SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core i5-13600 + Intel Arc A310

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)

▼

89 Score

Top 11% Ranking

89 / 100

HIGH-END

Power Build

Top 11% of systems. Excellent for 1440p Ultra or 4K High gaming.

1440p Ultra4K High

System Balance Analysis

CPU vs GPU performance ratio

Well Balanced

CPU

93%

GPU

85%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core i5-13600

44,240 Benchmark Score

Top 7% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

Intel Arc A310

7,550 Benchmark Score

Top 15% 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

This build pairs Intel’s Core i5-13600, a 14-core desktop processor from the Raptor Lake generation, with Intel’s Arc A310, an entry-level Alchemist GPU. The combination targets a desktop class system, and its combined percentile of 64 places it above the majority of all tested CPU+GPU pairings. Since the FACT PACK contains no measured FPS data for this exact combination, all gaming frame rates discussed here are estimates derived from the individual benchmark scores of the CPU and GPU. The processor is a strong performer, sitting at the 88th percentile among all CPUs, while the graphics card is far more modest, at the 40th percentile among all GPUs. This disparity shapes every workload verdict that follows.

FAQ

Q: What is the Intel Core i5-13600’s percentile ranking among all CPUs?

A: The Core i5-13600 sits at the 88th percentile vs all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 44240. This places it comfortably in the upper tier of processors, though its nearest rivals show it is not at the very top.

Q: How does the Core i5-13600 compare to its closest rival, the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 has an average score of 44309, which is a delta of -0.2% from the Core i5-13600’s 44240. This means the two processors are virtually identical in overall benchmark performance, with the Intel part holding a negligible edge.

Q: What is the Arc A310’s GPU compute performance?

A: The Arc A310 scores 2157 in the Passmark GPU compute test and 30607 in Geekbench OpenCL. Its overall average benchmark score is 7550, placing it at the 40th percentile vs all GPUs.

Q: Which GPU is a close rival to the Arc A310, and by how much?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 250 is the nearest rival, with an average score of 7557. The Arc A310 trails it by just -0.1%. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is also close, with the Arc A310 actually leading it by 1% based on the delta values.

Q: Does the Core i5-13600 support DDR4 and DDR5 memory?

A: Yes, the memory support field lists both DDR4 and DDR5, with a dual-channel memory bus. The CPU also supports ECC memory, which is a notable feature for workstation reliability.

Q: What is the power draw of the Arc A310, and what PSU is suggested?

A: The Arc A310 has a TDP of 30 W, with a suggested PSU of 200 W. Its power connectors are listed as “None,” indicating it draws power directly from the PCIe slot.

Q: Is the Arc A310 still in production?

A: No, the production status is listed as “End-of-life.” Its predecessor is Xe Graphics, and its successor is Battlemage, showing the product generation transition.

Benchmark Performance

The benchmark data reveals a stark split between the two components. The Core i5-13600 delivers an average benchmark score of 44240, which places it at the 88th percentile among all CPUs. This is a high-ranking result, but the nearest rival data shows it is clustering with other strong parts: the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 scores 44309 (-0.2%), the Intel Core i9-13950HX scores 44342 (-0.2%), and the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H scores 44466 (-0.5%). The consistency of these scores, all within a fraction of a percent, indicates that the i5-13600 is performing at the upper boundary of its tier, trading blows with flagship mobile and desktop parts.

In multi-threaded workloads, the CPU’s Cinebench R23 multicore score of 26620 is substantial, while its single-core score of 3758 shows strong per-thread capability. The Passmark multithread score of 31725 and single-thread score of 4049 reinforce this picture. Data compression performance hits 383972 in Passmark, and floating-point math scores 81892, suggesting robust number-crunching ability. The processor’s 14 cores and 20 threads, with a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, explain these results.

The Arc A310, conversely, is a low-tier performer. Its average benchmark score of 7550 places it at the 40th percentile vs all GPUs, which is below the median. The nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon R7 250 (7557, -0.1%), AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 (7580, -0.4%), NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (7472, 1%), and AMD Radeon HD 8850M (7447, 1.4%). The delta percentages show the Arc A310 is essentially on par with decade-old discrete GPUs, though it does edge out the GTX 1650 by 1%. Its Passmark G3D score of 5433 and G2D score of 625 are modest, while its DirectX 12 score of 29 and DirectX 11 score of 33 are particularly weak, indicating limited gaming headroom.

