SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 + 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)

▼

93 Score

Top 7% Ranking

93 / 100

ULTIMATE READY

Apex Performer

Top 7% 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

93%

GPU

93%

PROCESSOR

AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385

43,326 Benchmark Score

Top 7% 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 pairing combines AMD’s top-tier mobile APU, the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385, with Intel’s entry-level discrete Arc A370M GPU. The result is a laptop configuration with a massive processing core and a modest graphics engine, a mix that creates a specific set of strengths and bottlenecks. The following analysis relies strictly on the provided benchmark data to assess its performance across various workloads.

Usage Scenarios

For high-refresh gaming, this build is limited by the Intel Arc A370M. The GPU sits at the 74th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 29175. While this is a capable score, it puts the graphics card in the mid-range tier, not the high-end territory needed to drive high-refresh 1440p or 4K panels in demanding titles. The CPU, by contrast, is exceptionally strong, so the GPU will be the primary factor determining frame rates in most games.

Streaming is a scenario where this pairing shines on the CPU side. The Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 has 8 cores and 16 threads, and its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 28424 places it in the 88th percentile of all CPUs. This headroom allows for simultaneous game encoding and streaming without overtaxing the processor, though the GPU’s performance will still cap the in-game frame rate being streamed.

Video editing workloads benefit from a strong CPU, and this chip delivers. The Cinebench R20 multicore score of 11938 and the Passmark multithread score of 32075 indicate a processor that can handle 4K timeline scrubbing and export tasks efficiently. The Arc A370M can assist with effects processing, but its 4 GB VRAM and 64-bit memory bus create a constraint for large, complex projects that need to fit textures and previews in video memory.

3D rendering is a mixed bag. In CPU-based renderers, the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 is excellent, with its Cinebench R15 multicore score of 2865 showing strong sustained performance. However, for GPU-accelerated rendering, the Arc A370M’s 4.198 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 8 RT cores provide only entry-level capability, making it unsuitable for high-fidelity final-frame rendering that relies heavily on ray tracing.

Software development is a strong use case for this CPU. The Passmark data encryption score of 18978 and data compression score of 379448 indicate solid performance for build processes, code compilation, and database operations. The 16 threads handle parallel compilation well, and the high single-thread score of 3995 in Passmark ensures snappy response for IDE interactions and scripting tasks.

Student and office work is handled with ease, but the hardware is overkill. The 88th percentile CPU ranking means tasks like spreadsheet calculations, document formatting, and web browsing are trivial for this processor. The integrated Radeon 8050S graphics could handle these tasks alone, making the discrete Arc A370M unnecessary for basic productivity, though it adds no harm for these lightweight workloads.

Balance and Bottleneck

The data reveals a significant imbalance. The CPU’s average benchmark score is 43326, landing it in the 88th percentile, while the GPU’s average score is 29175, placing it in the 74th percentile. This 14-point percentile gap indicates the processor is substantially more powerful relative to its peer group than the graphics card is relative to its own peers.

In gaming, the Arc A370M is the clear bottleneck. The CPU has enough headroom to feed the GPU, but the graphics card cannot translate that processing power into higher frame rates. The GPU’s nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH, has a deltaPct of -0.1, showing they are near-identical in performance, so the Arc A370M’s capabilities represent a hard ceiling for gaming FPS.

For productivity and compute tasks, the bottleneck shifts to the GPU only when the workload is graphics-accelerated. CPU-bound tasks like data encryption, integer math (Passmark integer math score of 105056), and physics calculations (Passmark physics score of 1711) will run at the CPU’s pace, which is exceptionally fast. The GPU only becomes the limiting factor in scenarios that demand VRAM capacity or sustained GPU compute, where its 4 GB GDDR6 memory and 112.0 GB/s bandwidth are restrictive.

The FPS scaling is entirely dependent on the GPU. Since the CPU is not the limiting factor, improving the graphics card would yield direct FPS gains, whereas upgrading the CPU would have almost no effect on gaming performance. This pairing is a classic case of a high-end CPU waiting on a mid-range GPU.

FAQ

Q: Is this laptop good for gaming?

A: The Arc A370M GPU scores 29175 on average, placing it in the 74th percentile, so it can handle esports and older titles at moderate settings, but it is not suitable for high-refresh, high-detail AAA gaming. The CPU is far more powerful than the GPU requires.

