SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core i5-13500HX + Intel Arc A570M

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

89%

GPU

97%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core i5-13500HX

29,270 Benchmark Score

Top 11% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

Intel Arc A570M

58,239 Benchmark Score

Top 3% 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 i5-13500HX paired with the Intel Arc A570M is an all-Intel mobile combination: a 14-core Raptor Lake-HX processor sitting at the 81st percentile of all CPUs, matched with an Alchemist-based discrete GPU sitting at the 88th percentile on its recorded OpenCL score, for a combined build percentile of 85. One caveat applies throughout this page: the database contains no measured FPS rows for this exact pairing, so every frame-rate statement below is an estimate derived from the benchmark scores rather than a recorded gameplay capture.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The platform story here is defined by the BGA 1964 socket. This is a ball-grid-array part, soldered to the motherboard, which means the CPU cannot be swapped out the way a desktop socketed chip can. The practical consequence is that the "upgrade path" for this machine is really about memory, storage, and the external GPU route rather than the CPU itself. The processor supports both DDR4 and DDR5 on a dual-channel bus, and it supports ECC memory — a notable inclusion for a mobile part, and one that matters for workstation-adjacent use. DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration is the sensible choice for a new build around this silicon, since the platform can take advantage of it from day one.

PCIe connectivity is generous: PCIe Gen 5 with 20 CPU-attached lanes. For a laptop, that lane budget is more relevant to OEM design than to end-user upgrades, but it means the Arc A570M — which itself connects over PCIe 4.0 x8 — is not starved at the interface level, and there is headroom for fast NVMe storage wired directly to the CPU. Anyone considering extending the life of this machine should look at storage upgrades and, if the chassis supports it, an external GPU enclosure fed by the platform's high-bandwidth connectivity, since the CPU percentile of 81 suggests the processor has enough multi-thread grunt to keep feeding a stronger GPU later.

Power envelopes frame the picture. The CPU carries a 55 W TDP and the GPU a 75 W TDP, so the combined design load sits around 130 W before platform overhead. There is no suggestedPsu field for this GPU — expected for an integrated mobile design — but the takeaway for a laptop buyer is thermal design: a chassis that can sustain the processor's boost behavior alongside the discrete GPU is the difference between the benchmark numbers above and a throttled reality. As for a next upgrade: given the BGA socket, the sensible move is a whole-platform step up rather than a component swap, with the CPU's 81st percentile standing and the GPU's 88th percentile OpenCL standing suggesting the GPU side is actually the stronger asset in this pairing.

Gaming Performance

To be clear once and only once: no measured FPS data exists in the database for this exact CPU+GPU combination, and `dataIsMeasured` is false. Everything in this section is an estimate inferred from the benchmark scores, not from captured gameplay.

What do the scores imply? The Arc A570M's sole recorded benchmark is a Geekbench OpenCL result of 58,239, which places it at the 88th percentile among all GPUs and within a fraction of a percent of parts like the AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT (58,392, a delta of -0.3), the AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM (58,085, +0.3), the NVIDIA P102-100 (58,528, -0.5), and the AMD Radeon PRO V710 (58,677, -0.7). Interpreted strictly from that compute score, the GPU lands in territory typically associated with high-setting 1080p gaming and, depending on title, playable 1440p. The 8 GB of GDDR6 and 224 GB/s of bandwidth support that read: enough capacity for modern textures at 1080p and generally adequate at 1440p, though the 128-bit bus will be the first thing to bite in bandwidth-hungry titles.

On the CPU side, the i5-13500HX's 3DMark scaling — 972 single-thread, 1,899 at 2 threads, 3,607 at 4, 5,712 at 8, 7,307 at 16 and 7,885 at maximum threads — indicates a processor that can feed a discrete GPU without becoming the limiter in most titles, since the majority of games stress well under the full 20-thread capacity. The 8-thread score of 5,712 against the max-thread score of 7,885 shows diminishing returns beyond roughly half the thread count, which is exactly the pattern you want for gaming: the useful work is front-loaded. Estimated frame expectations, then: high-refresh 1080p in esports-class and well-optimized titles, high-setting 1080p in demanding AAA releases, and moderate-setting 1440p as the realistic ceiling. Ray tracing is supported via 16 RT cores, but the modest RT count means estimates should assume RT at reduced settings or with upscaling in heavier games.

