SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core i5-13400F + AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT

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)

▼

87 Score

Top 13% Ranking

87 / 100

HIGH-END

Power Build

Top 13% of systems. Excellent for 1440p Ultra or 4K High gaming.

1440p Ultra4K High

System Balance Analysis

CPU vs GPU performance ratio

Well Balanced

CPU

87%

GPU

88%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core i5-13400F

25,292 Benchmark Score

Top 13% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT

13,543 Benchmark Score

Top 12% 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.

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 Intel Core i5-13400F paired with the AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT presents a compelling study in asymmetric capability. The 10-core, 16-thread Raptor Lake processor sits at the 77th percentile among all CPUs, while the RDNA 4.0 graphics card, despite its modern architecture, lands at only the 55th percentile. This divergence suggests a build where the CPU’s strong multi-threaded foundation supports a GPU that, while capable, may not fully exploit the processor’s headroom in every scenario. The data invites a closer look at how these two components interact across different workloads and resolutions.

CPU Analysis — cores, clocks, architecture, what the benchmark scores mean for real workloads

The Intel Core i5-13400F is a 10-core, 16-thread desktop processor built on the Raptor Lake-S architecture using Intel’s 10 nm process. It operates with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz, drawing a 65 W TDP. The cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and a shared 20 MB L3 pool. This configuration, with its hybrid core arrangement, delivers a peculiar benchmark profile: the 3DMark max-thread score of 7307 is nearly identical to the 16-thread score of 7314, indicating that the thread scaling plateaus beyond a certain point. However, the jump from 4-thread (3459) to 8-thread (5591) shows a 61.6% improvement, revealing strong scaling when moving from four to eight active threads.

Single-thread performance is respectable but not class-leading. The 3DMark single-thread score of 960, Geekbench single-core score of 1996, and Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3191 all cluster in the mid-range for modern desktop CPUs. The PassMark single-thread score of 3634 reinforces this picture. In real workloads, this translates to snappy responsiveness in everyday tasks and solid performance in lightly-threaded applications, but the processor truly shines in multi-threaded scenarios. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 22604 places it in a strong position for productivity tasks like video encoding and 3D rendering, while the PassMark multithread score of 25032 and Geekbench multicore score of 11068 corroborate this.

The nearest rival data shows the i5-13400F trading blows with AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS and Ryzen 7 6800H, with deltaPct values of 0 and 0.4 respectively, meaning performance is essentially identical. The Intel Core 5 120 trails by 0.3%, and the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D also trails by 0.3%. This places the i5-13400F in a competitive mid-range tier for mobile-derived and desktop hybrid processors. The PassMark extended instructions score of 19847 and floating-point math score of 60539 suggest strong AVX and FPU performance, which bodes well for scientific computing and encryption workloads. The data compression score of 311364 and integer math score of 79942 indicate the processor handles data-intensive tasks efficiently, making it a solid choice for software development and database work.

Balance and Bottleneck — which component limits which workload, using percentiles and FPS scaling as evidence

The balance between the i5-13400F and RX 9070 XT is heavily skewed toward the CPU in terms of raw compute potential. The CPU’s 77th percentile versus the GPU’s 55th percentile suggests that, in CPU-bound scenarios, the processor has ample headroom to feed the graphics card. However, the measured FPS data reveals a more nuanced story. At 1920x1080, many games show high frame rates that suggest the GPU is the limiting factor in GPU-heavy titles. For instance, Cyberpunk 2077 at 1080p yields 77.2 FPS, while at 1440p it drops to 53.8 FPS and at 4K to 38.3 FPS. This scaling pattern—a 30.3% drop from 1080p to 1440p and a further 28.8% drop to 4K—indicates the GPU is the primary constraint as resolution increases.

Conversely, in esports titles like Counter-Strike 2, the 1080p score of 252.5 FPS versus 1440p at 167.5 FPS shows a 33.7% reduction, and 4K drops to 91 FPS. This dramatic scaling suggests that at lower resolutions, the CPU begins to play a larger role, but the GPU still handles the rendering load. The pair rank by FPS places this combination at rank 956 out of 3861 pairs, with an average FPS of 161.2 across all games. This percentile (approximately 75.2% of pairs are faster) indicates that while this build is capable, it is not in the top tier of gaming systems. The bottleneck analysis points to the GPU being the limiting factor in most modern titles, especially at higher resolutions, while the CPU’s strong multi-threaded scores ensure it won’t hold back the GPU in CPU-light scenarios.

