SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core i5-13600HX + Intel Arc A350M

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)

▼

92 Score

Top 8% Ranking

92 / 100

ULTIMATE READY

Apex Performer

Top 8% 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

92%

GPU

92%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core i5-13600HX

38,261 Benchmark Score

Top 8% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

Intel Arc A350M

24,647 Benchmark Score

Top 8% 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 i5-13600HX paired with the Intel Arc A350M is a laptop-class combination that leans heavily on its processor: a 14-core, 20-thread Raptor Lake-HX CPU sitting in the 86th percentile of all CPUs, matched with a 4 GB Arc 3 Mobile GPU in the 70th percentile. The combined percentile of 78 understates the asymmetry — the CPU outranks the GPU by a wide margin, and every conclusion about this build flows from that gap. No measured FPS data exists in the database for this exact pairing, so all frame-rate discussion below is estimated from the benchmark scores rather than drawn from recorded gameplay results.

FAQ

Q: How powerful is the Intel Core i5-13600HX in this configuration?

A: It sits in the 86th percentile of all CPUs, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 23422 and a single-core score of 3306. Its average benchmark score of 38261 places it within a fraction of a percent of rivals such as the AMD Ryzen 7 250 (0.1% delta) and the Intel Core Ultra 9 285H (-0.1% delta).

Q: Is the Intel Arc A350M good for gaming?

A: It is an entry-level discrete GPU. With 4 GB of GDDR6, 112.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth, and 3.379 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput, it lands in the 70th percentile of all GPUs, effectively tied with the AMD Radeon RX 590 (-0.4% delta) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 (1.5% delta) in average score. It handles modest settings, not maxed-out modern titles.

Q: How much does this build cost?

A: The CPU carried a launch MSRP of $284. No pricing data exists for the Arc A350M in this database, and no cost analysis is provided.

Q: Does this combination have measured frame-rate results?

A: No. The database contains no measuredFps entries for this exact CPU+GPU pairing, so any FPS figures discussed are estimates derived from the benchmark scores, not recorded results.

Q: How much power does the pairing draw?

A: The CPU has a TDP of 55 W and the GPU 25 W. Both are mobile parts; the GPU is an integrated-package part (IGP slot width) with no separate power connectors.

Q: Can the CPU be overclocked?

A: Yes. The multiplier is unlocked, which is notable for a mobile part and gives tuners headroom on the CPU side.

Q: Is the Arc A350M still in production?

A: No. Its production status is End-of-life, whereas the Core i5-13600HX is listed as Active.

GPU Analysis

The Intel Arc A350M is a compact Xe-HPG discrete GPU built on TSMC's 6 nm process, packing 7,200 million transistors into a 157 mm² die at a density of 45.9M transistors per mm². The render configuration is modest by modern standards: 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, 24 raster operations pipelines, and 6 ray-tracing cores. Compute output is 3.379 TFLOPS FP32 and 6.758 TFLOPS FP16 at a 2:1 ratio. Texture fill reaches 105.6 GTexel/s and pixel fill 52.80 GPixel/s.

The defining constraint is memory. Four gigabytes of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus yields 112.0 GB/s of bandwidth, with memory clocked at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). That capacity is the first wall this GPU hits in modern rendering: textures and frame buffers in contemporary engines exceed 4 GB quickly, and when they do, the narrow bus cannot paper over the spill. Clock speeds run from a 1150 MHz base to a 2200 MHz boost — a wide boost range that lets the part scale its output considerably above baseline when thermals allow.

API support is a genuine strength. DirectX 12 Ultimate (feature level 12_2), Vulkan 1.4, and OpenGL 4.6 mean the A350M exposes the full modern feature set, including hardware ray tracing through its 6 RT cores. Six RT cores is a small array, so ray-traced effects are supported but not performant — the hardware enables the path, not high frame rates on it.

The benchmark picture clarifies its tier. Geekbench OpenCL scores 24546 and Vulkan scores 24747, averaging 24647 — 70th percentile among all GPUs. That places it within a rounding error of the AMD Radeon RX 590 (-0.4%), the NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile (-0.5%), and the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT (0.8%), and about 1.5% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630. For rendering work, that means the GPU is competitive with mainstream cards of the previous generation in GPU-compute terms, but its 4 GB buffer is far tighter than what most of those rivals carry, which matters enormously in viewport work and final-frame rendering where scene data must fit in VRAM.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU's benchmark sheet is deep and consistent. Cinebench R15 posts 2360 multi-core and 333 single-core; Cinebench R20 posts 9837 multi-core and 1388 single-core; Cinebench R23 posts 23422 multi-core and 3306 single-core. The PassMark suite reinforces the picture: 28280 multithreaded, 3684 single-threaded, 97126 integer math, 70618 floating point math, 19289 encryption, 328686 data compression, 36783 string sorting, 19720 extended instructions, 1810 physics, and 109 on find-prime-numbers.