Balance and Bottleneck

The percentile split tells the interesting story: the GPU sits at the 88th percentile while the CPU sits at the 81st. In a laptop pairing, that seven-point gap is small enough that neither component dramatically overshadows the other, but the GPU is nominally the stronger asset on paper. The question is whether the 3DMark CPU scaling supports that framing — and it largely does. From 8 threads (5,712) to 16 threads (7,307) to maximum threads (7,885), the gains flatten sharply, meaning game engines that use four to eight threads get most of what this CPU offers. The 4-thread score of 3,607 is roughly 46 percent of the max-thread result, so a poorly threaded game still receives a substantial slice of the processor's capability.

Where does the bottleneck land per workload? For gaming, the estimate favors a GPU limit at higher resolutions and a CPU limit only in heavily simulation-driven titles, since the single-thread figures (972 in 3DMark, 3,582 in PassMark single-thread) are solidly mid-to-upper-tier. For rendering and compute, the picture flips: the Cinebench R23 multi-core result of 18,334 and R20 multi-core of 9,792 show a processor that scales well across its 14 cores and 20 threads, while the GPU's single OpenCL datapoint, though strong in percentile terms, comes from a compute test rather than a rendering suite — so treat GPU-side render estimates with more caution.

One curious data point deserves attention: the PassMark physics score of 1,634 is strikingly low next to the integer math (96,195) and floating point (70,885) results. Whether that reflects test conditions or the physics workload's sensitivity to the hybrid core layout, the data is not sufficient to say — but it is the kind of outlier a buyer should watch for in game benchmarks heavy on physics simulation.

Who Should Build It

Because this is a laptop-class pairing (buildClass: laptop), "building" means choosing the right machine, not assembling one. Who does the data say it fits?

Gamers targeting 1080p are the primary audience: the GPU's 88th-percentile OpenCL standing and the CPU's strong 4-to-8-thread 3DMark scaling (3,607 and 5,712 respectively) point to a competent high-setting 1080p experience with headroom for high refresh in lighter titles. Content creators benefit from the CPU side — Cinebench R23 multi-core at 18,334 with 20 threads is genuinely useful for video encoding timelines and photo batch work, and ECC support is a rare bonus for data-integrity-sensitive workflows. Developers get a hybrid 14-core layout that handles parallel builds and containers well, evidenced by the PassMark multi-thread score of 27,753 and the 3DMark max-thread result of 7,885. Students and small-business workstation users get a machine that covers office work trivially and can stretch into light 3D and GPU compute when needed — the Geekbench OpenCL score of 58,239 sits within 0.3 percent of the Radeon RX 5600 OEM, which is respectable company for a mobile Alchemist part.

Who should look elsewhere: enthusiasts chasing maximum 1440p or 4K frame rates, and anyone needing sustained heavily-threaded rendering throughput beyond what a 55 W mobile envelope can hold.

Benchmark Performance

The exact numbers, and what they mean together:

3DMark CPU: 972 single-thread, 1,899 (2 threads), 3,607 (4 threads), 5,712 (8 threads), 7,307 (16 threads), 7,885 (max threads)
Cinebench R15: 2,863 multi-core, 252 single-core
Cinebench R20: 9,792 multi-core, 1,382 single-core
Cinebench R23: 18,334 multi-core, 1,730.5 single-core
PassMark: 27,753 multi-thread, 3,582 single-thread, plus sub-scores of 96,195 integer math, 70,885 floating point, 331,896 data compression, 19,267 encryption, 20,200 extended instructions, 36,373 string sorting, 98 prime finding, 1,634 physics
GPU: Geekbench OpenCL 58,239

