SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 + 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)

▼

92 Score

Top 8% Ranking

92 / 100

ULTIMATE READY

Apex Performer

Top 8% 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

91%

GPU

93%

PROCESSOR

AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435

37,762 Benchmark Score

Top 9% 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

This profile documents the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 paired with the Intel Arc A370M in a laptop configuration. No measured FPS rows exist for this exact combination: `measuredFpsUltraByGame` is empty and `dataIsMeasured` is false. Consequently, all gaming frame-rate statements in this analysis are estimates derived from benchmark scores rather than direct measurements. The pairing combines an 86th-percentile CPU with a 74th-percentile GPU and lands at the 80th combined percentile.

Balance and Bottleneck

The first structural fact is the percentile split: the CPU sits at the 86th percentile of all CPUs, while the GPU sits at the 74th percentile of all GPUs. That gap maps to workload type. In CPU-heavy work such as data compression, encryption, and multithreaded math, the processor is the stronger component. In gaming and GPU compute, the Arc A370M defines the upper bound. The CPU’s single-thread score of 3757 and multithread score of 19091 indicate it can feed geometry, physics, and game logic faster than the GPU’s 4.198 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput can turn into rendered pixels in most 3D scenes.

The GPU’s 4GB VRAM and 112.0 GB/s bandwidth are the tightest memory resources in the platform. The CPU, by contrast, supports dual-channel DDR5 or LPDDR5X with 89.6 GB/s of memory bandwidth and ECC memory. That asymmetry matters: texture-heavy scenes can exhaust the GPU frame buffer quickly, while the CPU can keep streaming instructions and data into the memory subsystem without hitting a bandwidth wall.

Because no measured FPS rows exist, the usual FPS-scaling evidence is absent from this profile. The available data instead supports an indirect inference: the 86th-percentile CPU is unlikely to be the main limiter in most graphics-bound workloads, while the 74th-percentile GPU is the smaller resource pool in the pairing. The combined percentile of 80 sits between the CPU and GPU values, but closer to the CPU, reinforcing the idea that the processor carries the performance class while the graphics card limits the visual ceiling.

FAQ

Q: Does this profile include measured gaming FPS?

A: No. The `measuredFpsUltraByGame` field is empty and `dataIsMeasured` is false, so there are no measured FPS rows for the Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 plus Arc A370M combination. Frame-rate claims can only be estimates from benchmark scores.

Q: What platform does the CPU use?

A: The CPU uses AMD Socket FP8. It supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory in dual-channel mode, with 89.6 GB/s of memory bandwidth, ECC memory support, and PCIe Gen4 with 14 CPU lanes.

Q: Which is stronger, the CPU or the GPU?

A: The CPU is stronger by percentile. The Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 sits at the 86th percentile of all CPUs, while the Arc A370M sits at the 74th percentile of all GPUs. The combined percentile is 80.

Q: How close are the CPU’s nearest rivals?

A: The CPU’s average benchmark score is 37762. It is 0.1% below the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132, 0.2% below the Intel Core 5 211E, 0.2% above the Intel Core i5-13600K, and 0.4% below the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370.

Q: What are the GPU’s memory specifications?

A: The Arc A370M has 4GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, with a 1750 MHz memory clock (14 Gbps effective) and 112.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Does the GPU support modern graphics APIs?

A: Yes. The listed API support includes DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), Vulkan 1.4, and OpenGL 4.6.

Q: Are these components still in production?

A: The CPU’s production status is Active. The GPU’s production status is End-of-life.

CPU Analysis

The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 is a 6-core, 12-thread mobile processor built on the Zen 5 architecture. Its codename is Gorgon Point, and it belongs to the Ryzen AI PRO 400 generation, which mixes Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. The process node is TSMC 4nm. It runs at a 2.00 GHz base clock and a 4.50 GHz boost clock, with a 28W TDP. The cache layout is 80KB of L1 per core, 1MB of L2 per core, and 4MB of L3. The CPU also includes an integrated Radeon 840M graphics unit, although the benchmark profile under review pairs the CPU with the Intel Arc A370M.

The benchmark scores tell a workload-specific story. The single-thread score of 3757 is strong for responsive, lightly threaded applications. The multithread score of 19091 reflects the 12-thread throughput available to compilers, renderers, and multitasking. Integer math scores 60879, while floating-point math scores 41114, indicating the processor handles integer-heavy logic and arithmetic-heavy code differently; integer work is the stronger side. The extended-instructions score of 16724 supports this pattern, as does data encryption at 11267 and random string sorting at 24936. The eye-catching data compression score of 232803 shows the CPU has substantial throughput for compression and archive-style workloads. The physics score of 995 and the prime-number score of 57 are narrow stress tests; their low magnitudes relative to other sub-scores show how dependent this processor’s results are on the specific workload being measured.

