in CPU-bound titles. The 8-core, 16-thread configuration helps in modern games that use multiple cores, but the per-core performance is not exceptional.

At 1440p, the balance shifts. The GPU’s massive compute resources become more relevant, and the CPU bottleneck is less pronounced. The RTX 5090’s 32 GB of GDDR7 memory and 1.79 TB/s bandwidth provide a massive data pipeline that can handle high-resolution textures and complex scenes. The estimated frame rates at this resolution would be high, but the exact numbers are unknown without measured data.

At 4K, the RTX 5090 takes full control. This is where the GPU’s 104.8 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 423.6 GPixel/s pixel rate come into play. The CPU becomes a supporting player, providing enough single-thread performance to drive the game logic while the GPU renders at maximum detail. The estimated performance at 4K would be significantly better relative to the CPU’s capabilities, as the workload is overwhelmingly GPU-bound.

The lack of measured FPS data means these are qualitative estimates. The benchmark scores suggest that this system is capable of high-refresh gaming at lower resolutions, but the CPU is the limiting factor there. At higher resolutions, the GPU’s dominance ensures a smoother experience.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The CPU uses AMD Socket AM5, which is the contemporary desktop platform from AMD. The memory support is DDR5 with a dual-channel bus, providing a memory bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s. This bandwidth is a potential limitation for the RTX 5090, as the GPU has its own 1.79 TB/s of bandwidth, but the system memory bandwidth must handle data transfers between CPU and GPU. The platform supports PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes from the CPU, which is sufficient for the GPU’s PCIe 5.0 x16 interface — the GPU will run at PCIe 4.0 speeds, but the bandwidth difference is unlikely to be a major bottleneck for gaming.

The suggested PSU for the RTX 5090 is 950 W, while the CPU’s TDP is 65 W. This creates a massive power headroom requirement. The data shows a system that consumes a significant amount of power under load, driven almost entirely by the GPU. A sensible next upgrade for this platform would be to replace the CPU with a higher-tier AM5 part in the future, as the socket is current and supports the latest generation of AMD processors. However, the motherboard must support PCIe 5.0 to fully utilize the GPU’s bus interface; the current PCIe Gen 4 support from the CPU is a potential upgrade point.

The platform’s memory support for DDR5 is modern, but the 83.2 GB/s bandwidth is not exceptional for a high-end build. For workloads that are memory-bandwidth sensitive, this could be a limiting factor. The ECC memory support is listed as false, which is typical for consumer platforms.

FAQ

Q: What is the launch MSRP of the AMD Ryzen 7 8700G?

A: The launch MSRP is $329.

Q: How does the CPU’s multi-threaded performance compare to its nearest rival?

A: The CPU’s average benchmark score is 33089, which is exactly 0% different from the Intel Core i7-13650HX and AMD Ryzen 7 7745HX, and 0.3% slower than the AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 6950H.

Q: What is the GPU’s memory configuration?

A: The GPU has 32 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 512-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 1.79 TB/s.

Q: Is there measured FPS data for this build?

A: No, the FACT PACK contains no measured FPS rows for this exact combination, and the dataIsMeasured flag is false.

Q: What is the CPU’s socket type?

A: The CPU uses AMD Socket AM5.

Q: What is the GPU’s percentile rank among all GPUs?

A: The GPU is in the 92nd percentile, with an average benchmark score of 79842.

Q: What is the suggested PSU wattage for the GPU?

A: The suggested PSU is 950 W.

Benchmark Performance

The combined percentile for this build is 88, indicating a high-performing system overall. The CPU’s average benchmark score of 33089 places it in the 83rd percentile, while the GPU’s average benchmark score of 79842 places it in the 92nd percentile. The combined picture is one of a GPU that is significantly stronger relative to its peers than the CPU.

The CPU’s benchmark suite shows a mixed profile. The 3DMark scores are consistent across 16 threads (7918) and max threads (7917), confirming that the 8-core/16-thread configuration is fully utilized. The PassMark multithread score of 31690 and single-thread score of 3928 are reasonable for a mid-range desktop part. The Cinebench R15 multicore score of 2693 is lower relative to the R23 score, which is expected due to the different rendering workloads.

