SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core i5-13400F + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER

Get a comprehensive performance analysis of your gaming rig with detailed benchmarks, bottleneck detection, and upgrade recommendations

83 / 100
HIGH-END

Power Build

Top 17% 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%
VS
GPU
79%
PROCESSOR

Intel Core i5-13400F

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

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER

3,075 Benchmark Score
Top 21% 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 NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER is a desktop configuration that presents a stark contrast in component tiers. The CPU is a solid mid-range performer, while the GPU, despite its name suggesting top-tier status, benchmarks in the lower percentile of all graphics cards in the database. This pairing results in a system where the processor is the clear performance leader, and the graphics card, while featuring massive specifications on paper, does not deliver the expected level of rasterization performance. The following analysis is based solely on the provided benchmark data, which shows no measured FPS rows for this exact combination, meaning all gaming performance discussions are estimates derived from the individual component scores.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The platform is built around the Intel Core i5-13400F, which uses the Intel Socket 1700. This socket is the foundation for the 13th Gen Core series, and the CPU itself is based on the Raptor Lake architecture, specifically the Raptor Lake-S codename. The processor supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, giving builders flexibility in choosing memory technology, though it operates in a dual-channel configuration. For storage and expansion, the CPU provides PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes, ensuring high bandwidth for modern NVMe SSDs and graphics cards, although the GPU itself uses a PCIe 5.0 x16 interface.

The CPU has a thermal design power (TDP) of 65 watts. This is a modest figure, suggesting that a wide range of cooling solutions, from stock coolers to capable air coolers, can handle the thermal load without issue. The GPU, however, is a different matter entirely. With a TDP of 415 watts, it is the dominant power consumer in the system. While the suggested PSU field is null in the data, the 415W TDP of the graphics card alone indicates that a high-wattage power supply is required for stable operation, especially when combined with the rest of the system components. The GPU requires a single 16-pin power connector, which is a key consideration for PSU compatibility.

For a sensible next upgrade path, the data suggests that the CPU is the component with the most headroom. The i5-13400F's 65W TDP and active production status mean it is a current product, but its 10 cores and 16 threads are the primary compute resources. The GPU, despite its high TDP, is the performance bottleneck in this pairing. A user looking to improve system performance would likely see the most significant gains from upgrading the graphics card, as the CPU's benchmark percentiles are considerably higher. However, the platform itself is mature, and the next logical step would be to move to a newer socket and platform generation, as the LGA 1700 socket is tied to the 13th Gen series.

Benchmark Performance

The benchmark results for this pair reveal a significant performance disparity. The Intel Core i5-13400F demonstrates strong multi-threaded capability, scoring 22,604 points in Cinebench R23 multicore and 8,892 points in Cinebench R20 multicore. Its single-thread performance is also respectable, with a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3,191 and a Geekbench single-core score of 1,996. In the PassMark suite, the CPU achieves a multi-thread score of 25,032 and a single-thread score of 3,634. The 3DMark tests show a scaling pattern from 1,880 in the 2-thread test to 7,314 in the 16-thread test, indicating good scaling across core counts. The CPU's average benchmark score is 25,292, placing it in the 77th percentile of all CPUs, which is a strong showing for a mid-range desktop processor.

In contrast, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER has a single benchmark entry: a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 3,075. This score places the GPU in the 19th percentile of all GPUs, which is surprisingly low for a card with such a high-end name and specifications. The GPU's average benchmark score is also 3,075, and its nearest rivals in the database are the NVIDIA Quadro P1000 (scoring 3,163, a 2.8% difference) and the Intel Arc Pro B60 (scoring 3,182, a 3.4% difference). This indicates that, based on this specific benchmark, the RTX 5080 SUPER is performing at a level comparable to entry-level or professional workstation cards, not a high-end gaming card.

The combined picture is one of imbalance. The CPU is a strong performer, sitting in the upper quartile of all processors, while the GPU is in the bottom quintile of all graphics cards. This is a clear case where the CPU's benchmark scores are far more competitive than the GPU's, suggesting that the graphics card is the limiting factor for overall system performance in graphics-intensive tasks. The combined percentile for this build is 48, which reflects the drag of the low GPU score on the overall system rating.

