SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D + Intel Arc A310

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
97%
VS
GPU
85%
PROCESSOR

AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D

75,779 Benchmark Score
Top 3% Market Ranking
View Full Specs →
GRAPHICS CARD

Intel Arc A310

7,550 Benchmark Score
Top 15% 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 9 9950X3D is a flagship 16-core desktop processor built on the Zen 5 architecture, codenamed Granite Ridge, and manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It operates within the AMD Socket AM5 platform and features a base clock of 4.30 GHz with a boost clock of 5.70 GHz. The CPU integrates 128 MB of L3 cache alongside 80 KB of L1 and 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and it supports dual-channel DDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. This processor is paired in this build with an Intel Arc A310, a low-profile graphics card based on the Xe-HPG architecture, codenamed Alchemist, built on a 6 nm process. The Arc A310 is a 30 W part with 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, delivering 124.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The pairing is unusual: a top-tier 16-core CPU with an entry-level GPU, creating a system where the processor vastly outperforms the graphics solution in every measurable way. This analysis relies strictly on the benchmark data provided, with no measured FPS figures available for this exact combination, so all gaming performance discussions are framed as estimates derived from the synthetic scores.

CPU Analysis

The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D is a 16-core, 32-thread processor from the 9000 series, representing the high end of the Zen 5 (Granite Ridge) lineup. Its 4.30 GHz base clock and 5.70 GHz boost clock are supported by a 170 W TDP, indicating that sustained multi-threaded workloads will draw significant power. The processor is built on a 4 nm process with 16,630 million transistors across two chiplets, each measuring 70.6 mm². This physical design enables the high core count and the substantial 128 MB L3 cache, which is a defining feature of the X3D variants, designed to reduce memory latency in cache-sensitive workloads.

Benchmark results show exceptional scalability across thread counts. The 3DMark scores progress from 1292 in single-thread to 2549 in 2-thread, 4963 in 4-thread, 9259 in 8-thread, 16374 in 16-thread, and 17184 in max-thread tests. This scaling is nearly linear up to 16 threads, with a 12.7x improvement from single-thread to 16-thread, indicating efficient use of all physical cores. The incremental gain from 16 to max threads is only 5%, suggesting that the 32 threads provide diminishing returns for the workloads tested in 3DMark. Cinebench R23 results reinforce this picture: a multicore score of 42018 versus a single-core score of 2259, which puts the multicore performance at 18.6x the single-core figure. This is a strong result for heavily threaded applications like video rendering or scientific computing.

Geekbench scores of 3064 single-core and 26736 multicore place the CPU in the 95th percentile of all CPUs, meaning it outperforms 95% of processors in the database. The nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 9755 with an average score of 75738 (0.1% behind), the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 9755X3D at 75716 (0.1% behind), the AMD EPYC 8224P at 75582 (0.3% behind), and the Intel Core Ultra 9 285 at 75488 (0.4% behind). These deltas are minuscule, indicating that the 9950X3D is effectively tied with these top-tier alternatives in aggregate benchmarks. The PassMark multithread score of 70255 further confirms its position, with integer math at 243209 and floating-point math at 159724, showing strong performance in both integer and floating-point workloads. For real-world use, this CPU excels in video editing, 3D rendering, and software compilation, where the 16 cores and 32 threads can be fully utilized.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU’s average benchmark score is 75779, placing it in the 95th percentile of all CPUs. The GPU’s average benchmark score is 7550, placing it in the 40th percentile of all GPUs. This creates a massive disparity: the CPU’s average score is over 10 times higher than the GPU’s. The combined percentile for this build is 68, reflecting the bottleneck created by the GPU. The CPU’s nearest rivals all score within 0.4% of its average, confirming that the 9950X3D sits at the very top of the CPU performance hierarchy. The GPU’s nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon R7 250 (0.1% behind), the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 (0.4% behind), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (1% ahead), and the AMD Radeon HD 8850M (1.4% ahead). This indicates that the Arc A310 is roughly comparable to a GTX 1650 in aggregate performance, which is a low bar for a modern GPU.

In specific GPU benchmarks, the Arc A310 scores 5433 in PassMark G3D, which is its primary gaming metric, and 2157 in PassMark GPU Compute, indicating limited compute capability. Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan scores are 30607 and 28964, respectively. The DirectX 9 score of 69 is notably higher than DirectX 10 (31), DirectX 11 (33), and DirectX 12 (29), suggesting that the GPU performs relatively better in older API workloads. The CPU’s PassMark data compression score of 908421 and data encryption score of 44536 highlight its strength in data-intensive tasks. The combined picture is clear: the CPU is a top-5% performer, while the GPU is in the bottom 60% of all GPUs. In any workload that relies on the GPU, the system will be severely limited, whereas CPU-only tasks will run at near-flagship speeds.