Benchmark Performance — exact CPU and GPU scores, percentile positions, and what the combined picture is

The CPU’s benchmark suite paints a picture of a well-rounded mid-range processor. In 3DMark, the 16-thread score of 7314 and max-thread score of 7307 show near-identical performance, meaning the processor’s 16 threads are fully utilized. The 2-thread score of 1880 and 4-thread score of 3459 demonstrate decent scaling, with the 8-thread score of 5591 showing a 61.8% increase over the 4-thread result. Cinebench results are strong: R15 multicore at 2278, R20 multicore at 8892, and R23 multicore at 22604. The single-core scores of 321, 1255, and 3191 for R15, R20, and R23 respectively are consistent across versions. Geekbench multicore of 11068 and single-core of 1996 round out the CPU metrics. PassMark scores include multithread at 25032, single-thread at 3634, and specialized tests like data compression at 311364 and floating-point math at 60539.

The GPU’s benchmark scores are more modest. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 7260 is a modern metric, but the PassMark G3D score of 26795 and GPU compute score of 15864 show mid-range capability. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 17428 and Vulkan score of 65879 indicate that the GPU performs better in Vulkan API workloads. The DirectX scores are surprisingly low: DirectX 10 at 154, DirectX 11 at 292, and DirectX 12 at 78. These PassMark DirectX scores are synthetic and may not reflect real gaming performance, but they do indicate that the GPU’s strength lies in modern APIs rather than legacy ones. The combined percentile of 66 for this CPU+GPU pairing suggests it sits above average but not in the enthusiast tier.

Who Should Build It — target users and industries (gamers at specific resolutions, content creators, developers, students, small business workstations) tied strictly to the measured performance

The measured performance data indicates this build targets gamers who prioritize 1080p and 1440p gaming over 4K. At 1080p, the build achieves over 100 FPS in most titles, with esports games like CS:GO hitting 560 FPS and Valorant reaching 456 FPS. At 1440p, most games still exceed 60 FPS, with Call of Duty: Warzone hitting 127.9 FPS and Rainbow Six Siege at 198 FPS. However, at 4K, many titles drop below 60 FPS, such as Cyberpunk 2077 at 38.3 FPS and Red Dead Redemption 2 at 34 FPS. This suggests the sweet spot is 1080p high-refresh or 1440p standard refresh gaming.

Content creators will find the CPU’s Cinebench R23 multicore score of 22604 and PassMark multithread score of 25032 beneficial for video editing and rendering workloads. The GPU’s 16 GB VRAM and 644.6 GB/s bandwidth provide ample memory for texture-heavy tasks, though its compute scores (PassMark GPU compute at 15864) are moderate. Software developers will appreciate the CPU’s data compression score of 311364 and integer math score of 79942, which aid in compilation and debugging. Students and small business workstations would benefit from the CPU’s strong multi-threaded performance for office applications, though the GPU may be overkill for such tasks. The 65 W TDP CPU paired with the 304 W GPU requires a 700 W PSU, which is reasonable for a desktop build.

Upgrade Path and Platform — socket, memory support, PCIe, PSU headroom from suggestedPsu/tdp, what a sensible next upgrade looks like

The Intel Socket 1700 platform provides a clear upgrade path within the 13th generation, though the CPU’s production status is Active and its launch MSRP was $196. The processor supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, with no ECC support. PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU offers modern connectivity, and the GPU uses PCIe 5.0 x16, ensuring full bandwidth utilization. The 65 W TDP CPU leaves significant power headroom for the 304 W GPU, which has a suggested PSU of 700 W. This means the build has some PSU headroom for additional components, but upgrading to a more powerful GPU would require a larger PSU.

A sensible next upgrade would be a higher-tier GPU, as the CPU’s 77th percentile ranking suggests it can handle more graphics power. The current GPU sits at the 55th percentile, so a GPU in the 70th percentile or higher would better match the CPU’s capabilities. Alternatively, adding more memory or faster DDR5 would improve system responsiveness, as the CPU supports both memory types. The unlocked multiplier is false, so overclocking is not an option, but the boost clock of 4.60 GHz is already high. The platform’s PCIe Gen 5 support future-proofs storage and GPU connectivity, though the current GPU uses PCIe 5.0 x16, which is fully compatible.

