SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core i5-14400 + 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)

▼

87 Score

Top 13% Ranking

87 / 100

HIGH-END

Power Build

Top 13% of systems. Excellent for 1440p Ultra or 4K High gaming.

1440p Ultra4K High

System Balance Analysis

CPU vs GPU performance ratio

Well Balanced

CPU

90%

GPU

85%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core i5-14400

32,115 Benchmark Score

Top 10% 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

The Intel Core i5-14400 and Intel Arc A310 pairing represents a curious study in contrast: a robust, high-performance desktop CPU paired with an entry-level, low-power discrete GPU. The data shows a processor that ranks in the 82nd percentile against all CPUs, delivering workstation-class multi-threaded performance, while the graphics card sits in the 40th percentile, offering modest capabilities closer to legacy discrete GPUs. This combination yields a system with a massive processing headroom but a significant graphical bottleneck, making it suitable primarily for CPU-intensive tasks rather than high-end gaming or GPU-accelerated rendering. The benchmark results indicate a clear delineation between the two components' capabilities, and this analysis will dissect their individual strengths, their interaction in a shared system, and the realistic usage scenarios this pairing can support.

GPU Analysis — VRAM, bandwidth, clocks, RT/tensor hardware, what the benchmark scores mean for rendering

The Intel Arc A310 is built on the Xe-HPG architecture, fabricated on a 6 nm process by TSMC, and is part of the entry-level Arc 3 generation. The card's physical specifications are modest but modern: it features 768 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output pipelines. The GPU operates at a fixed clock speed of 1750 MHz for both base and boost, which is a relatively low frequency that keeps power consumption down. Its memory subsystem consists of 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, delivering a total bandwidth of 124.0 GB/s. The card also includes 6 dedicated ray tracing cores, though its compute throughput of 2.688 TFLOPS FP32 places it in a performance tier well below what is typically needed for demanding ray-traced workloads.

Benchmark data for the A310 paints a clear picture of its rendering capabilities. In synthetic graphics tests, the card scores 5433 in Passmark G3D and 30607 in Geekbench OpenCL, with a Vulkan score of 28964. These numbers are competitive with older discrete GPUs; the nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon R7 250 (deltaPct -0.1), the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 (deltaPct -0.4), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (deltaPct 1). The A310 scores slightly higher than the GTX 1650 by 1% in average benchmark score, suggesting parity with that older but well-known card. However, its Passmark DirectX 12 score of 29 is exceptionally low, indicating that while the hardware supports modern APIs like DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), it may not execute them efficiently. For rendering tasks, the data suggests the A310 is suitable for basic 2D acceleration and light 3D work, but its limited 4 GB VRAM and low pixel rate of 28.00 GPixel/s will struggle with complex scenes or high-resolution textures.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: The data does not support this scenario. With a Passmark G3D score of 5433 and performance parity with the GTX 1650, the Arc A310 is not positioned for high-refresh gaming at modern resolutions. The CPU's strength is irrelevant here, as the GPU will be the limiting factor, preventing the high frame rates required for 144Hz or 240Hz displays.

Streaming: The CPU's 10 cores and 16 threads, evidenced by a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 21315, provide ample headroom for software encoding of video streams. The Arc A310's low TDP of 30 W and modern Xe-HPG architecture with dedicated media engines (implied by the architecture) can handle the encoding, but the overall system is better suited for streaming gameplay from less demanding titles, as the GPU's raw rendering power is a constraint.

Video editing: The Core i5-14400 excels here. Its Passmark multi-thread score of 25080 and strong single-thread performance (3741) allow for smooth timeline scrubbing and fast export encoding. The A310's 4 GB VRAM and 124.0 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient for decoding and previewing 1080p footage, but the card's low FP32 throughput will make GPU-accelerated effects and color grading slow. The CPU does the heavy lifting, making this a viable budget editing rig for lightweight projects.

3D rendering: This scenario is heavily CPU-bound. The i5-14400's Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 21315 and Geekbench multi-core score of 9807 indicate that CPU-based rendering (e.g., in Blender's Cycles engine) will be productive. The A310, however, is not a suitable GPU renderer; its 2.688 TFLOPS FP32 compute and 6 RT cores are far below what is needed for real-time ray tracing or GPU-accelerated final renders. Users should expect CPU-only rendering performance.

Software development: This is a strong use case. The CPU's 10 cores, 16 threads, and high Passmark integer math score of 82017 enable fast compilation of code, while its 20 MB shared L3 cache helps with large codebases. The GPU is not a factor; any display output will work. The combined 61st percentile ranking of the pair indicates a solid, balanced system for general development tasks that do not require GPU compute.