The GPU’s benchmark scores are dominated by the Geekbench results: OpenCL scores 334370, and Vulkan scores 376728. These are massive numbers that reflect the GPU’s compute capability. The PassMark G3D score of 39650 is high, while the DirectX 12 score of 185 is relatively low, which is unusual but may reflect driver or test-specific conditions. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 18355 provides a modern gaming benchmark reference.

The GPU’s nearest rivals are interesting: the NVIDIA Tesla P100 PCIe 16 GB is 0.3% faster, and the AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT is 1.1% faster. These are professional and mobile parts, respectively, which suggests that the RTX 5090’s average score is comparable to a range of specialized hardware. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X is 1.4% slower. This indicates that the RTX 5090’s benchmark profile is not purely about gaming; it is a compute monster.

GPU Analysis

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 is a massive piece of hardware. It uses the GB202 chip on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture, manufactured on TSMC’s 5 nm process. The chip contains 92,200 million transistors on a 750 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 122.9M / mm². This is a flagship-grade chip with 32 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 512-bit bus, delivering 1.79 TB/s of bandwidth.

The GPU has 21760 shading units, 680 TMUs, and 176 ROPs. It includes 170 RT cores and 680 tensor cores, making it fully equipped for ray tracing and AI-accelerated workloads. The clock speeds are 2017 MHz base and 2407 MHz boost, with memory running at 1750 MHz (28 Gbps effective). The pixel rate is 423.6 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 1,636.8 GTexel/s. The FP32 performance is 104.8 TFLOPS, with FP16 at 104.8 TFLOPS (1:1).

The benchmark scores reflect this hardware’s compute focus. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 334370 and Vulkan score of 376728 are extraordinary, indicating that this GPU is not just for gaming but for serious compute workloads like rendering, simulation, and machine learning. The PassMark GPU compute score of 26756 is also high, though the DirectX scores are lower, which might suggest that the GPU is not fully optimized for legacy APIs.

For rendering workloads, the 104.8 TFLOPS of FP32 performance is a massive number. This translates to real-world capability in 3D rendering, video processing, and other GPU-accelerated tasks. The 32 GB of VRAM is a key feature for professionals working with large datasets or high-resolution textures, as it reduces the need for memory swapping. The RT cores (170) and tensor cores (680) provide dedicated hardware for ray tracing and AI denoising, which are critical for modern rendering pipelines.

Who Should Build It

This build targets users who need extreme GPU performance but do not prioritize CPU compute. The 83rd percentile CPU is competent but not top-tier, while the 92nd percentile GPU is near the top of its class. This configuration suits gamers at 4K resolution, where the GPU’s dominance is fully realized and the CPU’s limitations are less impactful.

Content creators who rely heavily on GPU-accelerated rendering will benefit from the RTX 5090’s 32 GB of VRAM and 104.8 TFLOPS of FP32 performance. Video editors using GPU-based effects and color grading will see significant acceleration. 3D artists working with ray-traced scenes will leverage the 170 RT cores and 680 tensor cores.

Software developers working on GPU compute projects, such as CUDA-based applications or machine learning models, will find the 5090’s compute performance compelling. The 92nd percentile GPU rank and the massive Vulkan score of 376728 indicate strong compute capability.

Students and small business users might find this build overkill, as the CPU’s 65 W TDP and modest performance are not suited for heavy multitasking or CPU-intensive workloads. However, for users who need a workstation for GPU-centric tasks, this pairing is sensible. The desktop class build is not portable, so it is intended for a fixed workstation or gaming rig.

Build Overview

This is a desktop build that pairs an AMD Ryzen 7 8700G with an NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090. The CPU is an 8-core, 16-thread Zen 4 part with a 65 W TDP, designed for efficiency. The GPU is a flagship Blackwell 2.0 part with a 575 W TDP, designed for maximum performance. The build class is desktop, and the combined percentile is 88, placing it in the top tier of systems.