FAQ

Q: What is the CPU’s multi-threaded performance compared to its rivals?

A: The i5-13400F scores 22604 in Cinebench R23 multicore, with PassMark multithread at 25032. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS, has an identical average score with a 0% delta, while the Intel Core 5 120 trails by 0.3%.

Q: How does the GPU perform in DirectX 12 workloads?

A: The GPU scores 7260 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, which is a modern metric. However, the PassMark DirectX 12 score is 78, which is lower than DirectX 11 at 292 and DirectX 9 at 353, indicating stronger legacy API performance in synthetic tests.

Q: What is the memory configuration for this build?

A: The CPU supports DDR4 and DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration. The GPU has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus with 644.6 GB/s bandwidth and a memory clock of 2518 MHz (20.1 Gbps effective).

Q: Is this build suitable for 4K gaming?

A: The measured data shows mixed results at 3840x2160. Games like Call of Duty: Warzone hit 109.5 FPS and Counter-Strike 2 reaches 91 FPS, but Cyberpunk 2077 only manages 38.3 FPS and Red Dead Redemption 2 drops to 34 FPS.

Q: What is the power consumption of the components?

A: The CPU has a 65 W TDP, while the GPU has a 304 W TDP. The suggested PSU for this configuration is 700 W, which provides adequate headroom for the combined power draw.

Q: Does the CPU support overclocking?

A: No, the multiplier is unlocked false, meaning the CPU cannot be overclocked. The boost clock is fixed at 4.60 GHz.

Q: What PCIe generation does the platform support?

A: The CPU provides PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes, and the GPU uses a PCIe 5.0 x16 interface, ensuring full bandwidth for the graphics card.

GPU Analysis — VRAM, bandwidth, clocks, RT/tensor hardware, what the benchmark scores mean for rendering

The AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT is built on RDNA 4.0 architecture using TSMC’s 4 nm process, with a Navi 48 chip containing 53,900 million transistors on a 357 mm² die. It features 4096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 128 ROPs, along with 64 RT cores. The base clock is 1660 MHz, with a boost clock of 2970 MHz and a game clock of 2400 MHz. Memory is 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, providing 644.6 GB/s bandwidth with a memory clock of 2518 MHz (20.1 Gbps effective). The GPU’s pixel rate is 380.2 GPixel/s and texture rate is 760.3 GTexel/s, with FP32 and FP16 both at 48.66 TFLOPS.

The benchmark scores reveal a GPU that excels in compute tasks but underperforms in some gaming metrics. The Geekbench Vulkan score of 65879 is strong, while the OpenCL score of 17428 is moderate. The PassMark G3D score of 26795 and GPU compute score of 15864 show solid performance. However, the PassMark DirectX scores are inconsistent: DirectX 10 at 154, DirectX 11 at 292, and DirectX 12 at 78. These scores suggest the GPU may have driver or architectural quirks in certain API paths. The 16 GB VRAM is substantial for modern textures, and the 644.6 GB/s bandwidth handles high-resolution assets efficiently. For rendering tasks, the 48.66 TFLOPS FP32 compute and 64 RT cores provide hardware acceleration for ray tracing, though the PassMark GPU compute score of 15864 indicates moderate compute throughput compared to the raw TFLOPS figure.

Build Overview — what this CPU+GPU pairing is, its class (desktop/laptop from buildClass), and overall tier from the percentiles

This is a desktop-class build combining the Intel Core i5-13400F (77th CPU percentile) with the AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT (55th GPU percentile), resulting in a combined percentile of 66. The build’s average FPS across games is 161.2, ranking 956th out of 3861 pairs, placing it in the upper 75th percentile of all possible pairings. This is a mid-range to upper-mid-range desktop configuration, not an enthusiast or budget system. The CPU’s strong multi-threaded performance (Cinebench R23 at 22604) pairs with a GPU that has 16 GB VRAM and modern RDNA 4.0 architecture, but the GPU’s benchmark scores lag behind its theoretical specifications. The build is best suited for 1080p and 1440p gaming, with 4K performance varying widely by title. The 65 W TDP CPU and 304 W GPU require a 700 W PSU, making this a power-efficient yet capable desktop system.

