SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS + 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)

▼

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

89%

GPU

93%

PROCESSOR

AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS

29,955 Benchmark Score

Top 11% 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

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 8845HS and Intel Arc A370M form a laptop pairing that sits firmly in the upper-midrange of the mobile performance spectrum. The data shows a CPU that excels in multi-threaded throughput paired with a discrete GPU that delivers entry-level 1080p gaming capability, creating a system with a clear split between compute-heavy productivity and lighter graphical workloads. This combination targets users who prioritize processor performance for creative and professional tasks while still wanting the benefit of a dedicated graphics solution over integrated alternatives.

CPU Analysis

The AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS is an 8-core, 16-thread processor built on the Zen 4 architecture, specifically under the Hawk Point codename. It operates within a 45-watt TDP envelope, a figure that positions it as a high-performance mobile part intended for thicker laptops or those with robust cooling solutions. The chip is manufactured on TSMC's 4nm process node, integrating 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die, which contributes to its efficiency and performance density.

Clock speeds are substantial, with a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. This boost capability is critical for single-threaded responsiveness, and the benchmark data confirms its strength. In the 3dMark single-thread test, the CPU scores 990 points, while in Cinebench R23 single-core it reaches 1769 points. These figures indicate strong per-core performance that translates to snappy application launches and responsive everyday use, though the data suggests the chip's real personality emerges under multi-threaded loads.

The cache hierarchy is generous. Each core has 64 KB of L1 cache and 1 MB of L2 cache, with a shared 16 MB L3 pool. This large L3 cache is beneficial for workloads that share data across cores, such as video encoding or physics simulations. The benchmark results validate the multi-threading strength: the 3dMark 16-thread score is 7404, which rises slightly to 7413 at max threads, showing near-perfect scaling from 8 to 16 threads. Cinebench R23 multicore reaches 16192 points, and Geekbench multicore hits 12212, both confirming that the 8845HS punches well above its 45W class.

Real-world workload interpretation from these numbers is straightforward. The PassMark multi-thread score of 28498 and integer math score of 97747 indicate strong performance in compilation tasks, spreadsheet calculations, and general scientific computing. The floating-point math score of 59254 suggests capable handling of 3D rendering and simulations that rely on FP32 operations. The 3dmark 4-thread score of 3690 is particularly relevant for older games and applications that use fewer cores but require high frequency, where the 5.10 GHz boost clock provides an advantage. The CPU's percentile ranking of 81 means it outperforms 81% of all CPUs in the database, placing it comfortably in the upper tier of mobile processors. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS, has an identical average benchmark score of 29955 with a 0% delta, confirming that the 8845HS is essentially a refresh of that successful design.

Gaming Performance

The factor pack contains no measured FPS rows for this exact CPU+GPU combination, meaning there is no empirical frame rate data available. As such, all gaming performance figures discussed here are qualitative estimates derived from the benchmark scores of both components, not measured results. The absence of measured data is notable and should be considered when evaluating expected gaming behavior.

Based on the CPU's 3dMark 4-thread score of 3690 and single-thread score of 990, the processor is more than capable of feeding a mid-range GPU in most titles. The Intel Arc A370M, however, is the limiting factor in gaming scenarios. The GPU's Geekbench Vulkan score of 28673 and OpenCL score of 29676 place it in the 74th percentile of all GPUs, suggesting it can handle esports titles and older AAA games at 1080p with medium settings. The GPU's 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus with 112.0 GB/s bandwidth will constrain texture-heavy modern games, likely requiring reduced texture quality settings to avoid stuttering.

For competitive shooters like Counter-Strike or Valorant, the high CPU single-thread performance combined with the GPU's 1024 shading units should yield playable frame rates at 1080p, though the 4 GB VRAM may cause issues in certain maps with heavy asset streaming. In more demanding titles like Cyberpunk 2077 or Microsoft Flight Simulator, the A370M's 4.198 TFLOPS of FP32 performance will struggle to maintain 60 FPS at 1080p even at low settings, and users should expect to drop resolution or heavily rely on upscaling technologies. The GPU's support for DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4 means it can access modern rendering features, but the raw compute throughput limits overall headroom. The estimated nature of these figures cannot be overstated — without measured FPS data, these are projections based on comparable hardware performance tiers.

GPU Analysis

The Intel Arc A370M is a mobile discrete GPU based on the Xe-HPG architecture, specifically the DG2-128 chip manufactured on TSMC's 6nm process. It contains 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, with a transistor density of 45.9M per mm². The GPU operates with a base clock of 1550 MHz and a boost clock of 2050 MHz, which are healthy frequencies for a mobile part in its class.