The average CPU benchmark score is 37762, placing it at the 86th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals are tightly clustered: the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132, Intel Core 5 211E, Intel Core i5-13600K, and AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 all sit within 0.4 percentage points of this part. That is a dense performance band. In practical terms, the Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 does not separate itself from these rivals by a large margin; it is simply part of a competitive tier of high-midrange processors.

Who Should Build It

This pairing is a laptop configuration, not a desktop build. The clearest audience is someone who needs a high-percentile CPU in a mobile chassis and can accept a GPU that is several percentile points lower. The CPU’s 86th-percentile rank and ECC memory support make it a sensible fit for small business workstations and correctness-sensitive office environments where data integrity matters. The data encryption score of 11267 and data compression score of 232803 point to users who handle archives, backups, and encrypted files regularly.

Software developers are another natural audience. The 6-core, 12-thread layout, integer math score of 60879, and multithread score of 19091 are the relevant numbers for compilation and build parallelism. Students and general office users would benefit from the high single-thread score of 3757 for fluid application response, while the 28W CPU TDP and 35W GPU TDP place the pair in a portable-friendly power class.

Content creators should weigh the GPU ceiling carefully. The Arc A370M’s OpenCL score of 29676 is useful for acceleration, but the 4GB VRAM and 64-bit memory bus will limit large rendering tasks. This is not a pairing for someone chasing maximum graphics performance; it is a balanced mobile workstation CPU with a modest discrete GPU attached. The data shows the CPU is the reason to select this configuration, and the GPU is the compromise.

GPU Analysis

The Intel Arc A370M is an Alchemist-generation mobile GPU built on the Xe-HPG architecture. The chip is DG2-128, fabricated on TSMC 6nm, with 7,200 million transistors in a 157 mm² die. It operates at a 1550 MHz base clock and a 2050 MHz boost clock. The GPU has 1024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, 32 ROPs, and 8 ray-tracing cores. No tensor-core count is listed in the FACT PACK, so AI-accelerated workloads cannot be quantified from this data.

Peak throughput numbers define its class: FP32 performance is 4.198 TFLOPS, FP16 is 8.397 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, pixel rate is 65.60 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 131.2 GTexel/s. These figures indicate a small-to-midrange mobile GPU. The memory subsystem is 4GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, running at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) and supplying 112.0 GB/s of bandwidth. For a modern GPU, that bandwidth is modest. The 8 RT cores give it hardware ray-tracing support, but they must operate within the same FP32 and memory limits as the rest of the chip.

In compute benchmarks, the GPU scores 29676 in OpenCL and 28673 in Vulkan, with an average benchmark score of 29175. That places it at the 74th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH, which is 0.1% higher, and the AMD FirePro W8000, also 0.1% higher. The Arc is 0.6% above the AMD Radeon RX 470 and 1% above the AMD Radeon RX 6800M in these specific compute scores. That last result is worth reading carefully: these are compute-benchmark scores, not gaming FPS. The data should not be interpreted as a gaming ranking.

The GPU’s API support is modern, with DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), Vulkan 1.4, and OpenGL 4.6. Its PCIe interface is Gen4 x8. The production status is End-of-life, which means the component is at the tail end of its availability window while the CPU remains Active.

Gaming Performance

No measured FPS data exists for this exact CPU+GPU combination. The `measuredFpsUltraByGame` dictionary is empty, `pairRankByFps` is null, and `dataIsMeasured` is false. Any frame-rate expectations below are therefore estimates based on the CPU and GPU benchmark scores, not on tested results.

The CPU’s single-thread score of 3757 suggests strong frame pacing in CPU-bound scenes, because the processor can handle game logic and draw-call submission without becoming the obvious bottleneck. The multithread score of 19091 also provides headroom for background tasks while gaming. The limiting side is almost certainly the GPU. The Arc A370M’s 4.198 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput and 74th-percentile rank point to a mid-range laptop experience. The 4GB VRAM and 112.0 GB/s bandwidth mean textures must fit in a small frame buffer, and bandwidth-heavy effects could force settings down.

Ray-traced gameplay is technically possible because the GPU has 8 RT cores, but the same FP32 and memory constraints apply. Heavy ray tracing would likely reduce frame rates substantially. In competitive or lighter visual titles, the strong CPU and moderate GPU could produce smooth high-refresh estimates. In graphically demanding titles, the GPU is the estimated ceiling. Ultra-preset measured FPS is unavailable, so any suggestion of “ultra” performance is speculative and contradicted by the small VRAM pool and compute throughput.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: The CPU’s 3757 single-thread score and 19091 multithread score can maintain high frame rates in CPU-friendly scenarios, but the GPU’s 4.198 TFLOPS and 4GB VRAM are the limits. Lowering texture quality and disabling heavy effects would be necessary to chase high refresh rates.