What the numbers say is straightforward. Single-core performance in the mid-3000s on R23 is strong for a mobile part — responsiveness, per-thread application speed, and game logic all benefit. Multi-core at 23422 on R23 with 20 threads indicates serious sustained throughput for a laptop chip, and the 86th-percentile CPU ranking confirms it outranks the large majority of processors in the database. Against nearest rivals, the i5-13600HX's average score of 38261 is statistically inseparable from the AMD Ryzen 7 250 (38221, +0.1%), the Intel Core Ultra 9 285H (38312, -0.1%), the Intel Core Ultra 5 245T (38194, +0.2%), and the Intel Core 9 270H (38335, -0.2%). All four rivals sit within a quarter of a percent — this CPU trades blows with chips positioned above its i5 badge.

The GPU's two compute scores average 24647, 70th percentile. The combined percentile of 78 for the pairing sits between the two component rankings, but closer analysis shows the CPU pulling the average up, not a balanced pairing.

Because no measured FPS rows exist for this combination, frame-rate estimates must be read from these scores. The CPU percentile (86) comfortably clears the bar for high-refresh gameplay in CPU-bound scenarios; the GPU percentile (70) and its 4 GB buffer set the real ceiling for visually demanding titles.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The platform facts constrain this build tightly. The Core i5-13600HX uses Intel BGA 1964 — a ball-grid socket, meaning the CPU is soldered and not socket-swappable. This is a laptop platform; the upgrade path runs through whole-system replacement, not component swaps. The GPU is likewise fixed: the A350M is an IGP-width mobile part with no power connectors and no user-replaceable form factor, and it is already End-of-life.

Memory and I/O are where flexibility lives. The platform supports both DDR4 and DDR5 on a dual-channel bus, and ECC memory is supported — a genuine rarity in this segment and a point in favor of the chip for workstation-adjacent duty. PCIe is generous: Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes, enough for a fast discrete GPU link plus high-speed storage in systems that implement it.

Power headroom is modest by desktop standards: 55 W CPU TDP plus 25 W GPU TDP, with no suggestedPsu figure provided for the graphics part (it draws from the platform, not a dedicated connector). The unlocked multiplier gives the CPU tuning potential within the platform's thermal envelope, though a soldered mobile system leaves little room for cooling expansion. A sensible next upgrade, given the CPU's strength and the GPU's 70th-percentile ceiling, is a laptop built around the same class of HX processor with a substantially higher-tier discrete GPU — the 86th-percentile CPU is being underfed by a 70th-percentile, 4 GB graphics part.

CPU Analysis

The Core i5-13600HX is a Raptor Lake-HX processor on Intel's 10 nm process, with a 257 mm² die, released January 2023. Its hybrid arrangement delivers 14 cores and 20 threads — the configuration behind the strong multi-core scores — with a 2.60 GHz base clock and a 4.80 GHz maximum boost. Cache is well provisioned: 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and a shared 24 MB L3. The iGPU is Intel UHD Graphics 770, present as a fallback display solution beneath the discrete Arc part.

Architecturally, Raptor Lake-HX brought desktop-class silicon into the mobile envelope, and the benchmark results show it. The R23 multi-core score of 23422 means this chip renders, compiles, and encodes like a serious desktop-class processor of its generation, not a thin-and-light mobile part. Single-core scores — 333 on R15, 1388 on R20, 3306 on R23, 3684 on PassMark single-thread — indicate snappy per-thread behavior, which is what governs game logic, UI responsiveness, and the serial portions of developer workloads.

The PassMark subscores map cleanly to real work. The 97126 integer-math and 70618 floating-point results support general computation and simulation; the 328686 data-compression score is directly relevant to build systems, archiving, and file processing; 36783 on random string sorting reflects parsing and scripting throughput; 19289 on encryption covers disk and communications crypto. PassMark physics at 1810 quantifies game-simulation capability on the CPU side. Against rivals, the practical takeaway is that buyers choosing between this chip and the Ryzen 7 250, Core Ultra 9 285H, Core Ultra 5 245T, or Core 9 270H are choosing between statistically identical performers — the decision should rest on platform features, not CPU speed.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: The CPU percentile of 86 and single-core strength (3306 R23) clear the processor-side bar for high-refresh play with ease. The GPU is the limiter. Its 70th percentile, 3.379 TFLOPS FP32, and 4 GB of VRAM estimate out at moderate settings in esports titles and reduced settings in modern AAA games — the CPU will be waiting on the graphics part in nearly every visually demanding title.

Streaming: The 23422 R23 multi-core score provides ample threads to run a game plus encoder plus chat overlays concurrently across 20 threads. The constraint is the GPU again: 4 GB of VRAM must hold game assets and encode buffers simultaneously. CPU-side, this platform streams comfortably.