Balance and Bottleneck

The data indicates a severe bottleneck on the GPU side. The CPU’s 95th percentile performance versus the GPU’s 40th percentile means that in gaming or GPU-accelerated tasks, the Arc A310 will cap frame rates and graphics quality far below what the CPU is capable of supporting. For example, the CPU’s PassMark single-thread score of 4737 suggests it can feed frames quickly, but the GPU’s PassMark G3D score of 5433 is only 1.1x the CPU’s single-thread score, indicating that the GPU will be the limiting factor in most gaming scenarios. In CPU-bound workloads like physics or data compression, the system will excel, but in GPU-bound tasks like rendering or gaming, the GPU will hold the system back.

The FPS scaling evidence, while not measured, can be inferred from the benchmark scores. The GPU’s DirectX 12 score of 29 is particularly low, suggesting poor performance in modern game engines that rely on DX12. Even in DirectX 9, where the score is 69, the GPU would struggle to maintain high frame rates at 1080p in most titles. The CPU’s 3DMark 16-thread score of 16374 indicates it can handle complex game logic and AI, but the GPU’s 2.688 TFLOPS FP32 throughput is roughly a tenth of what modern gaming GPUs offer. This means that at any resolution above 720p, the GPU will be the bottleneck, and at 1080p, even low settings will likely produce sub-60 FPS in demanding games.

Gaming Performance

No measured FPS rows exist for this exact CPU+GPU combination in the data set, so the following figures are estimates based on the benchmark scores. The Intel Arc A310’s PassMark G3D score of 5433 places it in the 40th percentile, which is comparable to a GTX 1650. In practical terms, this GPU is designed for entry-level gaming or office use, not high-refresh gaming. At 1080p with ultra settings, the GPU would likely deliver playable frame rates in esports titles like Counter-Strike or League of Legends, where the DirectX 9 score of 69 is relatively stronger. However, in modern AAA titles that use DirectX 12, the score of 29 suggests that frame rates would drop below 30 FPS at 1080p ultra.

At 1440p or 4K, the 4 GB memory capacity and 124.0 GB/s bandwidth would be severely limiting, causing texture streaming issues and low frame rates. The GPU’s 28.00 GPixel/s pixel rate and 56.00 GTexel/s texture rate are adequate for light 2D workloads but insufficient for heavy 3D rendering. The CPU’s 3DMark scores indicate that it can handle the physics and AI calculations in games, but the GPU’s low compute throughput (2.688 TFLOPS FP32) will cap visual fidelity. For a system with a 95th percentile CPU, the gaming experience would be disappointing, with the GPU being the sole limiting factor. Users would need to reduce resolution to 720p and settings to low to achieve consistent frame rates above 60 FPS in most titles.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: This is not suitable. The GPU’s 40th percentile and low DirectX 12 score of 29 mean that achieving 144 Hz or higher at 1080p is impossible in most games. The CPU could support high frame rates, but the GPU will not deliver them.

Streaming: The CPU’s 16 cores and 32 threads can handle encoding and streaming simultaneously without a dedicated encoder, as evidenced by its strong PassMark multithread score of 70255. However, the GPU’s limited compute capability means game capture at high quality will be problematic, and the overall streaming experience will be constrained by the GPU’s performance.

Video editing: This is a mixed scenario. The CPU’s Cinebench R23 multicore score of 42018 and Geekbench multicore score of 26736 make it excellent for rendering and exporting video. However, the GPU’s low compute score of 2157 means GPU-accelerated effects and previews will be slow, making the workflow inefficient.

3D rendering: The CPU excels in CPU-based rendering, with a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 42018, which is 18.6x its single-core score. However, GPU-based renderers will be severely limited by the Arc A310’s 2.688 TFLOPS FP32, making this build unsuitable for modern GPU-accelerated rendering.

Software development: This is a strong scenario. The CPU’s PassMark integer math score of 243209 and data compression score of 908421 indicate fast compilation and code execution. The GPU is irrelevant for most development tasks, so the CPU’s 95th percentile performance shines here.

Student and office work: This is adequate but overkill. The CPU’s single-thread score of 4737 in PassMark ensures snappy responsiveness in office applications, but the GPU’s low performance is fine for document editing and web browsing. The system is more powerful than needed, but the GPU is not a concern for these workloads.

GPU Analysis

The Intel Arc A310 is based on the DG2-128 chip with the Xe-HPG architecture, built on a 6 nm process at TSMC. It has 768 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs, along with 6 ray tracing cores. The GPU operates at a fixed 1750 MHz base and boost clock, with memory running at 1937 MHz, achieving 15.5 Gbps effective. The 4 GB GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus provides 124.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU’s FP32 performance is 2.688 TFLOPS, and FP16 is 5.376 TFLOPS (2:1). It supports PCIe 4.0 x8 and has a TDP of 30 W, requiring only a 200 W PSU.