The combined picture is one of extreme imbalance. The CPU is a high-end performer capable of handling demanding compute tasks, while the GPU is a basic display adapter with some 3D capability. The combined percentile of 64 reflects this mix, pulled down by the GPU’s low standing. For any workload that relies primarily on the CPU, this build will feel fast; for anything GPU-bound, it will feel dated.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: This scenario is not viable at high settings. The Arc A310’s Passmark DirectX 12 score of 29 and DirectX 11 score of 33 are extremely low, indicating that frame rates will be far too low for high-refresh monitors. The GPU’s 40th percentile ranking and 2.688 TFLOPS FP32 performance suggest even 1080p at low settings will struggle to maintain 60 FPS in modern titles. The CPU’s power is irrelevant here because the GPU becomes the bottleneck instantly.

Streaming: The CPU can handle encoding workloads well. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 26620 and Passmark multithread score of 31725 provide ample headroom for software x264 encoding while gaming. However, the GPU’s low DirectX scores mean the game itself will run poorly, making streaming a frustrating experience. The integrated UHD Graphics 770 in the CPU could assist, but the discrete GPU is too weak to provide a smooth gaming base.

Video editing: This is a mixed bag. CPU-based tasks like timeline scrubbing, effects processing, and export encoding will benefit from the 14 cores and the Cinebench R23 multicore score of 26620. The Passmark data compression score of 383972 helps with codec operations. However, GPU-accelerated effects and rendering will be limited by the Arc A310’s low compute scores (2157 in Passmark GPU compute) and 4 GB VRAM. Expect fast CPU exports but slow preview rendering with GPU effects.

3D rendering: CPU rendering will be strong. The Cinebench R20 multicore score of 11180 and R15 multicore score of 2683 indicate solid performance in software renderers like Blender Cycles (CPU mode) or V-Ray. GPU rendering is not viable; the Arc A310’s 2.688 TFLOPS FP32 and 6 RT cores are too weak, and its 4 GB VRAM will limit scene complexity. The 30 W TDP also suggests thermal throttling is unlikely but also that the chip is not designed for sustained compute.

Software development: This is a strong use case. The CPU’s single-thread score of 4049 in Passmark and Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3758 ensure fast compilation of single-threaded tasks, while the 20 threads handle parallel builds. The 24 MB of L3 cache and DDR5 support (with dual-channel bus) help with large codebases. The GPU is irrelevant for most development tasks, making this pairing acceptable for coding workflows.

Student and office work: The CPU’s high single-thread performance (4049 Passmark) makes everyday applications like word processors, spreadsheets, and web browsers feel responsive. The integrated UHD Graphics 770 in the CPU could even handle basic display output, though the Arc A310 is present. For office tasks, the GPU is more than enough, as these workloads are not graphically intensive. The 65 W TDP of the CPU means the system will run cool and quiet, which is ideal for a study environment.

Balance and Bottleneck

The data shows a severe bottleneck imbalance favoring the CPU. In any GPU-bound workload, the Arc A310 will be the limiting factor. Its 40th percentile ranking vs the CPU’s 88th percentile means the GPU is roughly half as capable relative to its peers. For example, in gaming, the CPU could easily feed a much more powerful GPU, but the Arc A310’s Passmark DirectX 12 score of 29 will cap frame rates far below what the CPU can handle. The CPU’s Passmark multithread score of 31725 is a compute resource that the GPU cannot utilize in gaming scenarios.

Conversely, in CPU-bound workloads like software compilation or data compression, the GPU sits idle while the CPU delivers high performance. The Passmark data compression score of 383972 shows the CPU is a workhorse, and the GPU’s low G2D score of 625 does not interfere with these tasks. This means the bottleneck flips entirely based on the workload type, but in mixed workloads like gaming, the GPU is always the constraint.

The FPS scaling evidence is absent (no measured FPS data), but the benchmark scores imply that upgrading the GPU would yield massive gains in any 3D application. The CPU has headroom to support a GPU with a much higher percentile ranking. The 14-core processor with a 5.00 GHz boost clock would not bottleneck a mid-range or even high-end GPU in most scenarios. The current pairing, however, leaves the CPU largely underutilized in gaming, as it waits for the GPU to render frames.

Who Should Build It

Gamers at 1080p low settings: The Arc A310’s 4 GB VRAM and 64-bit memory bus (124.0 GB/s) limit it to eSports titles or older games at low resolutions. The CPU’s high single-thread performance (4049 Passmark) helps with CPU-bound games like strategy titles, but the GPU’s low DirectX scores (29 in DirectX 12) mean modern AAA games are unplayable. This is a build for casual or retro gaming, not serious gamers.

Content creators focused on CPU rendering: Video editors and 3D artists who rely on CPU-based renderers will benefit from the Core i5-13600’s Cinebench R23 multicore score of 26620. The GPU can handle basic display output, but the 4 GB VRAM and 2.688 TFLOPS FP32 are inadequate for GPU-accelerated workloads. This is a workstation for CPU-heavy tasks like code compilation or batch photo processing.

