SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core i5-13600T + AMD Radeon RX 7400

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

85 / 100
HIGH-END

Power Build

Top 15% of systems. Excellent for 1440p Ultra or 4K High gaming.

1440p Ultra4K High

System Balance Analysis

CPU vs GPU performance ratio
Well Balanced
CPU
91%
VS
GPU
79%
PROCESSOR

Intel Core i5-13600T

35,305 Benchmark Score
Top 9% Market Ranking
View Full Specs →
GRAPHICS CARD

AMD Radeon RX 7400

2,467 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 i5-13600T and AMD Radeon RX 7400 form an unconventional pairing: a high-end, power-efficient desktop CPU matched with a modest entry-level GPU. The data shows a processor that performs at the 85th percentile against all CPUs, paired with a graphics card at the 17th percentile against all GPUs. This combination results in a system with a combined percentile of 51, indicating a build that is firmly mid-tier overall, but with a massive imbalance between its computational strengths and its graphical capabilities. This analysis will break down the benchmark data for both components, examine the implications for various workloads, and provide a clear picture of what this system can and cannot do.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core i5-13600T is built on the Raptor Lake architecture using a 10 nm process at Intel’s foundry. Its die size is 215 mm². The processor features a hybrid core design, totaling 14 cores and 20 threads. It operates at a base clock of 1800.00 MHz and can boost up to 4.80 GHz. This is a 35 W TDP part, indicating a strong focus on power efficiency, a fact underscored by its "T" series designation. The cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and a 24 MB shared L3 cache. It supports dual-channel DDR4 and DDR5 memory, includes ECC support, and provides 16 PCIe Gen 5 lanes from the CPU. The integrated UHD Graphics 770 is present, and the chip launched with an MSRP of $255.

Benchmark results show the CPU’s capability. In Cinebench R23, it scores 23571 in multi-core and 3327 in single-core tests. The Geekbench scores are 10851 for multi-core and 2385 for single-core. The Passmark suite provides deeper insights into specific workloads. Its multi-thread score is 27098, while the single-thread score is 3728. In integer math, it scores 96299, and in floating-point math, it scores 70152. Data compression work is a strong point, with a score of 337893, while data encryption scores 19320. Extended instruction set performance is 20651, and the CPU scores 82 in finding prime numbers. Physics calculations score 1287, random string sorting scores 36413.

The processor’s average benchmark score is 35305, placing it in the 85th percentile of all CPUs. This percentile position places it in the upper echelon of processors, though its nearest rivals show it is not at the very top. The nearest rival, the Intel Core i7-12700K, has an average score of 35287, which is a 0% difference. The Intel Core i7-12700KF scores 35365, which is -0.2% relative to the 13600T. The Intel Core i7-13700T scores 35403, a -0.3% difference, and the Intel Core 5 213PE scores 35428, also a -0.3% difference. These figures show the i5-13600T is effectively neck-and-neck with the previous generation's high-end i7 parts, making it a very strong performer for its power class. The high multi-core score in Cinebench R23 indicates that this CPU can handle demanding threaded workloads efficiently, while the strong single-core score in Geekbench suggests excellent responsiveness in everyday tasks and lightly-threaded applications.

Benchmark Performance

The performance picture for this build is defined by a stark contrast between the CPU and GPU. The CPU, as noted, sits at the 85th percentile, delivering top-tier performance that rivals much higher-wattage chips. Its average benchmark score of 35305 is within 0.3% of the Intel Core i7-13700T, a higher-tier part in the same generation. This demonstrates the efficiency of the 13600T's design; it delivers comparable performance to a more power-hungry sibling while maintaining a much lower TDP.

In contrast, the AMD Radeon RX 7400 scores at the 17th percentile of all GPUs. Its average benchmark score is 2467. The nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon 8040S with a score of 2440 (a 1.1% difference), the NVIDIA GeForce 710M at 2433 (a 1.4% difference), the Intel HD Graphics 610 at 2425 (a 1.8% difference), and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710M at 2422 (a 1.9% difference). These rivals are all old, low-end, or integrated graphics solutions. The data indicates that the RX 7400, despite being a discrete card from the RDNA 3.0 generation, performs in the same bracket as these legacy parts. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 1103. In Passmark, it scores 11897 in G3D and 5152 in GPU compute. DirectX 9 scores are 176, DirectX 10 are 59, DirectX 11 are 97, and DirectX 12 are 44. The G2D score is 1209.

The combined picture is a system where the CPU is the clear dominant force. The combined percentile of 51 reflects this, showing the build is average overall but for entirely different reasons than a balanced system. The CPU will not be the limiting factor in any workload; it has massive headroom. The GPU will be the bottleneck in any graphically intensive task. This imbalance is the defining characteristic of this pairing. The CPU data suggests a machine capable of professional-level productivity, while the GPU data suggests a machine only suited for basic display output or very light graphical tasks.