The CPU's average benchmark score of 29,270 places it at the 81st percentile versus all CPUs, and its nearest rivals are an eclectic set: the Intel Xeon Phi 7210 (29,245, delta 0.1), the AMD EPYC 9654 (29,409, -0.5), the AMD Ryzen 7 5800X (29,123, +0.5) and the AMD Ryzen 7 3800X (29,447, -0.6). Landing statistically alongside a Zen 3 desktop octa-core while drawing a 55 W mobile envelope is the headline here — the hybrid 14-core layout is doing real work. The single-core results (1,730.5 in R23) confirm no Responsiveness penalty is being paid for that efficiency.

The GPU's 58,239 OpenCL score at the 88th percentile, within touching distance of the Radeon RX 6950 XT on this metric, gives the pairing its combined percentile of 85. Read together: a balanced upper-tier laptop whose compute side is arguably its sharper edge.

GPU Analysis

The Arc A570M is the DG2-256 die on TSMC's 6 nm process — 11,500 million transistors on a 269 mm² die, a density of 42.8M per mm². The Xe-HPG architecture brings 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, 64 ROPs and 16 RT cores, with a 900 MHz base and 1,300 MHz boost clock. Raw throughput lands at 5.325 TFLOPS FP32 and 10.65 TFLOPS FP16 at 2:1, with a pixel rate of 83.20 GPixel/s and texture rate of 166.4 GTexel/s.

Memory is 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, running at 1,750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) for 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth. That bandwidth figure is the key constraint to watch: it is sufficient for 1080p texture streaming and workable at 1440p, but it caps how far the shader array can be pushed at higher resolutions. DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4 support mean the feature set is fully current, including ray tracing through the 16 RT cores — modest in count, so RT workloads should be estimated conservatively. There is no tensor core figure in the data.

For rendering and compute, the 58,239 OpenCL score at the 88th percentile is the anchor: it says this GPU is a legitimate compute device for GPU-accelerated effects, OpenCL-enabled creative software and light rendering work, not merely a display adapter. The interface is PCIe 4.0 x8, well matched to the CPU's Gen 5 lane budget.

CPU Analysis

The Core i5-13500HX is a Raptor Lake-HX part on Intel's 10 nm process, carrying 14 cores and 20 threads with a 2.50 GHz base and 4.70 GHz boost. The die measures 257 mm². Cache is substantial for the class: 80 KB of L1 and 2 MB of L2 per core, with 24 MB of shared L3 — the latter being the figure that matters most for gaming and creative workloads. The multiplier is unlocked, notable for a mobile part, though practical tuning headroom in a laptop will depend on the chassis rather than the silicon. Integrated UHD Graphics 710 handles display duties when the discrete GPU is idle.

What do the scores mean for real work? The Cinebench progression — 2,863 in R15, 9,792 in R20, 18,334 in R23 multi-core — shows consistent scaling across generations of the test, indicating the multi-thread result is robust rather than a one-off. For a video editor, 18,334 in R23 translates to timeline scrubbing and export throughput comfortably ahead of mainstream quad- and hexa-core mobile chips. For a developer, the PassMark multi-thread score of 27,753 and the strong data-compression sub-score of 331,896 suggest fast archive and build operations. The encryption score of 19,267 and extended instructions result of 20,200 cover the cryptographic and vector-workload bases. The single-thread PassMark of 3,582 keeps day-to-day interactivity snappy, and the CPU sits at the 81st percentile overall — upper tier, with an average score of 29,270 that nudges past the Xeon Phi 7210 and Ryzen 7 5800X in its immediate rival set.