The memory subsystem is the most notable constraint. The 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus provides 112.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which is modest for modern games. This bandwidth figure is roughly half of what many competing 6 GB or 8 GB GPUs offer, making the A370M more suited to 1080p gaming with reduced texture detail rather than higher resolutions or high-quality settings. The memory clock runs at 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective data rate, which is standard for the memory type.

Compute resources include 1024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 32 render output units. The pixel rate is 65.60 GPixel/s and the texture rate is 131.2 GTexel/s. These figures indicate the GPU can handle basic rasterization tasks efficiently but will bottleneck on complex pixel shaders. The FP32 performance of 4.198 TFLOPS is the headline compute number, while FP16 performance doubles to 8.397 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, useful for some AI-accelerated workloads. The GPU also includes 8 dedicated ray tracing cores, a feature that was rare in this performance class at release, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing in supported titles, albeit at lower resolutions and with significant performance trade-offs.

The A370M's average benchmark score of 29175 places it at the 74th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH, scores 29197, representing a 0.1% deficit for the Intel part. Interestingly, the AMD Radeon RX 6800M appears in the nearest rivals list with a score of 28874, showing a 1% lead for the A370M in these specific benchmarks, though that comparison is misleading given the 6800M's much larger memory bus and higher power envelope. The GPU's production status is end-of-life, suggesting Intel has moved on to newer architectures, but the A370M remains a functional entry-level discrete option.

Balance and Bottleneck

The data reveals a pronounced imbalance between CPU and GPU capabilities in this pairing. The CPU ranks in the 81st percentile while the GPU sits at the 74th, creating a system where the processor is the dominant component in most workloads. In CPU-intensive tasks like video encoding, 3D rendering, or software compilation, the Ryzen 7 8845HS will be the primary driver, and the GPU will have little impact on performance. The CPU's Cinebench R23 multicore score of 16192 and PassMark multi-thread score of 28498 indicate it can sustain heavy all-core loads without significant thermal throttling in a well-designed laptop chassis.

In gaming, the bottleneck shifts decisively to the GPU. The CPU's 3dMark 8-thread score of 6085 demonstrates it can handle the multi-threaded game logic and physics of modern titles, while the A370M's 4.198 TFLOPS and 112.0 GB/s bandwidth will become the limiting factor. The FPS scaling in games will be constrained by the GPU's pixel and texture rates, meaning that even if the CPU can deliver high frame times, the GPU will cap the output. This is not necessarily a negative — it means the system will not suffer from CPU-induced stuttering in games, but it also means the CPU's potential is underutilized in gaming scenarios.

The percentile gap of 7 points (81 vs 74) suggests that the GPU is the weaker link for balanced performance. For productivity applications that use both components, such as video editing with GPU-accelerated effects or 3D modeling with real-time viewports, the GPU's limited VRAM and bandwidth will create bottlenecks during texture loading and effect rendering. The CPU's 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth, however, is ample for its needs, and the dual-channel DDR5 support ensures the processor is not starved for data. The overall system is best described as CPU-first, with the GPU serving as a supplementary accelerator for light graphics tasks.

Benchmark Performance

The exact scores paint a detailed picture of this pairing's capabilities. The CPU's average benchmark score is 29955, placing it in the 81st percentile of all CPUs. The GPU's average benchmark score is 29175, placing it in the 74th percentile of all GPUs. The combined percentile for this build is 78, indicating that the pairing outperforms 78% of all other CPU+GPU combinations in the database.

The CPU's strongest results come in multi-threaded workloads. The PassMark data compression score of 344439 and random string sorting score of 41446 indicate excellent performance in data-heavy tasks, while the extended instructions score of 25642 shows strong SIMD processing capability. The single-thread PassMark score of 3738 and Geekbench single-core of 2081 confirm the high-frequency design. These scores collectively suggest a processor that can handle both bursty, latency-sensitive tasks and sustained multi-threaded workloads with equal competence.

The GPU's Geekbench OpenCL score of 29676 and Vulkan score of 28673 are close, showing consistent performance across different compute APIs. The slight OpenCL advantage suggests the driver optimizations are better for general compute tasks. The GPU's nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH, has a 0.1% higher average score, indicating that the A370M is competitive with older, higher-power discrete GPUs. Taken together, the CPU and GPU scores show a system that is significantly stronger in processor-bound tasks than GPU-bound tasks, with the combined 78th percentile reflecting that the CPU drags the overall ranking upward relative to what the GPU alone would achieve.

Who Should Build It

This CPU+GPU pairing is best suited for users whose primary workload is CPU-intensive and who need only occasional or light GPU acceleration. Students in engineering or computer science programs will benefit from the 8-core, 16-thread processor for compiling code, running virtual machines, or analyzing large datasets, while the A370M provides enough graphics power for CAD viewport rendering and basic visualization tasks. The CPU's 16 MB of L3 cache and high boost clock make it responsive for interactive development environments.