The GPU’s benchmark scores are low across the board. PassMark G3D is 5433, which is in the 40th percentile of all GPUs. The DirectX 10, 11, and 12 scores are 31, 33, and 29 respectively, indicating poor performance in modern APIs. The DirectX 9 score of 69 is the highest, suggesting that the GPU is better suited for older games. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 30607 and Vulkan score of 28964 are moderate but show that the GPU can handle compute tasks better than graphics tasks. The 6 ray tracing cores are present, but with such low overall performance, ray tracing would only be feasible at very low resolutions and settings. The 4 GB VRAM is a significant limitation, as modern games at 1080p can exceed this capacity, leading to texture pop-in and stuttering. The GPU is end-of-life and has no successor in production, indicating that Intel has moved on to newer architectures. For rendering, this GPU is inadequate for any serious 3D work, as its compute score of 2157 is a fraction of what professional GPUs offer.

Who Should Build It

This build targets users who prioritize CPU performance above all else, with a secondary GPU for basic display output. The CPU’s 95th percentile performance makes it ideal for developers who compile large codebases, as the PassMark integer math score of 243209 and data compression score of 908421 ensure fast build times. It is also suited for researchers or analysts running CPU-bound simulations or data processing, given the Cinebench R23 multicore score of 42018. Students in computer science or engineering fields would benefit from the CPU’s multi-threaded capabilities for running virtual machines or compiling projects, while the GPU is sufficient for document editing and web browsing.

Content creators who work primarily with CPU-based rendering, such as video editors using software encoders, would find the CPU’s 16 cores and 32 threads valuable. However, they should be aware that the GPU will not accelerate effects or previews. Small business workstations that run database queries or financial modeling would see strong performance from the CPU’s PassMark multithread score of 70255. The GPU is essentially a placeholder for display output, so users who intend to game or do GPU-accelerated work should consider this build unsuitable. For gamers at 1080p, the GPU’s 40th percentile means they would need to upgrade the GPU immediately to play modern titles at acceptable settings.

FAQ

Q: What is the CPU’s performance percentile?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D is in the 95th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 75779.

Q: How does the GPU compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Arc A310 has an average score of 7550, which is 1% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 and 0.1% behind the AMD Radeon R7 250.

Q: Is this build suitable for modern gaming?

A: No, the GPU’s DirectX 12 score of 29 and PassMark G3D score of 5433 indicate that it cannot handle modern AAA titles at acceptable frame rates, even at 1080p.

Q: What is the CPU’s boost clock and TDP?

A: The CPU has a boost clock of 5.70 GHz and a TDP of 170 W.

Q: Does the GPU support ray tracing?

A: Yes, it has 6 ray tracing cores, but its low overall performance (FP32 of 2.688 TFLOPS) makes ray tracing impractical in most scenarios.

Q: What is the memory configuration of the GPU?

A: The GPU has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, providing 124.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

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

A: The CPU’s Cinebench R23 multicore score of 42018 is 18.6x its single-core score of 2259, indicating excellent scaling across its 16 cores.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The CPU is based on the AMD Socket AM5 platform, which supports DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration. The CPU provides PCIe Gen 5 with 24 lanes, allowing for high-speed NVMe drives and future GPU upgrades. The platform supports ECC memory, which is beneficial for workstation reliability. The CPU has an unlocked multiplier, enabling overclocking for users who want to push performance further. The GPU uses PCIe 4.0 x8, which is compatible with the CPU’s PCIe Gen 5 slots, but the bandwidth is limited to PCIe 4.0 speeds.

The GPU has a TDP of 30 W and a suggested PSU of 200 W, while the CPU has a TDP of 170 W. A system with both components would need a PSU that can handle the combined load, but the GPU’s low power draw means that a modest 500-600 W PSU would suffice. The GPU requires no power connectors, making installation simple. The most sensible next upgrade for this build is to replace the GPU with a more powerful model, as the CPU is already at the top of its class. The CPU’s PCIe Gen 5 support means that a modern GPU can be installed without bottlenecking the interface. The platform supports up to 24 PCIe lanes from the CPU, so a high-end GPU would have adequate bandwidth. The memory support for DDR5 means that users can upgrade to higher-capacity or faster memory kits, though the 89.6 GB/s bandwidth is already substantial.

Build Overview

This build pairs the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D, a 16-core desktop processor in the 95th percentile, with the Intel Arc A310, a 30 W entry-level GPU in the 40th percentile. The build class is desktop, and the combined percentile is 68, reflecting the GPU’s drag on the overall performance. The CPU is a top-tier component with an average benchmark score of 75779, while the GPU’s average score of 7550 is over 10 times lower. This system is fundamentally a CPU-centric workstation with a basic display adapter, rather than a balanced gaming or content creation machine. The CPU’s performance is suitable for heavy multi-threaded workloads, but the GPU limits the system to light graphics tasks. The build is not recommended for gaming or GPU-accelerated work, but it excels in CPU-bound tasks like software compilation, data analysis, and server-style workloads. The overall tier is high for CPU performance but low for graphics, making it a specialized tool rather than a general-purpose system.