Balance and Bottleneck

The benchmark data clearly identifies the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER as the performance bottleneck in this configuration. The CPU's 77th percentile ranking among all CPUs indicates it is a capable processor that can handle demanding computational workloads. In contrast, the GPU's 19th percentile ranking shows it is a weak link for graphics processing. This means that in workloads that are heavily dependent on the GPU, such as gaming at high resolutions or 3D rendering, the system's performance will be limited by the graphics card, not the processor.

The CPU's performance in multi-threaded tests, such as its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 22,604, shows that it can feed data to the GPU at a sufficient rate. However, the GPU's low 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 3,075 suggests it cannot translate that data into high frame rates. This bottleneck will manifest in applications where the GPU is the primary compute engine. For example, in gaming at 4K resolution, the GPU's fill rate and shader performance will be the deciding factor, and the CPU will likely be waiting on the GPU to finish rendering frames.

Conversely, the CPU will be the limiting factor in lightly-threaded tasks. Its 3DMark 2-thread score of 1,880 is modest, and its single-thread performance, while respectable, is not class-leading. For tasks like legacy software or certain physics calculations that rely on a few fast cores, the i5-13400F may not be able to keep up with a higher-end processor. However, given the GPU's low performance, it is more likely that a user will first encounter the GPU bottleneck in most modern workloads. The FPS scaling, while not measured, would be expected to be low across the board due to the GPU's poor benchmark showing, with the CPU being underutilized in most gaming scenarios.

Who Should Build It

This configuration is a difficult recommendation for most users due to the severe performance imbalance. The CPU is well-suited for a variety of tasks, but the GPU's low benchmark scores undermine the system's overall capability. For gamers, this build would be a poor choice. The GPU's 19th percentile ranking suggests it will struggle to deliver playable frame rates at any resolution, and the system is not suitable for high-refresh-rate gaming or 4K gaming. The data does not support recommending this build for gamers at any specific resolution.

For content creators, the CPU's strong multi-threaded performance in Cinebench R23 (22,604) and PassMark multi-thread (25,032) would be beneficial for CPU-based rendering tasks. However, GPU-accelerated workflows, such as video encoding or 3D rendering in modern applications, would be severely hampered by the RTX 5080 SUPER's low benchmark score. The GPU's 3DMark score of 3,075 is too low to provide meaningful acceleration in these tasks.

The build could be considered for developers or students who primarily need a strong CPU for compiling code or running virtual machines, but who do not require significant graphics performance. The CPU's 10 cores and 16 threads would handle compilation and multi-tasking well. For small business workstations that are focused on office productivity, database management, or web browsing, the CPU's performance is more than adequate, and the GPU would be irrelevant for these tasks. However, the high power draw and cost of the GPU would be wasteful in such a scenario. In summary, the only sensible use case is a workstation where the CPU is the primary compute resource and the GPU is barely used, which is an inefficient use of the RTX 5080 SUPER.

GPU Analysis

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER is based on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture and uses the GB203 chip, manufactured on a 5 nm process by TSMC. It is a large chip with 45,600 million transistors on a 378 mm² die. The GPU comes with 24 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing a substantial 1.02 TB/s of memory bandwidth. The memory clock is listed as 2000 MHz with 32 Gbps effective speed. The core clocks are a base of 2295 MHz and a boost of 2617 MHz.

In terms of compute resources, the GPU has 10,752 shading units, 336 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 112 raster operation units (ROPs). It also features 84 RT cores and 336 tensor cores, which are designed for ray tracing and AI-accelerated workloads, respectively. The theoretical performance figures are high, with an FP32 throughput of 56.28 TFLOPS and a texture rate of 879.3 GTexel/s. The pixel rate is 293.1 GPixel/s.

Despite these impressive specifications, the GPU's actual benchmark score is very low. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 3,075 places it in the 19th percentile, far below what the hardware specifications would suggest. The nearest rivals in the database, such as the NVIDIA Quadro P1000 and the Intel Arc Pro B60, are not high-end gaming cards, which highlights the discrepancy between the theoretical compute power and the measured performance. This suggests that, in this database, the GPU's benchmark score does not reflect its hardware capabilities, or that the Steel Nomad test is not a good indicator of its performance in other workloads. For rendering, the high VRAM capacity and bandwidth would be useful for large textures and datasets, but the low benchmark score indicates the card will not deliver the expected rendering speed.