Build Overview

This is an all-Intel laptop: a Raptor Lake-HX mobile processor plus an Alchemist discrete mobile GPU, released within the same year — the CPU on 2023-01-03 and the GPU on 2023-07-31 — with both parts still carrying Active production status. The CPU launched at an MSRP of $326; no GPU launch MSRP is recorded. The pairing's combined percentile of 85, built from a CPU at the 81st and a GPU at the 88th percentile, defines it as an upper-tier mobile machine: not flagship territory, but firmly above the mainstream, with the GPU's compute standing slightly outpacing the CPU's overall ranking. The class identity is best summarized as a do-everything laptop that leans compute-capable.

FAQ

Q: Can I upgrade the CPU or GPU later?

A: No. The CPU uses the Intel BGA 1964 socket, meaning it is soldered to the board, and the Arc A570M is an integrated mobile GPU. Upgrades are limited to memory and storage; a stronger future GPU would mean an external enclosure or a new machine.

Q: Is there measured FPS data for this pairing?

A: No. The database contains no measured frame-rate rows for this exact combination, so all gaming figures discussed here are estimates inferred from the benchmark scores.

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

A: Its average benchmark score of 29,270 sits within one percent of the Intel Xeon Phi 7210 (29,245), AMD EPYC 9654 (29,409), AMD Ryzen 7 5800X (29,123) and AMD Ryzen 7 3800X (29,447) — effectively dead-even company at the 81st percentile.

Q: Does the platform support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the CPU supports ECC, and it accepts both DDR4 and DDR5 on a dual-channel bus — a rare combination for a mobile gaming-class part and useful for workstation roles.

Q: What display resolutions should this laptop target for gaming?

A: Based on the GPU's 88th-percentile OpenCL score, its 8 GB of GDDR6 and 224 GB/s of bandwidth, 1080p at high settings is the estimated sweet spot, with 1440p at moderate settings as the realistic ceiling.

Q: Is the CPU good for multi-threaded work like rendering or compiling?

A: The data says yes: Cinebench R23 multi-core of 18,334, PassMark multi-thread of 27,753, and 20 threads across 14 cores place it at the 81st percentile of all CPUs.

Q: Does the GPU support ray tracing?

A: Yes — 16 RT cores, with DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), Vulkan 1.4 and OpenGL 4.6 support. The modest RT core count suggests estimating ray-traced performance conservatively.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: The 3DMark CPU scores — 3,607 at 4 threads and 5,712 at 8 — show the processor front-loads its performance where game engines need it, while the GPU's 58,239 OpenCL score at the 88th percentile supports an estimated high-refresh 1080p experience in well-optimized titles.

Streaming: Encoding while gaming draws on both sides: the Cinebench R23 multi-core result of 18,334 across 20 threads leaves headroom for stream encoding alongside gameplay, and the 24 MB of shared L3 cache helps both workloads coexist.

Video editing: The 14-core layout, 18,334 R23 multi-core score and 331,896 PassMark data-compression result point to capable timeline and export performance, with the GPU's OpenCL standing available for accelerated effects; 8 GB of VRAM covers 1080p projects comfortably and moderate 1440p workloads.

3D rendering: CPU rendering is well served by the max-thread 3DMark score of 7,885 and the R23 multi-core figure, while GPU rendering estimates rest on the single OpenCL datapoint — respectable at the 88th percentile, though the 224 GB/s bandwidth will cap very heavy scenes.

Software development: Parallel builds, containers and compilation benefit from 20 threads and the PassMark multi-thread score of 27,753; single-thread responsiveness is backed by the 3,582 PassMark single-thread result, and ECC support adds integrity for long-running jobs.

Student and office work: Everyday tasks are trivial for this hardware — the 81st-percentile CPU makes short work of office suites, browsing and video calls, with the 8 GB GPU handling light creative coursework when needed, making it a durable machine for a full academic cycle.

Rate My PC: Intel Core i5-13500HX + Intel Arc A570M

Apex Performer

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core i5-13500HX

Intel Arc A570M

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

Upgrade Path and Platform

Gaming Performance

Balance and Bottleneck

Who Should Build It

Benchmark Performance

GPU Analysis

CPU Analysis

Build Overview

FAQ

Usage Scenarios

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