Software developers: The 14 cores and 20 threads, combined with a single-thread score of 4049 in Passmark, make this ideal for compiling large projects. The ECC memory support adds reliability for long-running builds. The GPU is unnecessary for most development, so the Arc A310’s low performance does not hinder this use case.

Students and office workers: The CPU’s responsiveness in single-threaded tasks (Cinebench R23 single-core 3758) ensures smooth everyday use. The 65 W TDP keeps power consumption low, and the Arc A310’s 30 W TDP means the entire system is energy-efficient. The 4 GB VRAM is irrelevant for word processing, spreadsheets, and web browsing.

Small business workstations: For tasks like accounting software, database management, and office suites, the CPU’s Passmark integer math score of 111044 and data encryption score of 22182 provide strong performance. The GPU is sufficient for 2D applications, and the ECC memory support is a boon for data integrity. This is a reliable, if not powerful, office machine.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The Core i5-13600 uses the Intel Socket 1700, which is specific to 12th and 13th Gen Core processors. The platform supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory with a dual-channel bus, giving builders flexibility in memory selection. The CPU also supports ECC memory, which is rare for consumer platforms and valuable for workstation reliability. PCIe support includes Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), which is forward-looking for storage and GPU connectivity.

The Arc A310 uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 bus interface, which is adequate for its bandwidth needs (124.0 GB/s memory bandwidth). The GPU’s TDP is just 30 W, and the suggested PSU is 200 W, leaving enormous headroom for upgrades. The CPU’s TDP is 65 W, so the total system draw is low, meaning a larger PSU is not required for the current build.

A sensible next upgrade would be replacing the Arc A310 with a more powerful GPU. The CPU’s 88th percentile ranking and 16 PCIe Gen 5 lanes can support a high-end graphics card without bottlenecking. The 200 W suggested PSU would need to be upgraded for a mid-range or high-end GPU, but the platform itself is not the limiting factor. The 24 MB L3 cache and 5.00 GHz boost clock ensure the CPU remains relevant for several more GPU generations.

Memory upgrades are also possible: the dual-channel DDR5 support means moving from DDR4 to DDR5 (or increasing DDR5 capacity) would improve memory bandwidth, though the FACT PACK does not list a specific memory bandwidth number. The integrated UHD Graphics 770 can serve as a fallback if the Arc A310 is removed, providing a basic display output. The socket 1700 is a dead-end for future CPU upgrades (no 14th Gen compatibility is listed), so the next major upgrade would require a new motherboard.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core i5-13600 is a 14-core, 20-thread processor based on the Raptor Lake architecture, built on Intel’s 10 nm process. It has a base clock of 2.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, with a TDP of 65 W. The die size is 215 mm², and it features a large cache hierarchy: 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. The CPU supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory with a dual-channel bus, and it includes ECC memory support, which is unusual for a consumer chip.

The benchmark scores confirm its high-end positioning. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 26620 is strong, while the single-core score of 3758 indicates excellent per-thread performance. The Passmark multithread score of 31725 and single-thread score of 4049 align with this. Data compression hits 383972 in Passmark, and integer math scores 111044, showing robust throughput for productivity tasks. The CPU’s 88th percentile ranking vs all CPUs places it alongside parts like the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 (44309, -0.2%) and Intel Core i9-13950HX (44342, -0.2%), which are flagship mobile chips.

The architecture’s real-world impact is clear: for any CPU-bound workload, this processor punches above its i5 designation. The 14 cores handle multi-threaded tasks efficiently, while the 5.00 GHz boost clock ensures snappy single-threaded response. The 65 W TDP is remarkably low for this level of performance, meaning the CPU can sustain high clocks without exotic cooling. The lack of an unlocked multiplier (multiplierUnlocked: false) means overclocking is not an option, but the stock performance is already near the top of its class.

Build Overview

This is a desktop-class build (buildClass: “desktop”) pairing Intel’s Core i5-13600 with Intel’s Arc A310. The combined percentile of 64 indicates that this system outperforms roughly two-thirds of all tested CPU+GPU combinations, but this is almost entirely due to the CPU’s strength. The GPU’s 40th percentile ranking drags the overall score down, creating a lopsided system that excels in CPU-intensive tasks and struggles in GPU-intensive ones.

