SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core i5-13400F + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti

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
87%
VS
GPU
96%
PROCESSOR

Intel Core i5-13400F

25,292 Benchmark Score
Top 13% Market Ranking
View Full Specs →
GRAPHICS CARD

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti

41,187 Benchmark Score
Top 4% 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 Intel Core i5-13400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti is a desktop pairing that lands in the upper echelon of the benchmark database, holding a combined percentile of 80. The processor, built on Intel’s 10 nm Raptor Lake architecture, delivers a 10-core, 16-thread configuration with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. The GPU, based on the Ampere architecture with the GA102 chip, brings 10,240 shading units and 12 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 384-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 912.4 GB/s. This combination of a high-core-count CPU and a flagship-tier GPU produces a system that sits comfortably above most rivals in synthetic benchmarks, though the data reveals specific strengths and limitations that matter for real-world workloads.

CPU Analysis

The i5-13400F’s 10 cores and 16 threads are arranged in a hybrid fashion, though the fact pack does not detail the P-core/E-core split. What the benchmark scores show is a processor that scales well with thread count. The 3DMark results progress from 1,880 in the 2-thread test to 7,314 in the 16-thread test, indicating strong multi-threading efficiency. The max-thread score of 7,307 is nearly identical to the 16-thread score, suggesting that the processor’s thread scheduler is effective at utilizing all available resources. In Cinebench R23, the multi-core score of 22,604 is roughly seven times the single-core score of 3,191, highlighting a substantial parallel workload capability.

For real workloads, this translates to brisk performance in multi-threaded applications like video encoding and 3D rendering. The Geekbench multi-core score of 11,068 versus a single-core score of 1,996 shows a similar pattern. The PassMark suite reinforces this: integer math scores 79,942, floating-point math scores 60,539, and extended instructions score 19,847. Data compression hits 311,364, while encryption reaches 16,608. These numbers suggest a CPU that is well-rounded for productivity tasks, with particularly strong integer and floating-point throughput.

The processor’s single-thread performance, while not class-leading, is competitive. The 3DMark single-thread score of 960 and Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3,191 place it in a position where it can handle most gaming and lightly-threaded applications without becoming a bottleneck. The PassMark single-thread score of 3,634 is respectable. In the context of its nearest rivals, the i5-13400F’s average benchmark score of 25,292 is essentially tied with the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS (25,284, deltaPct 0) and the AMD Ryzen 7 6800H (25,201, deltaPct 0.4). It trails the Intel Core 5 120 (25,362, deltaPct -0.3) and AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D (25,365, deltaPct -0.3) by a negligible margin. This places the CPU at the 77th percentile versus all CPUs, meaning it outperforms roughly three-quarters of all processors in the database.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The i5-13400F uses the Intel Socket 1700, which is the foundation for the Raptor Lake generation. The platform supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, giving builders flexibility in choosing memory technology, though the fact pack does not specify bandwidth figures. The CPU provides PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes available from the CPU itself, which is forward-looking for storage and GPU connectivity. The GPU, however, uses PCIe 4.0 x16, which is fully compatible with the Gen 5 slot and does not present a bandwidth limitation in practice.

The CPU’s TDP is 65 W, which is modest for a 10-core part. The GPU, by contrast, has a TDP of 350 W and a suggested PSU rating of 750 W. This system requires a substantial power supply to handle the combined draw during peak loads, especially in gaming or rendering scenarios where both components are active. The GPU’s power connectors are a single 12-pin, so the PSU must support that connector or an adapter. The GPU is dual-slot and measures 285 mm in length, 112 mm in height, and 40 mm in width, so case clearance is an important consideration for builders.

For a sensible next upgrade, the data suggests that the platform has room to grow. The Socket 1700 supports other 13th-gen parts that could offer higher core counts or clocks, though the fact pack does not list specific alternatives. The PCIe Gen 5 support means that future storage devices using that interface will be able to run at full speed. The DDR5 memory support is another avenue for improvement, though the fact pack does not quantify the performance delta between DDR4 and DDR5 on this platform. The GPU is end-of-life, and its successor is the GeForce 40 series, which would be a natural upgrade path for users who want more performance after several years.

FAQ

Q: What is the combined performance percentile of this CPU+GPU pairing?

A: The combined percentile is 80, placing it above the majority of tested desktop and laptop configurations in the database.

Q: How does the i5-13400F compare to the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS in average benchmark score?

A: The i5-13400F scores 25,292, which is essentially identical to the Ryzen 9 6900HS’s 25,284, with a deltaPct of 0.

Q: What is the GPU’s memory configuration and bandwidth?

A: The RTX 3080 Ti has 12 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 384-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 912.4 GB/s.