Usage Scenarios

High-Refresh Gaming: This is not a viable scenario. The CPU has the raw single-thread performance (3327 in Cinebench R23) to drive high frame rates, but the GPU’s 17th percentile standing and low DirectX 12 score (44) will severely limit graphical output. The data indicates the GPU is the bottleneck, making high-refresh gaming impossible; any game would need to be run at low settings and resolution to achieve playable frame rates, and even then, the RX 7400's performance relative to old integrated graphics suggests a poor experience.

Streaming: The CPU is exceptionally well-suited for streaming. Its 14 cores and 20 threads provide ample headroom for encoding video while running a game. A multi-thread score of 27098 on Passmark suggests it can handle the encoding workload without impacting game performance. However, the GPU’s low performance means games would be unplayable at high quality, making the stream content inherently limited. The CPU can handle the task, but the gaming side of the stream will be subpar.

Video Editing: This is a strong use case for the CPU but not the GPU. The CPU’s high integer math score (96299) and data compression score (337893) are excellent for video encoding and processing. The 24 MB of L3 cache and high boost clock will help with timeline scrubbing and effect application. However, the GPU’s low compute score (5152) means any GPU-accelerated effects or rendering will be slow. The system would rely almost entirely on the CPU for rendering, which is capable, but the GPU will not accelerate the process.

3D Rendering: This is a CPU-dominated workload, and the 13600T excels here. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 23571 is a strong indicator of performance in CPU-based renderers. The floating-point math score of 70152 further supports this. The GPU’s low compute performance means it will not be useful for GPU-accelerated rendering. This system would be a competent workstation for CPU-based rendering tasks, with the GPU serving only for display output.

Software Development: The CPU is excellent for compilation and development workloads. The Passmark multi-thread score of 27098 and extended instructions score of 20651 indicate strong performance in code compilation and running virtual machines or containers. The 20 threads will handle parallel builds efficiently. The GPU is irrelevant for most development tasks, making this a very capable and efficient development machine.

Student and Office Work: This system is overkill in the CPU department but perfectly functional. The single-thread performance (3728 in Passmark) ensures a responsive desktop experience in office suites, web browsing, and coding assignments. The low TDP of 35 W makes it an efficient choice for a workstation that runs for long periods. The GPU is sufficient for basic desktop rendering, multi-monitor setups, and 2D applications, but not for any 3D design or CAD work.

Balance and Bottleneck

The data paints a clear picture of a system with a severe bottleneck. The CPU operates at the 85th percentile, while the GPU is at the 17th percentile. In any workload that relies on the GPU, it will be the absolute limiting factor. The CPU will be, in most cases, idle waiting for the GPU to catch up. The Passmark GPU scores, particularly the DirectX 12 score of 44, are indicative of a part that is not designed for modern gaming or compute tasks. This is a textbook example of an unbalanced build where the CPU has enormous headroom that cannot be utilized in graphics-bound scenarios.

Conversely, in CPU-bound workloads like video encoding, 3D rendering, or code compilation, the GPU is irrelevant, and the CPU can stretch its legs. The bottleneck is not a fixed condition but rather workload-dependent. In gaming, the GPU is the bottleneck. In productivity, the CPU is the workhorse, and the GPU is a non-factor. The combined percentile of 51 is a misleading average; the system is not a "mid-range" performer in a unified sense. It is a top-tier CPU paired with a bottom-tier GPU. The FPS scaling in games would be entirely dependent on the GPU, and even with the CPU’s ability to push high frame rates, the GPU’s low scores will cap performance at a low level.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The platform provides a clear upgrade path. The CPU uses the Intel Socket 1700 and supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory, giving builders flexibility in choosing memory. The CPU provides 16 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, ensuring high-bandwidth connectivity for future expansion. The Radeon RX 7400 uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface.

The most sensible next upgrade for this system is the graphics card. The CPU has the performance headroom to support a much more powerful GPU. The suggested PSU for the RX 7400 is 200 W, which is very low. This suggests the system likely has a power supply that could handle a significantly more power-hungry discrete GPU. The CPU’s 35 W TDP means the overall system power draw is low, leaving plenty of headroom for a GPU upgrade. A user could easily swap the RX 7400 for a mid-range or even high-end GPU without needing to replace the CPU or the power supply. The 16 PCIe Gen 5 lanes from the CPU will not be a bottleneck for any modern graphics card. The platform is future-proof on the CPU side, and the upgrade path is straightforward: replace the GPU to unlock the system’s true potential.

Gaming Performance

No measured FPS data exists for this exact CPU+GPU combination. The FACT PACK contains no measured FPS rows. Therefore, all frame rate discussions are estimates based on the benchmark scores. The data strongly indicates that gaming performance will be very poor. The RX 7400's percentile rank (17th) and its Passmark DirectX 12 score of 44 are extremely low. The 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1103 is a modern DX12 benchmark, and a low score here suggests an inability to handle modern game engines.

