SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: AMD Ryzen 9 7950X + Intel Arc A380E

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)

▼

85 Score

Top 15% Ranking

85 / 100

HIGH-END

Power Build

Top 15% of systems. Excellent for 1440p Ultra or 4K High gaming.

1440p Ultra4K High

System Balance Analysis

CPU vs GPU performance ratio

GPU Bottleneck

CPU

96%

GPU

74%

Your GPU is limiting system performance. Consider upgrading to a more powerful graphics card to better utilize your CPU.

PROCESSOR

AMD Ryzen 9 7950X

69,515 Benchmark Score

Top 4% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

Intel Arc A380E

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.

Bottleneck Detected

GPU Bottleneck - Upgrading the weaker component will improve overall performance.

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 7950X paired with the Intel Arc A380E is one of the most lopsided combinations in the benchmark database: a 94th-percentile desktop CPU bolted to a 50th-percentile, now end-of-life entry-level GPU. The pairing yields a combined percentile of 72, which tells the story before any individual score is examined — the CPU carries the build, the graphics card trails far behind it. Notably, no measured FPS data exists for this exact combination in the database, so all frame-rate discussion below is estimated from benchmark scores rather than measured gameplay.

GPU Analysis

The Intel Arc A380E is an Alchemist-generation (Arc 3) part built on the Xe-HPG architecture, fabricated by TSMC on a 6 nm process. The chip, designated DG2-128, packs 7,200 million transistors into a 157 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 45.9M per mm². It is a small GPU by modern standards, and its specifications reflect that.

The memory subsystem is the card's most obvious constraint. Six gigabytes of GDDR6 sits on a narrow 96-bit bus, delivering 186.0 GB/s of bandwidth at an effective 15.5 Gbps (with the memory clocked at 1937 MHz). For rendering workloads, that bandwidth figure and modest capacity cap texture streaming at higher resolutions and detail settings. Neither the buffer size nor the bus width is competitive with anything aimed at serious GPU rendering.

Compute resources are entry-level. The A380E carries 1,024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 32 render output units, producing a pixel rate of 64.00 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 128.0 GTexel/s. Raw FP32 throughput is 4.096 TFLOPS, doubling to 8.192 TFLOPS at FP16 with a 2:1 ratio. Ray tracing is present — 8 RT cores — which matters for API compatibility since the card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (feature level 12_2), Vulkan 1.4, and OpenGL 4.6, but eight RT cores is a token allocation for path-traced or heavily ray-traced rendering. Tensor core data is not listed; AI-accelerated workloads should not be a consideration here.

Clock behaviour is unusual: base and boost are both listed at 2000 MHz, meaning there is no advertised boost headroom over the base frequency. The GPU sits at the 50th percentile versus all GPUs in the database — precisely median — and it carries no benchmark scores in this dataset, with an average benchmark score of zero because no results were recorded. Its production status is End-of-life, with Battlemage named as its successor and Xe Graphics as its predecessor.

For rendering specifically, the interpretation is blunt: the A380E can drive displays — four of them, via DisplayPort 2.0 — and can rasterize modest workloads, but it is not a rendering accelerator. Any GPU-bound task, whether real-time 3D or offline viewport work, will be the slow stage in this machine.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU side of the ledger is dense with results. In 3DMark CPU-profile-style thread scaling, the Ryzen 9 7950X scores 1,099 single-thread, 2,161 at two threads, 4,218 at four, 7,920 at eight, 14,110 at sixteen, and 15,579 at maximum threads. The scaling pattern is informative: throughput nearly doubles from two to four threads and from four to eight, but the jump from sixteen to maximum threads (32) adds only about 10%. That is characteristic of a 16-core/32-thread design where SMT threads supplement rather than multiply throughput.