Content creators who work primarily with audio, video encoding, or 2D graphics will find the CPU's PassMark multi-thread score of 28498 and Cinebench R23 multicore of 16192 sufficient for rendering timelines and exporting projects, with the GPU offering hardware acceleration for effects that support OpenCL or DirectX. Small business workstations handling spreadsheets, databases, and office productivity will see excellent performance from the CPU's data compression and encryption scores of 344439 and 20416 respectively. Gamers at 1080p with modest settings, particularly those playing esports titles, will find the system adequate, but users expecting high-refresh-rate AAA gaming will be disappointed by the GPU's 4 GB VRAM and 112.0 GB/s bandwidth. The system is not well-suited for 1440p or 4K gaming, as the GPU's pixel rate of 65.60 GPixel/s will struggle at those resolutions.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The CPU uses AMD Socket FP8, a mobile-specific socket that is not user-upgradeable in the traditional sense. Memory support is limited to DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration, providing 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The CPU offers PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes, which is sufficient for a discrete GPU and one or two NVMe SSDs. The GPU uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, which is narrower than the x16 slot most desktop GPUs use but adequate for the A370M's bandwidth requirements.

The CPU's TDP is 45 watts, and the GPU's TDP is 35 watts, totaling 80 watts for the core components. The suggested PSU field is null, meaning no specific power supply recommendation is provided, but the combined 80W TDP implies that a laptop power adapter in the 100-150W range would be typical for this class. The GPU is marked as end-of-life, so an upgrade path for the graphics component would require replacing the entire laptop or using an external GPU enclosure, which is not typical for this form factor. The CPU is still listed as active production, so laptops with this processor remain available. A sensible next upgrade for users needing more graphics performance would be a laptop with a higher-tier GPU, while those needing more CPU performance would look to a newer generation processor.

Build Overview

This build pairs the AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS with the Intel Arc A370M in a laptop form factor. The CPU is an 8-core, 16-thread Zen 4 processor on the 4nm Hawk Point architecture, while the GPU is a 6nm Xe-HPG DG2-128 chip with 4 GB of GDDR6 memory. The overall class is laptop, and the combined percentile of 78 indicates this is a solidly upper-midrange system. The CPU's 81st percentile ranking is the standout feature, making this primarily a productivity-focused machine that happens to include a discrete GPU for light gaming and hardware-accelerated compute. The GPU's 74th percentile ranking, while respectable for an entry-level discrete part, is the limiting factor for graphics-intensive applications. The system is best described as a workstation-class CPU with a budget-class GPU, which is an unusual but not impractical combination for users who prioritize processor performance above all else.

FAQ

Q: What is the CPU's multi-threaded performance compared to its closest rival?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS has an average benchmark score of 29955, which is exactly equal to the AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS with a 0% delta. It also leads the AMD Ryzen 7 5800XT by 0.3% and the AMD Ryzen 5 9600X by 0.8%.

Q: How does the GPU compare to its nearest competitors in benchmark scores?

A: The Intel Arc A370M scores 29175 on average, putting it 0.1% behind the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH and 0.1% behind the AMD FirePro W8000. It leads the AMD Radeon RX 470 by 0.6% and the AMD Radeon RX 6800M by 1%.

Q: What is the GPU's memory configuration and bandwidth?

A: The GPU has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, providing 112.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock runs at 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective data rate.

Q: Does this system support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the Intel Arc A370M includes 8 dedicated ray tracing cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing in compatible titles, though performance will be limited by the GPU's 4.198 TFLOPS FP32 throughput.

Q: What is the CPU's process node and transistor count?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS is manufactured on TSMC's 4nm process node, containing 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die.

Q: What is the combined performance percentile of this CPU+GPU pairing?

A: The combined percentile is 78, indicating the pairing outperforms 78% of all other CPU+GPU combinations in the database.

Q: What PCIe interface does the GPU use and what are its implications?

A: The GPU uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, which provides sufficient bandwidth for its 112.0 GB/s memory subsystem. This is narrower than the x16 interface used by many desktop GPUs, but the A370M's performance characteristics do not require the additional lanes.

Rate My PC: AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS + Intel Arc A370M

Apex Performer

System Balance Analysis

AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS

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

Optimal Performance

4K Gaming Ready

Performance Tiers Explained

Ultimate

High-End

Mid-Range

Entry Level

Legacy

CPU Analysis

Gaming Performance

GPU Analysis

Balance and Bottleneck

Benchmark Performance

Who Should Build It

Upgrade Path and Platform

Build Overview

FAQ

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