Given the GPU’s performance relative to the NVIDIA GeForce 710M and Intel HD Graphics 610, this system is only suitable for very old, esports, or 2D titles at low resolutions and settings. The CPU would provide excellent frame pacing and high minimum FPS if the GPU could keep up, but the GPU will be the limiting factor. For any modern AAA game, players would need to drastically lower resolution to 720p or below and set all graphical options to their lowest values. Even then, playable frame rates are not guaranteed. This is not a gaming system, and the performance estimates reflect the GPU's low standing.

FAQ

Q: How does the Intel Core i5-13600T compare to the Intel Core i7-12700K?

A: The benchmark data shows they are effectively equal. The i5-13600T has an average benchmark score of 35305, while the i7-12700K scores 35287, a 0% difference.

Q: What is the performance class of the AMD Radeon RX 7400?

A: The GPU performs at the 17th percentile of all GPUs. Its average benchmark score of 2467 puts it in the same performance bracket as the NVIDIA GeForce 710M and Intel HD Graphics 610.

Q: Is this system suitable for modern gaming?

A: No. The GPU's low DirectX 12 score of 44 and its 17th percentile ranking indicate it is not capable of running modern games at acceptable performance levels. The CPU is powerful, but the GPU is a severe bottleneck.

Q: What are the key specifications of the CPU?

A: The Intel Core i5-13600T has 14 cores and 20 threads, a base clock of 1800.00 MHz, a boost clock of 4.80 GHz, a 24 MB L3 cache, and a 35 W TDP.

Q: What kind of memory does the CPU support?

A: The motherboard platform supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration.

Q: What is the suggested power supply for the GPU?

A: The suggested PSU for the AMD Radeon RX 7400 is 200 W.

Q: Does the CPU have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, it includes the Intel UHD Graphics 770, which can be used for display output if a discrete GPU is not present or is disabled.

Build Overview

This build is a desktop system combining the Intel Core i5-13600T and the AMD Radeon RX 7400. The CPU is a high-performance, power-efficient part from the Raptor Lake generation, scoring in the 85th percentile. The GPU is a low-end entry-level card from the RDNA 3.0 generation, scoring in the 17th percentile. The pairing results in a combined percentile of 51, which places it in the middle tier of all builds. This is not a balanced gaming rig or a balanced workstation. It is a system with a very powerful processor and a very weak graphics card. The overall tier is average, but the component distribution is highly skewed. In CPU-centric tasks, this system punches far above its weight class. In GPU-centric tasks, it performs like a system from several generations ago.

Who Should Build It

This system is for users whose primary workloads are heavily threaded and CPU-bound, and who have minimal to no need for 3D acceleration. This includes software developers who compile large codebases, data analysts running complex calculations, and students or professionals working in fields like finance or research that use single-threaded and multi-threaded CPU applications. The low TDP of the CPU makes it an excellent choice for a quiet, efficient office workstation or a home server that also handles everyday computing. Gamers should avoid this build entirely, as the GPU will not deliver a satisfactory experience at any resolution. Content creators who work with 2D graphic design or audio production would also find the CPU beneficial, provided they do not need GPU acceleration. The target user is someone who needs a powerhouse CPU for productivity but only requires basic display output for 2D applications.

GPU Analysis

The AMD Radeon RX 7400 is a discrete desktop GPU based on the RDNA 3.0 architecture and the Navi 33 chip, codenamed "Hotpink Bonefish". It is manufactured on a 6 nm process at TSMC with 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die. The GPU has a base clock of 1452 MHz, a game clock of 2200 MHz, and a boost clock of 2300 MHz. It is equipped with 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 288.0 GB/s. The memory clock is 2250 MHz, translating to 18 Gbps effective.

The GPU features 1792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operation units. It also has 28 ray tracing cores. The pixel rate is 147.2 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 257.6 GTexel/s. The FP32 performance is 16.49 TFLOPS, and the FP16 performance is 32.97 TFLOPS (2:1). The board has a TDP of 43 W and requires a single 6-pin power connector. It uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface and offers display outputs of 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Despite having modern features like ray tracing cores, the benchmark data shows this GPU is extremely weak. Its Passmark G3D score of 11897 places it in the same league as the NVIDIA GeForce 710M. The 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1103 is low. The DirectX 12 score of 44 is particularly poor. While the specifications suggest a capable entry-level chip, the actual performance data indicates it is not suited for gaming. The 8 GB VRAM is a positive, but the low fill rate and compute performance mean it cannot use that memory effectively in modern games. The data shows this is a GPU for basic display output, not for rendering or gaming workloads.