Cinebench results reinforce the multi-core strength: 5947.5 multi-core and 315.5 single-core in R15, then 36,523 multi-core and 2,000 single-core in R23. The R23 multi-core figure is the headline number — a rendering-oriented score that places the chip firmly in workstation territory. Geekbench returns 22,415 multi-core and 2,613 single-core.

PassMark results cover the practical spread: 62,478 multithread versus 4,266 single-thread, 3102 physics, 225,603 integer math, 138,004 floating point math, 835,923 data compression, 49,336 encryption, 98,501 string sorting, 62,131 extended instructions, and 337 for prime-number finding. Compression and encryption scores in particular indicate strong file-archive and storage-crypto performance.

The aggregate average benchmark score is 69,515, placing the 7950X in the 94th percentile of all CPUs. Against its nearest rivals the margins are razor thin: the Intel Core i7-14700K averages 69,355 (a 0.2% gap), the AMD EPYC 9115 averages 69,288 (0.3%), the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX averages 69,875 (0.5% ahead of the 7950X), and the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F averages 69,996 (0.7% ahead). In other words, this chip trades blows within a fraction of a percent of a rival Intel mainstream flagship, a server EPYC part, a mobile Ryzen 9, and a newer Ryzen 7 — remarkable company for a chip released on September 26, 2022, at a launch MSRP of $699.

The combined picture is a 72nd-percentile system: a top-tier processor harnessed to a median-tier graphics card. The GPU contributes nothing numerically to the score set — it has zero recorded benchmark results — so the combined percentile is essentially the CPU's percentile dragged down by the graphics pairing.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The platform is AMD Socket AM5, which supports DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration with 83.2 GB/s of memory bandwidth. ECC memory is supported, an unusual and welcome feature for a desktop part and one that matters for workstation stability. PCIe connectivity is strong: Gen 5 with 24 lanes from the CPU alone, more than enough to feed the A380E's modest PCIe 4.0 x8 bus interface with headroom to spare.

Power budgeting is straightforward. The CPU's TDP is 170 W and the GPU's is 75 W, with Intel suggesting a 250 W PSU for the A380E on its own. Summing the two TDPs gives 245 W for the pair, so a PSU comfortably above the GPU's standalone 250 W suggestion is the sensible floor, with the database offering no larger figure than that to cite. The A380E requires no power connectors — it draws entirely from the slot — and occupies a single-slot, 20 mm-wide form factor. Its 254 mm length and 127 mm height fit nearly any case.

The upgrade path here is obvious and one-directional. The CPU is the keeper: 94th percentile performance, multiplier unlocked for overclocking, and an AM5 socket that hosts newer Ryzen generations. The GPU is the end-of-life component with a named successor (Battlemage). A sensible next upgrade is a graphics card replacement — anything meaningfully above the 50th GPU percentile — after which the 7950X would no longer be the constraint in almost any workload. The multiplier-unlocked CPU and Gen 5 lanes also leave room for a fast storage and tuning upgrade cycle without touching the motherboard.

Who Should Build It

This configuration suits users whose work is CPU-bound and whose graphics needs are display-output-bound. Software developers are the clearest fit: a 16-core/32-thread Zen 4 processor with a 62,478 PassMark multithread score compiles, containerizes, and virtualizes without strain, while the A380E's four DisplayPort 2.0 outputs drive a multi-monitor coding setup. Content creators working in video editing or 3D will find the CPU side excellent — the 36,523 Cinebench R23 multi-core score is genuine rendering muscle — but the 6 GB GPU buffer will pinch in GPU-accelerated timelines and viewports.

Students and small-business workstation users get strong value from this layout in compute terms: ECC support, single-slot graphics, and no external power connectors make for a compact, stability-oriented machine. High-refresh gamers at any resolution should not build this; the median-percentile GPU with 4.096 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput cannot deliver the frames the CPU is begging to push. Office productivity users would find the pairing massively over-provisioned on the CPU side, though it would remain responsive for years.