Gaming Performance — measured FPS by game and resolution from measuredFpsUltraByGame (or, if dataIsMeasured is false, frame expectations qualitatively from the benchmark scores and say the figures are estimates)

The data is measured, and the FPS figures provide a comprehensive picture. At 1920x1080, the build excels in esports titles: CS:GO hits 560 FPS, Valorant reaches 456 FPS, and Counter-Strike 2 manages 252.5 FPS. Minecraft runs at 250 FPS, and Roblox at 329.1 FPS. For AAA titles, Cyberpunk 2077 achieves 77.2 FPS, Red Dead Redemption 2 hits 68 FPS, and Control reaches 108.2 FPS. At 2560x1440, performance drops but remains playable: CS:GO at 381.3 FPS, Valorant at 432 FPS, and Counter-Strike 2 at 167.5 FPS. Cyberpunk 2077 drops to 53.8 FPS, Red Dead Redemption 2 to 51 FPS, and Control to 82.4 FPS. At 3840x2160, the build struggles in demanding titles: Cyberpunk 2077 at 38.3 FPS, Red Dead Redemption 2 at 34 FPS, and Ark: Survival Ascended at 15 FPS. However, esports titles remain playable: CS:GO at 229.3 FPS, Valorant at 396 FPS, and Rainbow Six Siege at 109 FPS. The average FPS across all games is 161.2, indicating strong overall performance.

Usage Scenarios — grounded in the scores: high-refresh gaming, streaming, video editing, 3D rendering, software development, student and office work. One short paragraph per scenario, citing the numbers that support the verdict

High-refresh gaming: This build delivers exceptional frame rates for competitive titles at 1080p, with CS:GO at 560 FPS and Valorant at 456 FPS. At 1440p, these titles still exceed 380 FPS, making this ideal for high-refresh monitors up to 240 Hz or beyond.

Streaming: The CPU’s strong multi-threaded performance (Cinebench R23 at 22604) can handle encoding alongside gaming, though the GPU’s compute scores (PassMark GPU compute at 15864) suggest hardware encoding may be less efficient than dedicated streamer GPUs.

Video editing: The CPU’s PassMark multithread score of 25032 and data compression score of 311364 provide solid performance for video editing software, while the GPU’s 16 GB VRAM handles large timelines and effects without memory pressure.

3D rendering: The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 22604 ensures fast CPU-based rendering, while the GPU’s 48.66 TFLOPS FP32 and 64 RT cores accelerate ray-traced previews. The PassMark GPU compute score of 15864 indicates moderate performance for GPU rendering workloads.

Software development: The CPU’s integer math score of 79942 and extended instructions score of 19847 support fast compilation, while the 10 cores and 16 threads handle parallel build processes. The data compression score of 311364 aids in handling large codebases.

Student and office work: The CPU’s single-thread performance (3DMark single-thread at 960) ensures responsive applications, while the 65 W TDP keeps power consumption low for prolonged use. The GPU is overkill for such tasks, but the 16 GB VRAM and 644.6 GB/s bandwidth handle any graphics-intensive academic work.

Rate My PC: Intel Core i5-13400F + AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT

Power Build

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core i5-13400F

AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT

Market Position

Game Performance Benchmarks

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive

Valorant

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive

Valorant

Valorant

Performance Insights

Strong Performance

Performance Tiers Explained

Ultimate

High-End

Mid-Range

Entry Level

Legacy

CPU Analysis — cores, clocks, architecture, what the benchmark scores mean for real workloads

Balance and Bottleneck — which component limits which workload, using percentiles and FPS scaling as evidence

Benchmark Performance — exact CPU and GPU scores, percentile positions, and what the combined picture is

Who Should Build It — target users and industries (gamers at specific resolutions, content creators, developers, students, small business workstations) tied strictly to the measured performance

Upgrade Path and Platform — socket, memory support, PCIe, PSU headroom from suggestedPsu/tdp, what a sensible next upgrade looks like

FAQ

GPU Analysis — VRAM, bandwidth, clocks, RT/tensor hardware, what the benchmark scores mean for rendering

Build Overview — what this CPU+GPU pairing is, its class (desktop/laptop from buildClass), and overall tier from the percentiles

Gaming Performance — measured FPS by game and resolution from measuredFpsUltraByGame (or, if dataIsMeasured is false, frame expectations qualitatively from the benchmark scores and say the figures are estimates)

Usage Scenarios — grounded in the scores: high-refresh gaming, streaming, video editing, 3D rendering, software development, student and office work. One short paragraph per scenario, citing the numbers that support the verdict

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