Gaming Performance

The FACT PACK contains no measured FPS data for this specific CPU and GPU combination. Therefore, all frame rate discussions are estimates based on the individual component benchmark scores. The GPU's 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 3,075 is in the 19th percentile of all GPUs, which is a very poor result. This score is comparable to the NVIDIA Quadro P1000 and Intel Arc Pro B60, which are not gaming-oriented products. Consequently, the estimated gaming performance for this system is expected to be very low.

Given the GPU's low benchmark score, it is reasonable to estimate that the system will struggle to achieve smooth frame rates in modern games, even at 1080p resolution. The CPU's strong performance, with a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 22,604, is not sufficient to compensate for the GPU's lack of graphics processing power. In GPU-bound scenarios, which are typical in gaming, the frame rate will be dictated by the GPU's pixel and texture processing rates. The GPU's theoretical pixel rate of 293.1 GPixel/s and texture rate of 879.3 GTexel/s are high, but the low Steel Nomad score suggests these rates are not being realized in practice.

The system is not recommended for gaming. The data indicates that the graphics card is the limiting factor, and the estimated frame rates would be poor across all games and resolutions. The only potential exception would be for very old or esports titles with low graphical requirements, but even then, the GPU's low percentile ranking does not inspire confidence. Users should not expect a playable experience in any modern AAA title at any resolution.

FAQ

Q: What is the processor's performance percentile compared to all CPUs?

A: The Intel Core i5-13400F has a percentile of 77, indicating it performs better than 77% of all CPUs in the database.

Q: How does the GPU's benchmark score compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER's 3DMark Steel Nomad score is 3,075. This is 2.8% lower than the NVIDIA Quadro P1000's score of 3,163 and 3.4% lower than the Intel Arc Pro B60's score of 3,182.

Q: What is the combined performance percentile of this build?

A: The combined percentile for the Intel Core i5-13400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER is 48, placing it in the middle of all system configurations.

Q: What is the TDP of the CPU and GPU?

A: The CPU has a TDP of 65 watts, while the GPU has a significantly higher TDP of 415 watts.

Q: What memory types does the CPU support?

A: The Intel Core i5-13400F supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration.

Q: What is the GPU's memory size and bandwidth?

A: The GPU has 24 GB of GDDR7 memory with a 256-bit bus and a bandwidth of 1.02 TB/s.

Q: Are there measured FPS results for this build?

A: No, there are no measured FPS rows for this exact combination. All gaming performance discussions are estimates based on the individual component benchmark scores.

Build Overview

This is a desktop build class configuration featuring the Intel Core i5-13400F processor and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER graphics card. The overall tier of this build, based on the combined percentile of 48, is average, meaning it sits at the 48th percentile of all system pairings in the database. However, this average ranking masks a significant internal imbalance. The CPU is a high-tier component, with a percentile of 77, while the GPU is a low-tier component, with a percentile of 19. This makes the build a study in contrasts: a powerful processor paired with a graphics card that benchmarks poorly. The system is not a balanced gaming machine, nor is it a professional workstation, but rather a combination that is greater than the sum of its parts in CPU-bound tasks and significantly less in GPU-bound ones.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core i5-13400F is a desktop processor from the Core 13th Gen series, built on the Raptor Lake architecture using a 10 nm process node. It has 10 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. The cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, and a shared 20 MB L3 cache. It supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory and has a TDP of 65 watts.

The benchmark scores indicate a well-rounded performer. In Cinebench R23, it scores 22,604 in multicore and 3,191 in single-core, showing strong capabilities in both multi-threaded and single-threaded workloads. The Geekbench scores are 11,068 for multicore and 1,996 for single-core. The PassMark tests show a multi-thread score of 25,032 and a single-thread score of 3,634. The 3DMark tests scale from 1,880 (2 threads) to 7,314 (16 threads), demonstrating good scaling. With an average benchmark score of 25,292 and a 77th percentile ranking, the CPU is a solid choice for a wide range of applications. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS and the AMD Ryzen 7 6800H, with a 0% and 0.4% performance difference, respectively, indicating it is competitive with mobile high-end processors. For real workloads, this means it can handle content creation, software compilation, and heavy multitasking with ease, though its 65W TDP suggests it is not a high-core-count enthusiast part.