The CPU is a high-end part (88th percentile), while the GPU is an entry-level part (40th percentile). This pairing is reminiscent of a workstation or office PC where the processor does the heavy lifting and the GPU merely provides display output. The Arc A310’s 4 GB VRAM and 64-bit bus are sufficient for 2D workloads and light 3D, but not for modern gaming or GPU rendering. The build is best described as a CPU-first system with a basic discrete GPU, rather than a balanced gaming or content creation machine.

The overall tier, based on the combined percentile of 64, places it in the mid-range of all builds. However, this ranking masks the extreme variance between components. A user looking for a balanced system would need to either upgrade the GPU significantly or accept that this build is for specific CPU-bound use cases. The 65 W CPU TDP and 30 W GPU TDP mean the system is energy-efficient, which is a positive for always-on office or server-like workloads.

Gaming Performance

There is no measured FPS data for this exact CPU+GPU combination (the FACT PACK contains no measuredFpsUltraByGame entries). All frame rate discussions below are estimates derived from the benchmark scores, and these figures should be treated as approximations rather than verified results.

The Arc A310’s Passmark DirectX 12 score of 29 and DirectX 11 score of 33 are among the lowest recorded, indicating that modern 3D games will run at very low frame rates. At 1080p ultra settings, most AAA titles would likely struggle to reach 30 FPS, and many would dip below 20 FPS. The GPU’s 2.688 TFLOPS FP32 performance and 124.0 GB/s memory bandwidth are simply insufficient for high-fidelity rendering. The 4 GB VRAM will also cause texture thrashing in games that require more memory.

At 720p or with low settings, eSports titles like CS:GO or League of Legends might achieve 60 FPS, as these games are CPU-bound and the Core i5-13600’s single-thread score of 4049 in Passmark is excellent. However, the GPU’s weak DirectX 9 score of 69 suggests even older games may not run smoothly. The CPU’s 5.00 GHz boost clock and 24 MB L3 cache help in CPU-bound scenarios, but the GPU is the definitive bottleneck.

The estimated frame rates for modern games are poor. For example, a demanding title like Cyberpunk 2077 at 1080p low settings would likely run at 20-30 FPS based on the GPU’s 40th percentile ranking. The CPU’s 88th percentile ranking means it is not the limiting factor; the GPU is. Users should expect a console-like experience from the previous generation, not a modern high-refresh experience. This build is not recommended for gaming beyond very old or very light titles.

GPU Analysis

The Intel Arc A310 is based on the Xe-HPG architecture, using the DG2-128 chip, and is built on TSMC’s 6 nm process. It has 768 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, with 6 RT cores for ray tracing. The GPU has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, delivering 124.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Its base and boost clocks are both 1750 MHz, with memory running at 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective). The FP32 performance is 2.688 TFLOPS, and FP16 is 5.376 TFLOPS (2:1).

The benchmark scores reveal a GPU that is positioned at the 40th percentile vs all GPUs, with an average score of 7550. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon R7 250, scores 7557 (-0.1%), showing the Arc A310 is on par with a GPU from over a decade ago. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 30607 and Vulkan score of 28964 are moderate, but the Passmark DirectX scores are abysmal: DirectX 12 at 29, DirectX 11 at 33, and DirectX 10 at 31. Only DirectX 9 shows a somewhat reasonable 69, but that is still low.

The GPU’s compute performance is weak, with a Passmark GPU compute score of 2157. This limits its use in rendering, where it would be outperformed by even integrated graphics in some cases. The 6 RT cores are present but likely too slow for practical ray tracing, as the FP32 throughput is too low. The 4 GB VRAM is a hard constraint for modern workloads, and the 64-bit bus limits memory bandwidth to 124.0 GB/s, which is insufficient for high-resolution textures.

The Arc A310’s TDP is just 30 W, with no power connectors, drawing power solely from the PCIe slot. The suggested PSU is 200 W, which is very low. This makes the GPU extremely energy-efficient, but that efficiency comes at the cost of performance. The production status is “End-of-life,” and its successor is Battlemage, indicating Intel has moved on. For rendering tasks, the data shows this GPU is only suitable for basic 2D acceleration or light 3D workloads, not serious graphics work.

Rate My PC: Intel Core i5-13600 + Intel Arc A310

Power Build

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core i5-13600

Intel Arc A310

Market Position

Game Performance Benchmarks

Cyberpunk 2077

Red Dead Redemption 2

Microsoft Flight Simulator

Control

Call of Duty: Warzone

Fortnite

Performance Insights

Strong Performance

Performance Tiers Explained

Ultimate

High-End

Mid-Range

Entry Level

Legacy

FAQ

Benchmark Performance

Usage Scenarios

Balance and Bottleneck

Who Should Build It

Upgrade Path and Platform

CPU Analysis

Build Overview

Gaming Performance

GPU Analysis

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