SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: AMD Ryzen 9 5950X + Intel Arc B770

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)

▼

84 Score

Top 16% Ranking

84 / 100

HIGH-END

Power Build

Top 16% of systems. Excellent for 1440p Ultra or 4K High gaming.

1440p Ultra4K High

System Balance Analysis

CPU vs GPU performance ratio

Well Balanced

CPU

94%

GPU

74%

PROCESSOR

AMD Ryzen 9 5950X

51,947 Benchmark Score

Top 6% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

Intel Arc B770

0 Benchmark Score

Top 26% 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 9 5950X paired with the Intel Arc B770 is an unusual combination: a 16-core workstation-class Zen 3 processor from AMD mated to Intel's Battlemage discrete graphics. One important caveat applies throughout this page: no measured FPS rows exist for this exact CPU+GPU combination in the database, so every frame-rate statement here is an estimate derived from the benchmark scores rather than direct measurement. The data shows a build that is heavily CPU-dominant on paper, with a processor sitting in the 91st percentile of all CPUs and a GPU positioned at the 50th percentile, yielding a combined percentile of 71.

CPU Analysis

The Ryzen 9 5950X is a 16-core, 32-thread processor built on AMD's Zen 3 architecture, codenamed Vermeer, and manufactured on TSMC's 7 nm process. The chip runs a 3.40 GHz base clock with boosts up to 4.90 GHz, carries a 105 W TDP, and fits AMD Socket AM4. Its cache hierarchy is generous: 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and a substantial 64 MB of shared L3 — a figure that matters greatly for gaming latency and for workloads with large working sets like compilation and rendering. Memory support is DDR4 on a dual-channel bus with 51.2 GB/s of bandwidth, and ECC memory is supported, which is a notable capability for a desktop part and one reason this chip appears in entry workstation builds. PCIe connectivity is Gen 4 with 20 lanes from the CPU.

The benchmark profile tells a clear story about where this processor sits. Its 3DMark CPU scaling curve is revealing: 944 points single-threaded, 1856 at 2 threads, 3595 at 4 threads, 6598 at 8 threads, 10810 at 16 threads, and 11597 at maximum threads. Two things stand out. First, scaling from 8 to 16 threads is close to linear, which indicates that sustained heavily threaded workloads genuinely exploit all 16 cores. Second, the jump from 16 threads to maximum threads is small — the extra logical processors add only modest headroom, as expected from SMT rather than physical cores. For a workload designer, this means the chip is effectively saturated at 16 concurrent threads.

Cinebench R23 results support the same conclusion: 26017 multi-core against 1614 single-core. Geekbench shows 15233 multi-core and 2083 single-core, and PassMark reports a multithread score of 45424 against a single-thread score of 3470. The consistent pattern is that per-core throughput is solid but not exceptional by current standards, while aggregate throughput is what places this CPU in the 91st percentile against all CPUs in the database. The Cinebench R15 results (4324 multi-core, 266.5 single-core) show the same shape on the older test.

The average benchmark score of 51947 puts the 5950X almost exactly on par with some surprising rivals. The nearest-rivals list is instructive: Intel Core Ultra 5 235HX at 52073 (a delta of -0.2 percent), AMD EPYC 8124P at 52121 (-0.3 percent), Intel Core i9-13900F at 51730 (+0.4 percent), and Intel Core i7-14700 at 52301 (-0.7 percent). In other words, this 2020-launched desktop chip still trades blows within a fraction of a percent with far newer Intel silicon and even an EPYC server part. That longevity is the defining trait of the data here. Its launch MSRP was $799.

Benchmark Performance

Starting with the CPU, the aggregate picture is one of upper-tier performance: a 91st percentile position against all CPUs. The PassMark sub-scores add texture to the aggregate. Data compression scored 624347, data encryption 39593, extended instructions 40468, integer math 185520, floating point math 100280, physics 1878, and random string sorting 65172. The find-prime-numbers score of 228 rounds out a profile that emphasizes throughput across integer, floating point, and memory-bound subtests rather than any single specialty.