Video editing: Timeline scrubbing and effects preview lean on the CPU here — 9837 on R20 multi-core and 328686 on compression translate to responsive editing in mainstream NLEs. Final GPU-accelerated renders will hit the A350M's 24647 average compute score and 112.0 GB/s bandwidth, which is workable but not fast, and 4 GB of VRAM restricts heavy multi-cam or high-resolution footage.

3D rendering: CPU rendering is the strong path: 23422 on R23 multicore is a legitimately capable render score for a mobile chip. GPU rendering via OpenCL (24546) or Vulkan (24747) is possible but modest, and scene sizes beyond 4 GB will stall. Use the CPU as the primary render engine on this platform.

Software development: The PassMark single-thread score of 3684 gives fast interactive compile feedback, while 28280 multithreaded handles parallel builds well. The 328686 data-compression score benefits package managers and archive-heavy toolchains. This is one of the best-fit scenarios for the pairing — the CPU is rarely the bottleneck.

Student and office work: Routine productivity, browsing, and documents are trivially covered by the 86th-percentile CPU. The Arc A350M's DirectX 12 Ultimate support handles hardware-accelerated UI and media playback without strain. Battery-sensitive light duty can fall back to the integrated UHD Graphics 770.

Who Should Build It

The data points to a specific user: someone whose workload is CPU-heavy and GPU-light. Software developers get the clearest match — the single-thread and multi-thread scores, memory flexibility across DDR4 and DDR5, ECC support, and 20 PCIe Gen 5 lanes make this a credible mobile development platform. Students in technical fields get a machine that compiles, simulates (70618 floating point), and multitasks without strain. Small-business workstation users benefit from the same traits, with ECC support adding a data-integrity argument for accounting or database-adjacent duty.

Content creators who render on the CPU will be satisfied: the Cinebench line shows desktop-class throughput. Creators who need GPU rendering speed or high-frame-rate GPU previews should look elsewhere — the 70th-percentile, 4 GB A350M is not that tool. Gamers fall into a split: esports players at reduced settings will find the estimated performance acceptable; players targeting maximum settings in modern AAA titles at high resolution will not, because the GPU's 4 GB buffer and 3.379 TFLOPS set a hard ceiling well below what the 86th-percentile CPU could otherwise deliver.

Build Overview

This is a laptop-class build (buildClass: laptop) pairing a mobile workstation-grade CPU with an entry-level discrete mobile GPU. The Core i5-13600HX contributes an 86th percentile ranking and an average benchmark score of 38261; the Arc A350M contributes a 70th percentile ranking and an average of 24647. The combined percentile of 78 places the overall system in the upper quarter of the database, but that figure is an average of two unequal halves.

The tier verdict: a strong-processing, modest-graphics mobile platform. The CPU outranks the combined percentile; the GPU sits below it. Both parts come from Intel, with the CPU on Intel's 10 nm node and the GPU fabbed by TSMC on 6 nm — a combined 257 mm² CPU die and 157 mm² GPU die. Production status diverges: the CPU is Active, the GPU End-of-life, which matters for long-term driver support expectations on the graphics side.

Balance and Bottleneck

This pairing is CPU-strong and GPU-limited, and the percentiles quantify it precisely. An 86th-percentile CPU against a 70th-percentile GPU is a 16-point spread — the processor is positioned well above the graphics part's class in nearly every workload that uses both.

In gaming, the bottleneck is unambiguous. The CPU's PassMark physics score of 1810 and single-thread score of 3684 indicate it can drive simulation and draw-call throughput far beyond what the A350M's 70th-percentile compute and 4 GB frame buffer can rasterize. Estimated FPS scaling in games will track the GPU almost exclusively: raising resolution or settings will saturate the graphics part long before the processor shows load, and at lower settings the CPU will idle ahead of a GPU already at its limit. The 64-bit bus and 112.0 GB/s bandwidth mean VRAM pressure degrades performance steeply once texture data exceeds capacity.

In production workloads the bottleneck flips or disappears. Cinebench at 23422 multi-core is CPU-bound throughput the GPU cannot aid meaningfully, and development workloads are dominated by the 3684 single-thread and 28280 multi-thread results. Only GPU-compute tasks — OpenCL at 24546, Vulkan at 24747 — engage the weaker component as the primary engine, and those tasks are exactly where this build performs at its 70th-percentile tier rather than its CPU's 86th.

The strategic conclusion: this configuration is balanced only for workloads that never stress the GPU. For anything visually demanding, the Arc A350M defines the ceiling, and no amount of CPU headroom — however considerable — raises it.

Rate My PC: Intel Core i5-13600HX + Intel Arc A350M

Apex Performer

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core i5-13600HX

Intel Arc A350M

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

FAQ

GPU Analysis

Benchmark Performance

Upgrade Path and Platform

CPU Analysis

Usage Scenarios

Who Should Build It

Build Overview

Balance and Bottleneck

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