SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 + Intel Arc A350M

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

92%

GPU

92%

PROCESSOR

AMD Ryzen AI 9 365

40,048 Benchmark Score

Top 8% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

Intel Arc A350M

24,647 Benchmark Score

Top 8% 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 AI 9 365 paired with the Intel Arc A350M is an unusual cross-vendor laptop combination: a modern Zen 5 mobile processor sitting in the 87th percentile of all CPUs, matched with an entry-level Alchemist-generation discrete GPU in the 70th percentile. The combined percentile of 79 suggests a machine whose processing muscle substantially outruns its graphics capability. Notably, no measured FPS data exists for this exact pairing in the database, so all frame-rate discussion below is estimated from benchmark scores rather than drawn from real game testing.

Balance and Bottleneck

The data paints a clear picture of asymmetry. The Ryzen AI 9 365 occupies the 87th percentile among all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 40048, essentially tied with the AMD Ryzen 7 7700 (avgScore 40081, deltaPct -0.1) and the Intel Core 5 221E (avgScore 40144, deltaPct -0.2). The Arc A350M, by contrast, averages 24647 across its Geekbench OpenCL (24546) and Vulkan (24747) results, placing it 70th percentile among GPUs. That is a seventeen-point percentile gap in favor of the processor.

What does that gap imply in practice? In GPU-bound scenarios — modern games at higher settings — the A350M will be the limiter, and the Ryzen's ten cores and twenty threads will spend much of their time idle. The GPU's raw specifications reinforce this: 768 shading units, 3.379 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput, 4 GB of GDDR6 on a narrow 64-bit bus delivering 112 GB/s of bandwidth. A 64-bit memory interface is a hard constraint on texture-heavy scenes, and 4 GB of VRAM fills quickly at elevated resolutions and settings. Conversely, in CPU-bound workloads — compilation, physics simulation, video encoding — the processor's strong multi-thread scores (Passmark multithread of 29467, Geekbench multicore of 13760) mean the GPU is irrelevant and the machine performs like a high-tier thin-and-light workstation.

There is also an interesting wrinkle: the Ryzen AI 9 365 carries integrated Radeon 880M graphics. Depending on driver support and how the laptop's switching logic behaves, the discrete A350M's 70th-percentile score suggests it is only modestly ahead of what a modern iGPU can approach, raising the question of whether the discrete chip earns its thermal budget in this pairing. The database does not include measured iGPU-versus-dGPU comparisons for this build, so that remains an inference rather than a finding.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming. Estimated from scores, the A350M sits near the AMD Radeon RX 590 (deltaPct -0.4) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 (deltaPct 1.5) — GPUs associated with 1080p play at moderate settings. High-refresh esports titles at 1080p are plausible; demanding AAA games at ultra settings are not. The absence of measured FPS for this pairing makes any specific frame claims speculative.

Streaming. The 20-thread CPU with a Passmark multithread score of 29467 can comfortably handle encode-plus-game workloads in CPU terms, but the A350M lacks headroom to render a demanding game while any encoding path consumes GPU resources. Streaming lighter titles is realistic; streaming AAA games at ultra settings would compound the GPU bottleneck.

Video editing. A Cinebench R23 multicore score of 18698 and Geekbench multicore of 13760 indicate capable timeline scrubbing, proxy workflows, and export performance for a laptop. The limitation is the 4 GB VRAM: GPU-accelerated effects and higher-resolution timelines consume VRAM quickly, so CPU-based encoding paths will matter here.

3D rendering. The CPU percentile (87) supports solid viewport and CPU rendering performance — Cinebench R15 multicore of 2842 is respectable for a 28 W mobile part. But GPU rendering on 768 shading units and 6 RT cores will be slow for final-frame work; this is a modeling machine, not a render node.

Software development. This is where the build shines. A Geekbench single-core of 2253 and Cinebench R23 single-core of 1992 reflect the strong per-thread throughput of Zen 5, while 20 threads handle parallel builds. The 89.6 GB/s of dual-channel memory bandwidth also helps memory-hungry toolchains and containers.

Student and office work. More than sufficient. Browsing, documents, video calls, and photo management are trivial loads for a CPU in the 87th percentile, and the 25 W GPU consumes little power when idle. Battery-friendly TDPs on both chips (28 W CPU, 25 W GPU) suit all-day class use.

CPU Analysis

The Ryzen AI 9 365 is a Strix Point APU built on TSMC's 4 nm process, spanning 233 mm². It belongs to the Ryzen AI 300 generation, which mixes Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores — ten cores and twenty threads total. The base clock of 2.00 GHz and boost of 5.00 GHz reflect that hybrid design: efficiency-optimized cores run at lower clocks while primary cores reach 5 GHz for bursty single-threaded work.