The GPU side is thinner on data — the database holds no benchmark scores for the Intel Arc B770, so its standing rests on the percentile field alone: 50th percentile against all GPUs, with an average benchmark score recorded as 0 because no test results are populated. That absence itself is worth flagging. Any statement about Arc B770 performance in this article is therefore an inference from its hardware specification and its percentile position, not from measured scores.

What does the hardware specification imply? The B770 is built on the Xe2-HPG architecture (Battlemage, Arc 7 generation) on TSMC's 5 nm process, with the BMG-G31 chip measuring 368 mm². It fields 4096 shading units, 256 TMUs, 128 ROPs, and 32 RT cores, with a base clock of 2100 MHz and a boost of 2400 MHz. FP32 compute is 19.66 TFLOPS, with FP16 at 39.32 TFLOPS in a 2:1 ratio. Those figures place it comfortably in mid-range territory — capable at mainstream resolutions, but clearly the junior partner in this pairing.

The combined percentile of 71 quantifies the imbalance: the CPU drags the pair upward, the GPU holds it near the middle of the field. This is a build whose compute ceiling far exceeds its graphics ceiling.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming. With the CPU at the 91st percentile and 3DMark scaling showing strong 4-thread (3595) and 8-thread (6598) results, the processor is more than capable of feeding high frame rates. Whether the pair delivers them depends almost entirely on the 50th-percentile GPU — realistic for high-refresh play at 1080p where the CPU's single-thread score of 944 in 3DMark does the heavy lifting.

Streaming. Simultaneous play and encode is a classic many-thread workload. The 3DMark max-threads score of 11597 and Cinebench R23 multi-core of 26017 indicate ample headroom to run a game alongside encoding, with the 16 physical cores providing near-linear scaling up to 16 concurrent threads.

Video editing. Timeline scrubbing, effects rendering, and export all reward the 64 MB L3 cache and the 26017 Cinebench R23 multi-core score. The 512 GB/s memory bandwidth of the GPU and its 16 GB of VRAM help with GPU-accelerated preview, though the absence of GPU benchmark scores means export performance claims must stay qualitative.

3D rendering. The Cinebench R23 multi-core result of 26017 and Geekbench multi-core of 15233 are the strongest signals here — CPU rendering is where this build is most at home. GPU path tracing is possible with the 32 RT cores, but a 50th-percentile GPU sets the ceiling for viewport and GPU-render performance.

Software development. Compilation, containerized workloads, and test suites are throughput-bound. The 3DMark 16-thread score of 10810 versus 6598 at 8 threads shows compiling on all cores nearly doubles throughput versus half the cores — a direct, measurable benefit for large codebases. PassMark integer math at 185520 supports general development workloads.

Student and office work. Single-thread scores (Geekbench 2083, PassMark 3470) are the relevant figures, and they are entirely adequate for browsers, office suites, and light content work. This chip is overkill for pure office use — the 91st percentile position would go largely unused.

Who Should Build It

The data points to three constituencies. First, developers and technical professionals: the near-linear thread scaling up to 16 cores, the 185520 PassMark integer score, and ECC support make this a genuine entry-workstation proposition for compilation-heavy or data-sensitive work. Second, hybrid creator-gamers who prioritize rendering and encoding throughput — the 26017 Cinebench R23 score — and accept mid-tier graphics in exchange. Third, multi-instance or virtualization users on a budget-free basis: 32 threads, ECC, and 64 MB of L3 support running several VMs or containers concurrently.

Who should not build it: pure gamers chasing maximum frame rates at 1440p or 4K. A 91st-percentile CPU paired with a 50th-percentile GPU leaves processor capability stranded in graphically demanding scenarios. Gamers targeting 1080p high-refresh setups get more from the pairing, since the CPU's 944 single-thread 3DMark score and 4-thread score of 3595 can express themselves at that resolution.