The CPU’s 83rd percentile and the GPU’s 92nd percentile create a system that is more powerful on the graphics side than on the processor side. The average benchmark scores are 33089 for the CPU and 79842 for the GPU, clearly showing the GPU’s relative strength. This is not a balanced build; it is a GPU-centric system where the CPU is a supporting component.

The launch MSRP for the GPU is 1,999 USD, while the CPU is $329. This price differential is reflected in the performance data. The system’s overall tier, based on the 88th combined percentile, is high-end, but the CPU is the weaker link. The GPU’s 32 GB of VRAM and 1.79 TB/s bandwidth are modern, while the CPU’s 83.2 GB/s memory bandwidth and PCIe Gen 4 support are more mainstream.

Balance and Bottleneck

The data clearly indicates that the GPU is the dominant component in this build. The GPU’s average benchmark score of 79842 is 2.4 times higher than the CPU’s 33089. This suggests that in most workloads, the GPU will be the primary performance driver, and the CPU will be the limiting factor in scenarios that require strong single-thread or multi-thread CPU performance.

In gaming at lower resolutions (1080p), the CPU is likely to bottleneck the GPU. The CPU’s single-thread score of 1010 in 3DMark is not exceptional, and the RTX 5090 is capable of producing frame rates that exceed what the CPU can feed. The FPS scaling, while not measured, would show diminishing returns as resolution decreases, with the CPU limiting frame rates.

At higher resolutions (4K), the bottleneck shifts to the GPU. The GPU’s 104.8 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 423.6 GPixel/s pixel rate are more than sufficient to render high-resolution frames, and the CPU’s role becomes less critical. The bottleneck is thus resolution-dependent: CPU-bound at low resolutions, GPU-bound at high resolutions.

In compute workloads, the GPU is also the bottleneck in the sense that it is the faster component. For tasks like 3D rendering or machine learning, the GPU’s 92nd percentile rank means it will complete tasks much faster than the CPU’s 83rd percentile rank could. The CPU’s PassMark integer math score of 103107 is respectable, but the GPU’s FP32 performance dwarfs it for parallel tasks.

The memory subsystem is another potential bottleneck. The CPU’s 83.2 GB/s memory bandwidth is much lower than the GPU’s 1.79 TB/s. In workloads that require frequent data transfers between CPU and GPU, this disparity could cause stalls. The PCIe Gen 4 interface, while not PCIe 5.0, provides a data path that is likely adequate for most tasks, but it is a point of concern for extreme workloads.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: At 1080p and 1440p, the CPU may limit frame rates, but the GPU’s massive compute power ensures high settings are possible. The estimated FPS would be high, but the exact figures are unmeasured. At 4K, the GPU dominates, and the system is capable of high-refresh gaming at maximum detail.

Streaming: The CPU’s 8 cores and 16 threads are sufficient for encoding and streaming while gaming, but the GPU’s tensor cores (680) can also handle encoding tasks. The system has ample headroom for streaming at high bitrates, though the CPU’s modest single-thread performance might cause minor frame drops in CPU-bound games.

Video editing: The GPU’s 32 GB of VRAM and 104.8 TFLOPS of FP32 performance accelerate effects, color grading, and export times significantly. The CPU’s Geekbench multicore score of 14584 handles timeline scrubbing and basic editing tasks adequately. This is a strong system for professional video work.

3D rendering: The GPU’s 170 RT cores and 680 tensor cores accelerate ray tracing and AI denoising. The 32 GB of VRAM handles large scenes and high-resolution textures. The CPU’s Cinebench R23 multicore score of 17128 is adequate for scene preparation, but the GPU does the heavy lifting.

Software development: The CPU’s PassMark data compression score of 386811 is excellent for build tools and compilation tasks. The GPU’s compute performance is useful for developers working on GPU-accelerated applications or running simulations. The 65 W CPU TDP keeps power draw manageable during long development sessions.

Student and office work: This is overkill for typical student or office tasks. The CPU’s 83rd percentile rank is more than sufficient, but the GPU’s 575 W TDP and suggested 950 W PSU make this an impractical choice for basic productivity. The system would idle at high power consumption and provide no benefit for word processing or spreadsheet work.