The cache hierarchy is generous per core: 80 KB of L1 and 1 MB of L2 per core, with a shared 16 MB L3. That per-core L2 allocation matters for workload classes with large working sets per thread — compilation, simulation, compression — and the Passmark data compression score of 354510 supports that. Single-thread results are strong across the board: Passmark single-thread of 3841, Geekbench single-core of 2253, Cinebench R23 single-core of 1992. Multi-thread results (Passmark multithread 29467, Geekbench multicore 13760, Cinebench R23 multicore 18698) show scaling consistent with a heterogeneous core layout rather than a desktop monolith — strong for 28 W, not competitive with big desktop chips.

The memory subsystem supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a dual-channel bus with 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth, which is high for the mobile segment and benefits the integrated Radeon 880M as much as the CPU cores. PCIe is Gen 4 with 16 lanes from the CPU. One caveat from the data: the multiplier is locked, so there is no overclocking headroom. ECC is not supported, ruling out error-corrected workstation configurations.

Among its nearest rivals, the Ryzen AI 9 365 is statistically indistinguishable from the AMD Ryzen 7 7700 (-0.1%), Intel Core 5 221E (-0.2%), AMD Ryzen 9 270 (-0.5%), and Intel Core i9-13905H (-0.7%) on average benchmark score — a remarkable result given those are desktop and higher-TDP mobile competitors, and it underscores how efficient the 4 nm Strix Point design is per watt.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The socket is AMD Socket FP8 — a mobile, ball-grid package. That means the CPU is soldered to its laptop mainboard and is not user-upgradeable; the "upgrade path" for this build is effectively the whole machine. Likewise, the Arc A350M connects via PCIe 4.0 x8 and is an integrated-platform part (slot width listed as IGP), not a replaceable card.

What can be upgraded or spec'd thoughtfully at purchase: memory. DDR5 and LPDDR5X are supported, dual-channel, and if the chassis uses socketed DDR5 rather than soldered LPDDR5X, capacity increases are possible. Storage upgrades ride the CPU's Gen 4 lanes. Power delivery is modest by desktop standards — the CPU TDP is 28 W and the GPU TDP is 25 W, so combined sustained board power is low and thermal design, not PSU capacity, is the binding constraint (suggestedPsu is not provided, as expected for a laptop). A sensible next upgrade is a newer laptop pairing this class of Strix Point CPU with a stronger discrete GPU — something beyond the 70th percentile — to close the seventeen-point CPU-GPU percentile gap. The A350M itself is end-of-life, so no successor within that product line appears in the data.

Gaming Performance

To be explicit: the FACT PACK contains no measured FPS rows for this CPU+GPU combination, and dataIsMeasured is false. Every frame-rate statement here is an estimate derived from benchmark scores, not from tested gameplay.

The A350M's Geekbench OpenCL score of 24546 and Vulkan score of 24747 place it in the company of the Radeon RX 590 (-0.4%), the RTX A5000 Mobile (-0.5%), the Radeon RX 6600 XT (+0.8%), and the GTX 1630 (+1.5%). GPUs in that scoring band historically target 1080p gaming. The estimated picture, then: older or lighter titles at 1080p should run at playable frame rates, and esports-oriented games at reduced settings may reach high refresh territory. Demanding AAA releases at 1080p ultra are estimated to fall below comfortable thresholds, and the 4 GB of VRAM on a 64-bit bus makes 1440p or 4K gaming unrealistic. The six RT cores exist on paper, but with a 3.379 TFLOPS FP32 budget, ray-traced effects would exact a heavy toll; DX12 Ultimate support means the features render, not that they run fast. The Vulkan 1.4 and OpenGL 4.6 API coverage at least ensures broad compatibility.

GPU Analysis

The Arc A350M is a first-generation Alchemist part, the DG2-128 die, fabricated on TSMC's 6 nm node with 7.2 billion transistors across 157 mm² — a transistor density of 45.9 million per mm². The Xe-HPG architecture gives it 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 24 ROPs, producing a pixel rate of 52.80 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 105.6 GTexel/s. Clocks run from a 1150 MHz base to a 2200 MHz boost, with memory at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective).

The memory story is the defining constraint: 4 GB of GDDR6 across a 64-bit bus yields 112 GB/s of bandwidth. For context against nothing outside the pack — the number simply is modest, and it caps both resolution and texture quality in games and dataset size in GPU compute. The FP32 figure of 3.379 TFLOPS, with FP16 at 6.758 TFLOPS via a 2:1 rate, is entry-level discrete territory. Six RT cores provide hardware ray tracing, but tensor cores are not listed, meaning AI-assisted upscaling support is not documented in this dataset — an open question for anyone hoping to lean on such features to stretch the 4 GB framebuffer. For rendering workloads, the OpenCL and Vulkan scores near 24600 confirm the GPU can accelerate viewport shading and light compute kernels, but final-frame production rendering is better left to the CPU.