Small businesses considering light workstations will find the ECC support and the -0.7 to +0.4 percent deltas against current Intel rivals reassuring: this platform remains competitive with contemporary alternatives despite its 2020 release date.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The CPU occupies AMD Socket AM4 with DDR4 memory on a dual-channel bus delivering 51.2 GB/s. That is a mature platform: AM4 has no forward socket compatibility, so a future CPU upgrade means a platform change. The 20 lanes of PCIe Gen 4 from the CPU are sufficient for the Arc B770's PCIe 4.0 x16 interface plus a fast Gen 4 SSD.

Power planning is straightforward from the pack. The CPU's TDP is 105 W and the GPU's is 225 W, with Intel specifying a suggested PSU of 550 W. Given those figures, a 550 W unit is the stated floor; anything above that provides margin for transient load spikes, though no specific headroom number can be derived from the data provided.

The sensible next upgrade is unambiguous from the percentile spread. Moving the GPU from the 50th percentile upward would raise the combined 71st percentile far more effectively than replacing a CPU already sitting at the 91st percentile. The dual-slot card, its 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin power connectors, and the 550 W suggested PSU indicate that a modestly stronger GPU would fit the same power envelope only if its own requirements align — a detail to verify per-card.

Gaming Performance

As stated at the outset, no measured FPS data exists in the database for this exact combination — the measuredFps field is empty and dataIsMeasured is false. All frame-rate discussion below is estimation from benchmark scores, not measurement.

What can be inferred? At 1080p, the CPU is unlikely to be the limiting factor in most titles: the 944 3DMark single-thread score and 3595 at 4 threads sit in the 91st percentile overall, indicating strong frame-pacing and draw-call throughput. The Arc B770, at the 50th GPU percentile with 19.66 TFLOPS of FP32 and 512 GB/s of memory bandwidth, is positioned for solid mainstream performance at that resolution, with its 16 GB of GDDR6 providing capacity headroom for texture-heavy titles.

At 1440p, expect the balance to shift decisively toward the GPU; the CPU's percentile advantage becomes progressively irrelevant as resolution climbs. At 4K, the GPU is clearly the limiting component. Ray tracing is supported via DirectX 12 Ultimate and the 32 RT cores, but a mid-percentile GPU implies RT effects will carry a meaningful cost — this is estimation, and per-game results will vary with engine and driver maturity, particularly for a Vulkan 1.4-capable, OpenGL 4.6-capable Arc part where API path matters.

Balance and Bottleneck

The pairing is CPU-heavy, and the numbers quantify it precisely. A 91st-percentile CPU against a 50th-percentile GPU produces a combined 71st percentile — and that combined figure sits much closer to what the GPU alone would suggest than what the CPU alone would suggest. The interpretation: in graphically bound workloads, this system behaves like a mid-tier machine; in compute-bound workloads, it behaves like a high-tier machine.

The CPU benchmark scaling curve reinforces this. Because the 3DMark scores rise steeply from single-thread (944) to 16 threads (10810), the processor has reserves that gaming cannot draw upon — games rarely saturate 16 cores, so the effective gaming contribution of this CPU resembles its 4-to-8-thread scores (3595 to 6598) rather than its maximum. Meanwhile the GPU's 50th-percentile position caps the frame output regardless of CPU reserves. Since no measured FPS rows exist, the scaling argument is inference from percentiles and scores rather than from frame data — but the directional conclusion is robust: upgrade the GPU first, and the CPU will not hold the next card back for a long while.

FAQ

Q: How does the Ryzen 9 5950X compare to newer Intel CPUs in the database?

A: Extremely closely. Its average score of 51947 sits within a fraction of a percent of the Intel Core Ultra 5 235HX (-0.2 percent), Intel Core i9-13900F (+0.4 percent), and Intel Core i7-14700 (-0.7 percent), and essentially matches the AMD EPYC 8124P (-0.3 percent).

Q: Does this build have measured frame rates in the database?