Balance and Bottleneck

The bottleneck is the GPU, unambiguously. The CPU sits at the 94th percentile; the GPU sits at the 50th. The combined percentile of 72 is almost exactly what you'd expect when one component dominates: the average is pulled toward the stronger part, but the weaker part caps every graphics-dependent workload.

The thread-scaling data provides the evidence. From single-thread (1,099) to max-thread (15,579), the 7950X offers a roughly fourteen-fold spread of throughput. Game engines historically lean on four to eight threads — where the chip scores 4,218 and 7,920 respectively — meaning even the CPU's mid-range throughput figures are more than an entry-tier GPU can feed. CPU-bound scenarios (rendering, encoding, compiling) use the 32 threads fully; GPU-bound scenarios (gaming at high settings) will leave most of those threads idle.

The 170 W CPU TDP versus the 75 W GPU TDP mirrors the imbalance in power: more than double the electrical budget goes to the processor. Frame-rate scaling, as estimated from the scores rather than measured data, would be essentially flat across resolutions and settings changes relative to the CPU's capability — the GPU's 186.0 GB/s bandwidth and 64.00 GPixel/s pixel rate are the ceiling wherever pixels are being generated.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: Not recommended. With no measured FPS rows for this pairing, estimates from the benchmark scores suggest the 50th-percentile GPU with 4.096 TFLOPS FP32 will cap frame rates well below what the 94th-percentile CPU could otherwise sustain. High-refresh play at elevated settings requires a GPU upgrade first.

Streaming: Viable on the encode side, constrained on the game side. The 7950X's 62,478 PassMark multithread score handles encoding, compositing, and chat/overlay overhead with enormous headroom, but the game being streamed will be GPU-limited.

Video editing: Strong CPU, weak GPU. Timeline scrubbing and export encoding benefit from 32 threads and 83.2 GB/s of memory bandwidth, while GPU-accelerated effects contend with 6 GB of GDDR6 and 186.0 GB/s — the weakest link in an otherwise capable editing rig.

3D rendering: Split verdict. CPU rendering is excellent — the 36,523 Cinebench R23 multi-core and 15,579 3DMark max-thread scores indicate fast CPU-based renders. GPU rendering and ray-traced viewports are limited by 8 RT cores and 4.096 TFLOPS.

Software development: Ideal. Compilation scales with threads, and this chip delivers; the 0.2% parity with the Intel Core i7-14700K on aggregate score confirms flagship-class throughput for build farms, containers, and local CI.

Student and office work: Massively over-provisioned and therefore future-proof. Documents, browsing, and spreadsheets use a fraction of a single thread; the 2,000-point Cinebench R23 single-core score guarantees snappy everyday responsiveness for years.

Gaming Performance

To restate clearly: the database contains no measured FPS data for this exact CPU-GPU combination (`dataIsMeasured` is false, and `measuredFpsUltraByGame` is empty). Everything in this section is an estimate derived from the benchmark scores, not measured gameplay.

Estimating from the data available: the GPU's 50th-percentile standing, 4.096 TFLOPS FP32 throughput, 186.0 GB/s bandwidth, and 6 GB frame buffer suggest playable frame rates at 1080p with reduced settings, with ultra presets at 1080p likely challenging in modern titles and higher resolutions increasingly constrained by both the buffer and bandwidth. Ray-traced features, supported via DirectX 12 Ultimate and the 8 RT cores, would exact a heavy toll at any resolution.

The CPU, by contrast, would not be the limiting factor at any realistic frame rate. Its 4,218 four-thread and 7,920 eight-thread 3DMark scores indicate processor throughput far beyond what this GPU can rasterize. The measured gap between component percentiles — 94 versus 50 — is the quantitative expression of the imbalance gamers would experience. Until the GPU is upgraded, gaming performance in this build is defined almost entirely by the A380E.

FAQ

Q: Is this build balanced for gaming?