Benchmark Performance

Exact figures for the CPU: Cinebench R15 multicore 2842, single-core 303; Cinebench R23 multicore 18698, single-core 1992; Geekbench multicore 13760, single-core 2253; Passmark multithread 29467, single-thread 3841, physics 1704, integer math 101831, floating point 62802, data compression 354510, encryption 18297, extended instructions 25113, prime finding 117, string sorting 39447. The average benchmark score is 40048 at the 87th percentile.

Exact figures for the GPU: Geekbench OpenCL 24546, Vulkan 24747, average 24647, 70th percentile. The combined build percentile is 79.

The combined picture is that of a compute-forward laptop. The CPU's nearest rivals cluster within a single percentage point — Ryzen 7 7700, Core 5 221E, Ryzen 9 270, Core i9-13905H — meaning it trades blows with parts outside its thermal class. The GPU's rivals similarly cluster tightly (RX 590, RTX A5000 Mobile, RX 6600 XT, GTX 1630), placing it in a well-defined mid-tier band. When the two are combined into a single score, the percentile lands at 79: dragged down from the CPU's 87 by the GPU's 70, but comfortably above the GPU's standing alone. For any workload that touches the GPU, expect GPU-tier performance; for everything else, expect near-desktop-class responsiveness.

FAQ

Q: Is this build good for gaming?

A: Only modestly. The Arc A350M sits at the 70th GPU percentile with scores near the Radeon RX 590 and GTX 1630, suggesting 1080p gaming at reduced settings. No measured FPS data exists for this pairing, so frame expectations are estimates.

Q: Can it handle video editing or streaming?

A: Yes, within limits. A Cinebench R23 multicore score of 18698 and Passmark multithread of 29467 handle encoding and timeline work well, but 4 GB of VRAM on a 64-bit bus constrains GPU-accelerated effects.

Q: Is the CPU overclockable?

A: No. The multiplier is locked, and the FP8 socket means the chip is a soldered mobile part regardless.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its rivals?

A: Nearly identically — the AMD Ryzen 7 7700 is 0.1% ahead on average score, the Intel Core 5 221E 0.2%, the AMD Ryzen 9 270 0.5%, and the Intel Core i9-13905H 0.7%. All are statistically ties.

Q: What memory does it support?

A: DDR5 and LPDDR5X, dual-channel, with 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth. ECC is not supported.

Q: Does the GPU support ray tracing?

A: It has 6 RT cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) support, so hardware ray tracing is present, though the 3.379 TFLOPS FP32 budget makes heavy use impractical.

Q: Is the GPU still in production?

A: No — the Arc A350M is listed as end-of-life. The Ryzen AI 9 365 remains active.

Who Should Build It

For students and office users, this pairing is overkill in the best way: the 87th-percentile CPU makes every productivity task instantaneous, and both chips sip power at 28 W and 25 W respectively — ideal for thin laptops and long batteries. Software developers are arguably the best fit: single-core scores of 2253 (Geekbench) and 3841 (Passmark single-thread) deliver fast interactive work, while 20 threads and 89.6 GB/s of memory bandwidth crush parallel builds and containerized environments. Content creators doing photo work and light 1080p video will find the CPU more than sufficient, provided they respect the 4 GB VRAM ceiling. Gamers should temper expectations: the 70th-percentile GPU with a 64-bit bus targets 1080p at moderate settings, so this suits esports and older titles rather than AAA ultra play. Small businesses get a capable portable workstation for spreadsheets, light CAD viewport work, and compression-heavy tasks (Passmark data compression of 354510), though the lack of ECC rules out error-sensitive deployments.

Build Overview

This is a laptop-class build (buildClass: laptop) pairing a 2024 AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 — a 10-core, 20-thread Zen 5 / Zen 5c Strix Point APU on 4 nm, boosting to 5.00 GHz — with Intel's Arc A350M, an end-of-life 6 nm Alchemist discrete GPU from the Arc 3 Mobile tier. The overall tier, judged by the combined percentile of 79, is upper-mid-range: a machine whose processor punches near desktop levels (87th percentile, effectively tied with the Ryzen 7 7700) while its graphics sit in solid mid-tier territory (70th percentile, alongside the RX 590 and GTX 1630 bands). The build's identity is compute-first: an efficiency-optimized mobile platform for development, productivity, and light creation, with entry-level discrete gaming as a secondary capability — and with the caveat, stated once more, that all gaming figures here are score-derived estimates, as no measured FPS data exists for this combination.

Rate My PC: AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 + Intel Arc A350M

Apex Performer

System Balance Analysis

AMD Ryzen AI 9 365

Intel Arc A350M

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

Usage Scenarios

CPU Analysis

Upgrade Path and Platform

Gaming Performance

GPU Analysis

Benchmark Performance

FAQ

Who Should Build It

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