A: No. There are no measured FPS rows for this combination, so all gaming figures discussed here are estimates derived from benchmark scores.

Q: How well does the CPU scale with threads?

A: 3DMark CPU scores run 944 single-thread, 3595 at 4 threads, 6598 at 8, 10810 at 16, and 11597 at maximum — near-linear scaling through 16 physical cores with a modest SMT gain beyond.

Q: Is ECC memory supported?

A: Yes, the 5950X supports ECC on its DDR4 dual-channel memory bus — unusual for a desktop part and useful for workstation use.

Q: What power supply does the database suggest?

A: Intel suggests a 550 W PSU for the Arc B770. The CPU has a 105 W TDP and the GPU a 225 W TDP, with the card using one 6-pin and one 8-pin connector.

Q: Which component should be upgraded first?

A: The GPU. It sits at the 50th percentile versus the CPU's 91st, so graphics performance caps the combined 71st-percentile result in games and GPU-accelerated workloads.

Q: What display outputs does the GPU offer?

A: One HDMI 2.1a and three DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, supporting DirectX 12 Ultimate, Vulkan 1.4, and OpenGL 4.6.

GPU Analysis

The Intel Arc B770 is a Battlemage-generation part on the Xe2-HPG architecture, fabbed by TSMC on a 5 nm process with a 368 mm² die (chip designation BMG-G31). Its predecessor architecture is Alchemist. The specification sheet describes a mid-range card: 4096 shading units, 256 texture mapping units, 128 render outputs, and 32 RT cores for hardware ray tracing. Tensor core counts are not listed in the database, so no AI-acceleration claims can be made here.

Clocks run from a 2100 MHz base to a 2400 MHz boost. Memory is 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus running at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective), yielding 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth — a healthy figure for the class, and the 16 GB capacity is generous for texture-heavy modern titles and creative workloads. Pixel fill rate is 307.2 GPixel/s and texture rate is 614.4 GTexel/s. Compute output is 19.66 TFLOPS FP32 and 39.32 TFLOPS FP16 at a 2:1 ratio.

Because the database contains no benchmark scores for this GPU, the 50th percentile position is the only performance anchor. Read against the rest of the system, it means the card supplies mainstream rendering throughput: adequate for high-refresh play at lower resolutions and reasonable performance at 1440p, with the 32 RT cores enabling ray tracing at an undetermined performance cost. For GPU rendering in creative applications, the FP32 figure and bandwidth suggest competence rather than workstation-class throughput — an estimate, pending measured data.

Build Overview

This is a desktop build pairing AMD's 16-core, 32-thread Ryzen 9 5950X — Zen 3, 7 nm, 105 W TDP, AM4, DDR4 with ECC — with Intel's Arc B770 Battlemage GPU on 5 nm, drawing 225 W. The CPU sits in the 91st percentile of all CPUs; the GPU in the 50th percentile of all GPUs; the combination lands at the 71st percentile.

The overall tier, then, is a compute-led upper-mid-range desktop. Its identity comes from the processor: a chip whose average score still matches current-generation rivals within less than a percent, whose thread scaling rewards heavily parallel work, and whose ECC support opens workstation doors. The GPU defines its ceiling in anything graphics-bound. For developers, renderers, streamers, and multi-threaded-workload users, the data describes a strong foundation awaiting a stronger graphics card. For pure gamers, it describes an imbalanced pairing — impressive processor, mid-tier pixels — and one whose clearest next step is printed directly in the percentile columns: the CPU has room to spare, and the GPU is the gate.

Rate My PC: AMD Ryzen 9 5950X + Intel Arc B770

Power Build

System Balance Analysis

AMD Ryzen 9 5950X

Intel Arc B770

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

CPU Analysis

Benchmark Performance

Usage Scenarios

Who Should Build It

Upgrade Path and Platform

Gaming Performance

Balance and Bottleneck

FAQ

GPU Analysis

Build Overview

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