Q: How strong is the CPU for multi-threaded work?

A: The Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 scores 28424 in Cinebench R23 multicore and 32075 in Passmark multithread, placing it in the 88th percentile of all CPUs. This is excellent for video editing, 3D rendering in CPU-based engines, and software compilation.

Q: What is the GPU memory configuration?

A: The Intel Arc A370M has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, providing 112.0 GB/s of bandwidth. This is a limiting factor for high-resolution textures and large GPU compute workloads.

Q: Does the CPU have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, it includes the Radeon 8050S integrated graphics, which could handle basic display tasks. The discrete Arc A370M provides additional performance for gaming and GPU-accelerated applications.

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

A: The CPU’s average score of 43326 is -0.2% versus the AMD Ryzen AI 9 465 and +0.3% versus the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H, making it statistically tied with both in overall performance.

Q: What API support does the GPU offer?

A: The Arc A370M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, meaning it is compatible with modern gaming APIs and features like hardware ray tracing.

Q: Is the CPU overclockable?

A: No, the multiplier is locked, so the base clock of 3.60 GHz and boost clock of 5.00 GHz are fixed. Performance is determined by the stock boost behavior.

Who Should Build It

This configuration targets users who need extreme CPU processing power in a laptop chassis but have modest graphics demands. Content creators working with video editing, 3D modeling, or data analysis will benefit from the 88th percentile CPU performance, which handles rendering and compilation tasks with ease.

Developers and engineers will find the 8-core, 16-thread Zen 5 architecture ideal for build servers or local compilation, with the Passmark integer math score of 105056 indicating strong number-crunching ability. The ECC memory support (LPDDR5X, quad-channel) adds reliability for long-running compute jobs.

Gamers at 1080p with medium settings on older or less demanding titles will find the Arc A370M sufficient, but those targeting high refresh rates or 1440p+ resolutions should look elsewhere. The GPU’s 74th percentile ranking places it near the AMD Radeon RX 470, which is a previous-generation mid-range card.

Students and office workers are over-served by this hardware. The CPU is far more capable than needed for document processing or web browsing, making this a poor choice for budget-conscious users who only need basic productivity. Small business workstations that run complex simulations or large database queries, however, would benefit significantly from the CPU’s Passmark data compression score of 379448.

GPU Analysis

The Intel Arc A370M is built on the Xe-HPG architecture, specifically the DG2-128 chip, and is manufactured on a 6 nm process at TSMC. It contains 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, with a transistor density of 45.9M per mm², making it a relatively small and power-efficient chip.

Memory consists of 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, running at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective), yielding 112.0 GB/s of bandwidth. This is a modest amount of VRAM and bandwidth, which will limit performance in games with high-resolution textures or in compute workloads that require large data sets in memory. The GPU’s pixel rate is 65.60 GPixel/s and its texture rate is 131.2 GTexel/s, indicating it can handle basic rasterization at 1080p.

The GPU includes 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, along with 8 RT cores for ray tracing. It has no listed tensor cores, so AI acceleration is absent. The FP32 compute is 4.198 TFLOPS, with FP16 at 8.397 TFLOPS via a 2:1 ratio. These numbers put it in the entry-level discrete GPU class.

Benchmark results show a Geekbench OpenCL score of 29676 and a Vulkan score of 28673, averaging 29175. This places the GPU in the 74th percentile, with its nearest rival being the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH at -0.1% delta. The scores indicate that the A370M is competitive with older mid-range desktop GPUs but is not suited for high-end rendering tasks. The 8 RT cores provide ray tracing capability, but the low compute throughput means ray-traced effects will need to be used sparingly.

Gaming Performance

No measured FPS data exists for this exact CPU and GPU combination. The FACT PACK contains no measuredFps rows, so all frame rate discussions are estimates based on the benchmark scores and the GPU’s percentile position. The Arc A370M’s average benchmark score of 29175, which is comparable to the AMD Radeon RX 470 (deltaPct of 0.6%), suggests it can run most games at 1080p with low to medium settings.

For esports titles like Counter-Strike or League of Legends, which are not graphically demanding, the GPU should push well over 60 FPS at 1080p with competitive settings, given its 74th percentile ranking. For older AAA games from a few generations ago, 1080p at medium settings should be playable, potentially hitting 60 FPS in less demanding scenes.