Streaming: Data compression at 232803 and multithread throughput at 19091 suggest the CPU can handle concurrent encoding and game logic. The GPU is less of a factor in encoding unless the streaming software uses GPU acceleration, which the OpenCL score of 29676 supports.

Video editing: Integer math at 60879 and floating-point math at 41114 give the CPU solid processing power for timeline operations. The GPU’s OpenCL score of 29676 can accelerate effects, though the 4GB VRAM will constrain large projects.

3D rendering: Vulkan score of 28673 and FP32 throughput of 4.198 TFLOPS make the GPU usable for small to medium GPU-rendered scenes. The 8 RT cores help with ray-traced rendering, but the 4GB frame buffer is a hard limit for complex scenes. CPU rendering can fall back on the 12-thread multithread score of 19091.

Software development: A 6-core, 12-thread CPU with integer math at 60879 and multithread at 19091 is a credible compile machine. ECC memory support is useful for long-running builds and correctness-sensitive work.

Student and office work: The single-thread score of 3757 provides responsive everyday performance. The 28W CPU TDP and 35W GPU TDP fit a mobile design, making this pairing suitable for portable productivity rather than a heavy desktop replacement.

Build Overview

This is a laptop-class pairing, with `buildClass` set to laptop. It combines an AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 CPU with an Intel Arc A370M GPU. The overall tier is defined by the 80th combined percentile, with the CPU at the 86th percentile and the GPU at the 74th percentile. In short, this is an upper-mid mobile platform where the processor is clearly the stronger half and the GPU is the more modest contributor.

The two components come from different vendors, so the laptop platform must support both the AMD FP8 CPU socket and an Intel Arc GPU over PCIe 4.0 x8. The CPU also contains a Radeon 840M integrated GPU, but the profile reviewed here uses the Arc A370M as the active graphics solution. The result is a configuration with strong CPU-side capability, an average-to-solid GPU, and a combined position that reflects the gap between the two.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU’s average benchmark score is 37762, placing it at the 86th percentile of all CPUs. Its individual scores are: single-thread 3757, multithread 19091, integer math 60879, floating-point math 41114, extended instructions 16724, data encryption 11267, data compression 232803, random string sorting 24936, physics 995, and prime numbers 57.

The nearest CPU rivals, with their average scores and delta percentages, are: AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 at 37804 with a delta of -0.1%, Intel Core 5 211E at 37829 with a delta of -0.2%, Intel Core i5-13600K at 37685 with a delta of 0.2%, and AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 at 37904 with a delta of -0.4%. This means the Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 is within a very narrow performance window of all four rivals.

The GPU’s average benchmark score is 29175, placing it at the 74th percentile of all GPUs. Its individual scores are 29676 in Geekbench OpenCL and 28673 in Geekbench Vulkan. The nearest GPU rivals are: AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH at 29197 with a delta of -0.1%, AMD FirePro W8000 at 29211 with a delta of -0.1%, AMD Radeon RX 470 at 28996 with a delta of 0.6%, and AMD Radeon RX 6800M at 28874 with a delta of 1%.

The combined picture is a CPU that dominates its nearest rival cluster and a GPU that is above average but not outstanding. Because the CPU and GPU percentiles differ, the system’s behavior depends heavily on workload: CPU-bound tasks will feel close to the 86th percentile, while GPU-bound tasks will be shaped by the 74th-percentile Arc A370M.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The CPU is built for AMD Socket FP8. Memory support includes DDR5 and LPDDR5X in dual-channel mode, with 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth and ECC support. The CPU-side PCIe implementation is Gen4 with 14 lanes. The GPU uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, which fits within the CPU’s lane budget without requiring the full CPU PCIe resource.

No suggested PSU is listed in the FACT PACK. The only power data available is the CPU TDP of 28W and the GPU TDP of 35W, so the combined thermal and power envelope is clearly laptop-class. The CPU’s multiplier is locked, which rules out overclocking as a meaningful upgrade lever.

The CPU’s production status is Active, while the GPU’s production status is End-of-life. That asymmetry points toward future platform planning: the processor is current, but the graphics component is already at the end of its production cycle. The most obvious bottleneck in the data is the GPU’s 4GB VRAM and 64-bit memory bus. A sensible next step, within the constraints of a laptop build, is a platform that pairs a CPU in this performance class with a GPU offering more memory and bandwidth. The FP8 socket locks the CPU to this motherboard generation, so upgrading the GPU would mean changing the laptop platform rather than swapping a desktop card.

Rate My PC: AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 + Intel Arc A370M

Apex Performer

System Balance Analysis

AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435

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

Balance and Bottleneck

FAQ

CPU Analysis

Who Should Build It

GPU Analysis

Gaming Performance

Usage Scenarios

Build Overview

Benchmark Performance

Upgrade Path and Platform

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