Student and office work: The system is overqualified for this role. The i5-14400's Passmark single-thread score of 3741 ensures snappy application responsiveness, and its data encryption score of 16731 provides fast file encryption. The Arc A310's 4 GB VRAM handles 4K desktop output via its 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs, but the GPU's Passmark G2D score of 625 is modest, meaning basic 2D desktop acceleration is adequate but not exceptional. This is a high-performance office machine.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The platform is built around the Intel Socket 1700, which houses the Raptor Lake architecture CPU. The Core i5-14400 supports dual-channel DDR4 and DDR5 memory, offering flexibility in memory selection. The CPU provides PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), ensuring high-bandwidth connectivity for future storage devices and expansion cards. The integrated UHD Graphics 730 provides a fallback display output, which is useful for troubleshooting or if the discrete GPU fails. The motherboard and CPU combination is a solid foundation for a desktop system.

The Arc A310 is the clear upgrade target. With a suggested PSU of 200 W and a TDP of only 30 W, the card consumes minimal power, meaning the current system likely has significant PSU headroom. This headroom allows for a substantial GPU upgrade without changing the power supply. A sensible next step would be to replace the A310 with a more powerful graphics card that can leverage the CPU's performance. Since the i5-14400 ranks in the 82nd percentile and has a high average benchmark score of 32115, it is not the bottleneck; the GPU is. The data shows that the CPU can handle a much stronger discrete GPU, making the upgrade path straightforward: keep the CPU and platform, and swap the graphics card for a higher-tier model that fits within the existing PSU capacity. The A310's end-of-life production status further suggests that an upgrade is imminent for users seeking more graphical power.

Balance and Bottleneck

The benchmark results indicate a severe bottleneck imbalance, with the CPU vastly outperforming the GPU. The i5-14400's average benchmark score is 32115, while the Arc A310's is 7550. The CPU's percentile rank is 82, compared to the GPU's 40. This means that in almost any workload that uses both components, the GPU will be the limiting factor. For example, in gaming, the CPU is capable of feeding the GPU with frames at a high rate, but the A310 cannot process them quickly enough, capping the frame rate. The data shows that the GPU's performance is comparable to the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650, which is over five years old, while the CPU is a modern 14th-generation part. This pairing is akin to putting a high-performance engine in a car with a limited top speed.

The specific bottleneck depends on the workload. In CPU-bound tasks like data compression (Passmark score 314995), encryption (16731), and physics (1396), the GPU is idle, and the CPU's performance shines. In GPU-bound tasks like 3D rendering or high-resolution gaming, the CPU is underutilized, waiting for the GPU to catch up. The Passmark GPU compute score of 2157 confirms the GPU's low compute throughput. The FPS scaling in gaming would be entirely dependent on the GPU's capabilities, and the CPU would have no impact on the frame rate in most scenarios. The balance is heavily skewed towards the CPU, making this a system where the user must match the workload to the CPU's strengths to get good performance.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core i5-14400 is a 10-core, 16-thread processor based on the Raptor Lake architecture, manufactured on a 10 nm process by Intel. It has a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz, with a TDP of 65 W. The cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and a shared 20 MB L3 cache. It supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration and includes ECC memory support. The CPU is built on the Intel Socket 1700 and was released in January 2024 with a launch MSRP of $221.

Benchmark scores show a well-rounded performer. In Cinebench R23, it scores 21315 multi-core and 3009 single-core, indicating strong multi-threaded and single-threaded performance. Geekbench results of 9807 multi-core and 1905 single-core corroborate this. The Passmark suite shows a multi-thread score of 25080 and a single-thread score of 3741. The CPU's integer math score of 82017 and floating-point math score of 61549 highlight its capability in general computation. Its nearest rivals in average score are the Intel Core i7-12800H (deltaPct 0), the Intel Core i7-13705H (deltaPct 0.1), and the Intel Core i5-14450HX (deltaPct 0.2), with the Intel Core i9-11900 being slightly ahead by 0.3%. The CPU's 82nd percentile ranking places it comfortably in the upper echelon of desktop processors, making it a powerful choice for productivity, content creation, and software development, where its multi-core performance is the primary asset.

Who Should Build It

This pairing targets users who prioritize CPU performance and have modest or secondary graphics needs. The primary audience is software developers and students in computer science, who will benefit from the CPU's fast compilation times (Passmark integer math 82017) and multi-threaded performance (Cinebench R23 21315). Small business workstations handling spreadsheets, databases, and office applications will find the system responsive, with the CPU's high single-thread score of 3741 ensuring smooth interaction.