For modern AAA games with high fidelity graphics, the 4 GB VRAM and 112.0 GB/s bandwidth will be a bottleneck. Frame rates will likely drop below 60 FPS at 1080p with high settings, and ray tracing features should be disabled to maintain playable performance. The CPU will not be the limiting factor, as its 88th percentile performance provides ample headroom.

The GPU’s nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH (-0.1%) and the AMD Radeon RX 470 (0.6%), both of which are known for 1080p-class gaming. This positions the A370M as a solid entry-level gaming GPU, but not one capable of high-refresh or high-resolution gaming. Expect playable frame rates at 1080p with adjusted settings, but do not expect high FPS in demanding titles.

CPU Analysis

The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 is a Zen 5 architecture processor, codenamed Strix Halo, built on a 4 nm TSMC process. It features 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The TDP is 55 W, making it a high-performance mobile chip.

The cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 32 MB of shared L3 cache. Memory support is LPDDR5X with a quad-channel interface, providing 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. It also supports ECC memory, which is a valuable feature for workstation reliability. The CPU uses the AMD Socket FP11 and has a Gen 4 PCIe interface with 16 lanes.

Benchmark scores are strong across the board. Cinebench R23 multicore is 28424 and singlecore is 4012, while Cinebench R20 multicore is 11938 and singlecore is 1685. Passmark scores include a multithread score of 32075, a single thread score of 3995, floating point math at 69580, and integer math at 105056. The average benchmark score is 43326, placing it in the 88th percentile.

The nearest CPU rivals are all within 1% of its average score: the AMD Ryzen AI 9 465 at -0.2%, the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H at +0.3%, the AMD Ryzen 7 170 at -0.8%, and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 7745 at -0.9%. This indicates the Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 is at the top of its class, with no single competitor holding a meaningful advantage. The Passmark data compression score of 379448 and data encryption score of 18978 show it is well-suited for storage and security workloads.

Build Overview

This is a laptop-class build combining the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 CPU with the Intel Arc A370M GPU. The combined percentile rank is 81, indicating that the overall system sits in the top fifth of all configurations in the database. However, this ranking is heavily weighted by the CPU’s strength, as the GPU is comparatively weaker.

The CPU is a mobile processor with a 55 W TDP, designed for high-performance laptops. The GPU is an end-of-life product with a 35 W TDP, slotted as an IGP (integrated graphics processor) in terms of form factor, though it is a discrete chip. This pairing is unusual, as the CPU is a top-tier processor while the GPU is an entry-level model.

The build’s overall tier is high due to the CPU, but the user experience in graphics-intensive tasks will be closer to the GPU’s 74th percentile tier. This is a workstation-oriented pairing, where the CPU is the primary workhorse and the GPU provides basic acceleration. It is not a balanced gaming laptop, but rather a mobile workstation with the ability to handle light gaming.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU’s average benchmark score is 43326, placing it in the 88th percentile of all CPUs. The GPU’s average benchmark score is 29175, placing it in the 74th percentile of all GPUs. The combined percentile is 81, reflecting the strong CPU contribution.

The CPU’s nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen AI 9 465, which scores 43431, a delta of -0.2% from the 385. The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H scores 43210, a delta of +0.3%, meaning the 385 is slightly faster. These differences are negligible in real-world usage, indicating the CPU is at performance parity with the best mobile chips available.

The GPU’s nearest rival is the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH, scoring 29197, a delta of -0.1%, making them effectively identical. The AMD Radeon RX 470 scores 28996, a delta of +0.6%, so the Arc A370M is slightly faster. The AMD Radeon RX 6800M scores 28874, a delta of +1%, showing the A370M holds a small edge.

The combined picture is a system with exceptional processing power and mediocre graphics. The CPU’s 88th percentile ranking is a top-tier result, while the GPU’s 74th percentile is solidly mid-range. Users will experience fast load times, quick compilation, and smooth multitasking, but gaming and GPU-accelerated rendering will be capped by the A370M’s modest 4 GB VRAM and compute throughput. This is a system built for CPU-intensive work, with gaming as a secondary consideration.

Rate My PC: AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 + Intel Arc A370M

Apex Performer

System Balance Analysis

AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385

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

Usage Scenarios

Balance and Bottleneck

FAQ

Who Should Build It

GPU Analysis

Gaming Performance

CPU Analysis

Build Overview

Benchmark Performance

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