Q: What is the CPU’s TDP and what PSU is suggested for the GPU?

A: The CPU has a TDP of 65 W, while the GPU’s suggested PSU is 750 W.

Q: Does the platform support both DDR4 and DDR5 memory?

A: Yes, the memory support includes both DDR4 and DDR5, with a dual-channel memory bus.

Q: What is the GPU’s production status?

A: The GPU is end-of-life, with its predecessor being the GeForce 20 series and its successor being the GeForce 40 series.

Q: What is the pair’s average FPS across all tested games?

A: The pair achieves an average FPS across games of 160, based on measured data.

Balance and Bottleneck

The balance between the CPU and GPU is skewed toward the GPU in most gaming scenarios, but the data shows that the CPU can hold its own. The 3DMark 16-thread score of 7,314 and the max-thread score of 7,307 indicate that the CPU can feed the GPU in multi-threaded workloads. However, the single-thread performance, while adequate, is not exceptional, which could create a bottleneck in games that are heavily reliant on a single core. The PassMark single-thread score of 3,634 is a useful reference point.

Looking at the gaming FPS data, the pair’s average FPS across games is 160, and the pair ranks 983 out of 3,861 pairs, placing it in the top quartile. This suggests that the combination is well-matched for most titles. At 1920x1080, the CPU becomes more relevant, as the GPU can produce very high frame rates. For example, Counter-Strike 2 hits 254.8 FPS, Valorant reaches 454.2 FPS, and Tom Clancy’s Rainbow Six Siege achieves 300 FPS. At these frame rates, the CPU’s single-thread performance is likely the limiting factor, as the GPU is not being stressed to its full potential.

At higher resolutions, the GPU becomes the primary bottleneck. At 3840x2160, frame rates drop significantly across the board. For instance, Cyberpunk 2077 falls to 39.2 FPS, Red Dead Redemption 2 to 33 FPS, and Ark: Survival Ascended to 14.1 FPS. These numbers indicate that the GPU is the limiting component at 4K, as the CPU’s workload remains relatively constant while the GPU’s pixel-pushing demands increase. The percentile data supports this interpretation: the GPU is at the 83rd percentile versus all GPUs, while the CPU is at the 77th percentile versus all CPUs. The GPU is the stronger component in this pairing, and it will dictate performance in GPU-bound workloads.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: At 1920x1080, this pairing excels. The data shows frame rates well above 144 Hz in many esports titles, such as Valorant at 454.2 FPS, Counter-Strike: Global Offensive at 557.6 FPS, and Tom Clancy’s Rainbow Six Siege at 300 FPS. Even demanding single-player titles like Cyberpunk 2077 hit 76.5 FPS at 1080p, which is playable. At 2560x1440, frame rates remain high, with Valorant at 434.3 FPS and CS:GO at 385.9 FPS, though more demanding titles like Cyberpunk 2077 drop to 56.8 FPS.

Streaming: The CPU’s 16 threads provide ample headroom for encoding while gaming. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 22,604 and the 3DMark 16-thread score of 7,314 suggest that the CPU can handle simultaneous gaming and streaming workloads. The GPU’s 320 tensor cores also offer hardware-accelerated encoding capabilities, though the fact pack does not list specific encoder performance.

Video editing: The multi-threaded performance is strong, with a Geekbench multi-core score of 11,068 and a PassMark multithread score of 25,032. The data compression score of 311,364 and the floating-point math score of 60,539 indicate that video encoding and effects processing would benefit from the CPU’s parallel capabilities. The GPU’s 34.10 TFLOPS FP32 performance also contributes to GPU-accelerated rendering and effects.

3D rendering: The Cinebench scores are the key indicator here. The R23 multi-core score of 22,604 shows that the CPU can handle complex scenes, while the GPU’s 80 RT cores and 320 tensor cores provide hardware acceleration for ray tracing and AI denoising. The passmark GPU compute score of 15,282 further supports the GPU’s rendering capabilities.

Software development: The CPU’s 10 cores and 16 threads are well-suited for compilation tasks, which are often parallel. The PassMark integer math score of 79,942 and the extended instructions score of 19,847 suggest strong performance for code compilation and data processing. The single-thread score of 3,634 also ensures that interactive development tools remain responsive.

Student and office work: This pairing is overkill for basic office tasks, but the data shows it will handle any productivity suite with ease. The PassMark single-thread score of 3,634 and the 3DMark 2-thread score of 1,880 indicate that everyday applications run smoothly. The CPU’s 65 W TDP also keeps power consumption reasonable for a desktop system.