Content creators focusing on CPU-based tasks, such as video transcoding or 3D rendering in CPU-bound engines, will see excellent performance from the i5-14400. The Arc A310 can serve as a basic display adapter for these workloads. Gamers who play esports titles at 1080p with low settings may find the A310 adequate, given its parity with the GTX 1650, but the system is not intended for high-end gaming. The 4 GB VRAM on the A310 limits texture quality, so users should stick to lower resolutions and settings. This system is ideal for a developer workstation where the GPU is an afterthought, or for a budget home office PC that occasionally handles light 3D tasks. It is not for gamers or GPU-accelerated renderers.

Benchmark Performance

The combined system ranks in the 61st percentile for all builds, which reflects the CPU's strength pulling up the average. The CPU's average benchmark score is 32115, with a percentile rank of 82. Key scores include Cinebench R23 multi-core 21315, Geekbench multi-core 9807, and Passmark multi-thread 25080. The GPU's average benchmark score is 7550, with a percentile rank of 40. Its notable scores are Geekbench OpenCL 30607, Vulkan 28964, and Passmark G3D 5433.

The deltaPct values against the CPU's nearest rivals are minimal, with the i5-14400 being statistically tied with the Intel Core i7-12800H (0% delta) and slightly ahead of the Core i7-13705H (0.1% delta). The GPU's deltaPct shows it is 1% faster than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650, but 0.1% slower than the AMD Radeon R7 250. The combined picture is a system with exceptional CPU headroom and GPU performance that is a generation behind. The CPU is the dominant component, and the GPU is a limiting factor for any graphics-intensive workload. The data shows that the CPU alone would rank in the top 20% of all processors, while the GPU is in the bottom 60%, creating a mismatch that defines the system's character.

FAQ

Q: Is the Intel Core i5-14400 a good processor for multi-tasking?

A: Yes, the data shows strong multi-threaded performance. It scores 21315 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 25080 in Passmark multi-thread, with 10 cores and 16 threads, ranking in the 82nd percentile of all CPUs.

Q: How does the Intel Arc A310 compare to an older NVIDIA card?

A: Benchmark results indicate the A310 is approximately 1% faster than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 in average score, with a deltaPct of 1. It also trades blows with the AMD Radeon R7 250, being 0.1% slower.

Q: What is the power consumption of the Arc A310?

A: The GPU has a TDP of 30 W, and the suggested PSU for the system is 200 W. This low power draw means it does not require external power connectors.

Q: Can this system handle 4K video playback?

A: The GPU has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory and 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs, which can drive 4K displays. The CPU's high single-thread score of 3741 also helps with video decoding, so 4K playback is likely smooth, though the GPU's Passmark G2D score of 625 suggests 2D acceleration is not a primary strength.

Q: Does the CPU support overclocking?

A: No, the multiplier is unlocked, meaning the i5-14400 is locked and cannot be overclocked. The boost clock is fixed at 4.70 GHz.

Q: What memory types can be used with this CPU?

A: The Core i5-14400 supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, allowing users to choose based on motherboard compatibility and budget.

Q: Is the Arc A310 suitable for ray tracing?

A: The GPU includes 6 ray tracing cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, but its FP32 performance is only 2.688 TFLOPS. Given its low Passmark DirectX 12 score of 29, ray tracing performance will be poor and not suitable for gaming.

Gaming Performance

No measured FPS data exists for this exact CPU and GPU combination. The FACT PACK contains no measuredFps rows, so all frame rates discussed here are estimates derived from the benchmark scores. The Arc A310's Passmark G3D score of 5433 places it in the same performance tier as the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650, which is a 1080p budget gaming card. Therefore, the estimated gaming performance is as follows:

At 1080p resolution with ultra settings, the A310 will struggle to maintain playable frame rates in modern AAA titles. The GPU's low 2.688 TFLOPS FP32 compute and 124.0 GB/s bandwidth will limit performance. Games that are not graphically intensive, such as esports titles like "Counter-Strike 2" or "League of Legends," may achieve 60+ FPS at medium to high settings, but this is an estimate. For more demanding games, users should expect to lower settings to low or medium to reach 30-60 FPS. The CPU will not be a bottleneck in any of these scenarios; its performance is far beyond what the GPU can utilize. The 4 GB VRAM will also be a limiting factor, causing texture pop-in or requiring lower texture quality in games that use more than 4 GB. At 1440p, the A310 is not a viable option for gaming, as the resolution will overwhelm the GPU's capabilities, likely resulting in sub-30 FPS performance in most titles. The data suggests that this is a 1080p low-to-medium settings gaming system at best, and only for less demanding titles.

Rate My PC: Intel Core i5-14400 + Intel Arc A310

Power Build

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core i5-14400

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

GPU Analysis — VRAM, bandwidth, clocks, RT/tensor hardware, what the benchmark scores mean for rendering

Usage Scenarios

Upgrade Path and Platform

Balance and Bottleneck

CPU Analysis

Who Should Build It

Benchmark Performance

FAQ

Gaming Performance

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