A: No. The CPU sits in the 94th percentile and the GPU in the 50th, producing a combined percentile of 72. The GPU bottlenecks every graphics workload while the CPU idles with headroom.

Q: How does the Ryzen 9 7950X compare to rival CPUs?

A: Its average benchmark score of 69,515 is within a fraction of a percent of the Intel Core i7-14700K (0.2%), AMD EPYC 9115 (0.3%), AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX (0.5%), and AMD Ryzen 7 9700F (0.7%) — effectively flagship-parity performance.

Q: Can the Intel Arc A380E handle ray tracing?

A: Technically yes — it has 8 RT cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4 — but eight RT cores on a 4.096 TFLOPS part means ray-traced effects will exact a heavy performance cost.

Q: Are there measured frame rates for this pairing?

A: No. The database contains no measured FPS data for this combination, so all frame-rate discussion is estimated from the benchmark scores.

Q: What power supply does this build need?

A: The CPU has a 170 W TDP and the GPU a 75 W TDP, with Intel suggesting a 250 W PSU for the A380E alone. A PSU comfortably above the combined 245 W TDP sum is the sensible floor.

Q: Does this platform support ECC memory?

A: Yes. The Ryzen 9 7950X supports ECC on its Socket AM5 platform with dual-channel DDR5 at 83.2 GB/s — useful for workstation stability.

Q: Is the Arc A380E still in production?

A: No. Its production status is End-of-life, with Battlemage listed as its successor architecture.

CPU Analysis

The Ryzen 9 7950X is a Zen 4 (codename Raphael) processor with 16 cores and 32 threads, fabricated on TSMC's 5 nm node with 13,140 million transistors across a 2x 71 mm² dual-die layout. Base clock is 4.50 GHz with boosts to 5.70 GHz, and the chip is multiplier unlocked for user tuning. It launched on September 26, 2022 at a launch MSRP of $699 and remains in Active production status.

The cache hierarchy is generous and well-distributed: 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 64 MB of shared L3. That large shared pool benefits throughput workloads where threads share working sets — rendering, compilation, and simulation all fit the profile. Memory support is DDR5 over a dual-channel bus at 83.2 GB/s, with ECC available. Integrated Radeon Graphics is included, which usefully provides display output independent of the discrete card. PCIe Gen 5 with 24 CPU lanes rounds out a forward-looking platform.

What the scores mean in practice: the 2,000-point Cinebench R23 single-core and 2,613 Geekbench single-core results place per-thread performance among the strongest available, so lightly threaded applications — most office software, many games, DAW plugins — run at full speed. The 36,523 R23 multi-core and 22,415 Geekbench multi-core results translate into heavy throughput: batch encoding, code compilation, physics simulation, and CPU rendering complete quickly. The PassMark spread confirms breadth, from 225,603 integer math to 835,923 data compression.

The thread-scaling curve is the one caveat worth noting. Going from 16 threads (14,110) to 32 (15,579) in 3DMark yields roughly a 10% gain — software that cannot use SMT well gets most of its value from the 16 physical cores. In this particular build, that caveat rarely matters, because the paired GPU will keep the processor waiting far more often than SMT scheduling will. The 7950X is the correct long-term asset in this machine; the A380E is the component to replace.

Rate My PC: AMD Ryzen 9 7950X + Intel Arc A380E

Power Build

System Balance Analysis

AMD Ryzen 9 7950X

Intel Arc A380E

Market Position

Game Performance Benchmarks

Cyberpunk 2077

Red Dead Redemption 2

Microsoft Flight Simulator

Control

Call of Duty: Warzone

Fortnite

Performance Insights

Strong Performance

Bottleneck Detected

Performance Tiers Explained

Ultimate

High-End

Mid-Range

Entry Level

Legacy

GPU Analysis

Benchmark Performance

Upgrade Path and Platform

Who Should Build It

Balance and Bottleneck

Usage Scenarios

Gaming Performance

FAQ

CPU Analysis

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