Who Should Build It

This build targets enthusiasts who want a high-performance desktop for gaming and content creation. The measured FPS data shows that it is an excellent choice for 1080p and 1440p gaming, with many titles exceeding 100 FPS at those resolutions. At 3840x2160, it can still play most games, though frame rates are lower, with Cyberpunk 2077 at 39.2 FPS and Red Dead Redemption 2 at 33 FPS. Gamers who prioritize high refresh rates at 1080p or 1440p will get the most value from this pairing.

Content creators, specifically video editors and 3D artists, will benefit from the CPU’s multi-core performance and the GPU’s compute capabilities. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 22,604 and the GPU’s 34.10 TFLOPS FP32 performance make it a capable workstation for rendering and effects. Software developers will find the 16 threads useful for compilation, and the fast data compression score of 311,364 indicates efficient handling of large codebases.

Students and small business workstations would find this system more powerful than they need, but it would not struggle with any task. The 65 W CPU TDP and the 750 W suggested PSU make it a relatively efficient system for its performance class. The GPU’s end-of-life status means that buyers should be aware that it is a previous-generation part, but its 83rd percentile ranking shows it remains competitive.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU’s average benchmark score is 25,292, placing it at the 77th percentile versus all CPUs. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS with an average score of 25,284 and a deltaPct of 0, the Intel Core 5 120 with 25,362 and a deltaPct of -0.3, the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D with 25,365 and a deltaPct of -0.3, and the AMD Ryzen 7 6800H with 25,201 and a deltaPct of 0.4. This means the i5-13400F is statistically tied with these parts, with no meaningful performance difference.

The GPU’s average benchmark score is 41,187, placing it at the 83rd percentile versus all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon Pro 5300 with an average score of 40,870 and a deltaPct of 0.8, the NVIDIA Tesla M40 24 GB with 41,707 and a deltaPct of -1.2, the NVIDIA Tesla M40 with 41,897 and a deltaPct of -1.7, and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 with 40,377 and a deltaPct of 2. The RTX 3080 Ti sits between these parts, with the Tesla M40 variants slightly ahead and the Radeon Pro 5300 and RTX 5070 slightly behind.

The combined picture is one of balanced, high-end performance. The CPU is not the fastest in its segment, but it is competitive with the top mobile and desktop parts in its price range. The GPU is a stronger performer, ranking higher in its own percentile. Together, they form a system that is capable of handling demanding workloads across gaming and productivity.

Build Overview

This is a desktop build, as indicated by the buildClass field. The CPU is from Intel’s Core 13th Gen series, using the Raptor Lake architecture on the Socket 1700. The GPU is from NVIDIA’s GeForce 30-series, using the Ampere architecture. The combined percentile of 80 places this pairing in the upper quintile of all tested systems. The pair’s ranking by FPS is 983 out of 3,861 pairs, with an average FPS across games of 160. This is a strong result, indicating that the system is well above the median for gaming performance.

The CPU’s launch MSRP is $196, and the GPU’s launch MSRP is 1,199 USD, though the GPU is now end-of-life. The system’s overall tier is high, driven primarily by the GPU’s 83rd percentile ranking. The CPU’s 77th percentile is also above average, but it is the GPU that boosts this pairing into the top tier of the database.

Gaming Performance

The data is measured, as indicated by the dataIsMeasured field being true. The following are the measured FPS at ultra settings for a selection of games across three resolutions.

At 1920x1080, the system delivers high frame rates in most titles. Esports games are particularly strong: Valorant hits 454.2 FPS, Counter-Strike: Global Offensive reaches 557.6 FPS, and Tom Clancy’s Rainbow Six Siege achieves 300 FPS. Counter-Strike 2 is also high at 254.8 FPS. More demanding games like Cyberpunk 2077 run at 76.5 FPS, Red Dead Redemption 2 at 68 FPS, and Microsoft Flight Simulator at 93.1 FPS. The lowest figure in this group is Ark: Survival Ascended at 36.2 FPS, which is a known heavy title.

At 2560x1440, frame rates remain playable in most games. Valorant stays high at 434.3 FPS, CS:GO at 385.9 FPS, and Rainbow Six Siege at 197 FPS. Cyberpunk 2077 drops to 56.8 FPS, Red Dead Redemption 2 to 51 FPS, and Microsoft Flight Simulator to 72.7 FPS. Ark: Survival Ascended falls to 21.6 FPS, which is below playable for most users.

At 3840x2160, the GPU becomes the clear bottleneck. Valorant still manages 395.1 FPS, and CS:GO hits 225.9 FPS, but most demanding games see significant drops. Cyberpunk 2077 runs at 39.2 FPS, Red Dead Redemption 2 at 33 FPS, and Microsoft Flight Simulator at 51.1 FPS. Ark: Survival Ascended is essentially unplayable at 14.1 FPS. The average FPS across all games is 160, but this figure is heavily skewed by the high performance in esports titles at 1080p.