SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core i5-14400 + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER

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

84 / 100
HIGH-END

Power Build

Top 16% 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%
VS
GPU
79%
PROCESSOR

Intel Core i5-14400

32,115 Benchmark Score
Top 10% Market Ranking
View Full Specs →
GRAPHICS CARD

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER

3,075 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

# Intel Core i5-14400 + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER: A Desktop Benchmark Analysis

This pairing combines Intel's 14th-generation mainstream desktop processor with NVIDIA's flagship Blackwell-architecture graphics card. The CPU and GPU occupy vastly different performance tiers — the i5-14400 sits at the 82nd percentile among all CPUs, while the RTX 5080 SUPER ranks at just the 19th percentile among all GPUs based on available benchmark data. This unusual combination raises immediate questions about workload balance, system intent, and which component ultimately defines the user experience across different application types. The data presented here draws exclusively from the supplied FACT PACK, which contains no measured FPS figures for this specific pairing; all gaming performance discussion is therefore framed as estimates derived from synthetic benchmark scores and component specifications.

Usage Scenarios

For high-refresh gaming at 1080p or 1440p, this system shows a fundamental imbalance. The RTX 5080 SUPER's 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 3075 places it near the bottom of the GPU percentile ranking, suggesting limited raw graphics throughput. Meanwhile, the i5-14400's strong single-core Cinebench R23 score of 3009 and PassMark single-thread result of 3741 indicate the CPU can feed frames rapidly. The data suggests the GPU would likely become the bottleneck in esports titles, potentially capping frame rates well below what the CPU could theoretically support.

Streaming workloads benefit from the i5-14400's 10 cores and 16 threads, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 21315 that places it at the 82nd percentile overall. The CPU's PassMark multi-thread score of 25080 and data compression score of 314995 indicate solid encoding headroom for simultaneous gameplay capture and broadcast. However, the GPU's poor relative standing means game encoding via NVENC would still be limited by the graphics card's overall rendering capability, making CPU-based x264 encoding the more reliable path.

Video editing presents a mixed picture. The i5-14400's Cinebench R20 multi-core score of 8952 and Geekbench multi-core score of 9807 support smooth timeline scrubbing and export acceleration for 1080p and moderate 4K projects. The GPU's 24 GB of VRAM provides ample texture cache for effects-heavy timelines, but the low GPU percentile suggests hardware-accelerated effects rendering would underwhelm. Export times would likely be CPU-bound, where the i5-14400's 20 MB of shared L3 cache helps maintain consistent multi-threaded performance.

3D rendering favors the CPU heavily. The i5-14400's Cinebench R15 multi-core score of 2148 and R20 score of 8952 show competent performance for CPU-based renderers like V-Ray or Blender Cycles. The GPU's 56.28 TFLOPS FP32 throughput and 84 RT cores suggest hardware ray tracing capability, but the 19th percentile rank implies drivers or architecture limitations hamper real-world rendering output. Users would likely rely primarily on CPU rendering, leaving the GPU's compute largely idle.

Software development benefits from the i5-14400's balanced architecture. The PassMark integer math score of 82017 and extended instructions score of 19816 support fast compilation, while the single-thread score of 3741 ensures responsive IDE interaction. The GPU's weak relative standing matters little for code editing, debugging, or version control operations. The 65 W TDP CPU also means sustained all-core builds won't thermally throttle as aggressively as higher-power chips.

Student and office workloads present the most sensible use case. The i5-14400's PassMark physics score of 1396 and random string sorting score of 32346 handle spreadsheet calculations and document processing efficiently. The integrated UHD Graphics 730 provides basic display output for office tasks, allowing the discrete GPU to idle. The CPU's 2.50 GHz base clock and 4.70 GHz boost clock deliver snappy daily responsiveness without demanding excessive cooling or power.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU's average benchmark score of 32115 places it at the 82nd percentile among all tested processors. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-12800H at 32121 (0% delta), Intel Core i7-13705H at 32076 (0.1% faster), Intel Core i5-14450HX at 32040 (0.2% faster), and Intel Core i9-11900 at 32226 (0.3% slower). These margins are negligible, meaning the i5-14400 performs statistically identically to a range of mobile and desktop chips from previous generations — a notable finding for a 2024 release.

The GPU's average benchmark score of 3075 from the single 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test places it at just the 19th percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rivals tell a striking story: NVIDIA Quadro P1000 at 3163 (2.8% faster), Intel Arc Pro B60 at 3182 (3.4% faster), NVIDIA GeForce 820A at 2983 (3.1% slower), and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 860M at 2967 (3.6% slower). The RTX 5080 SUPER is apparently bracketed by entry-level and mobile graphics solutions from years past, which contradicts its 24 GB VRAM and 1.02 TB/s bandwidth specifications.

The combined percentile of 51 for this pairing reflects the massive gap between CPU and GPU performance tiers. The system's overall benchmark profile is dominated by the CPU's above-average standing and dragged down by the GPU's below-average showing. This creates a curious analytical situation where the same build could be described as either a competent workstation or a weak gaming machine, depending on which component's scores receive emphasis.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core i5-14400 features 10 cores and 16 threads based on the Raptor Lake architecture, specifically the Raptor Lake-R refresh. It is manufactured on Intel's 10 nm process with a die size of 215 mm². The base clock runs at 2.50 GHz with a boost clock of 4.70 GHz, all within a 65 W TDP envelope. The cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 20 MB of shared L3 cache.

The benchmark scores reveal a processor that excels at single-threaded responsiveness while delivering solid multi-threaded throughput. The Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3009 and multi-core score of 21315 show a 7x scaling factor from one core to all cores, which is typical for a hybrid architecture with 6 performance cores and 4 efficiency cores. The PassMark single-thread score of 3741 ranks at the 82nd percentile, confirming strong per-core IPC.

The Geekbench scores of 1905 single-core and 9807 multi-core align closely with other 14th-generation desktop parts. The PassMark data compression score of 314995 and encryption score of 16731 indicate robust cryptographic and archiving performance, useful for file servers or secure communications workloads. The floating point math score of 61549 and integer math score of 82017 show balanced ALU and FPU capabilities.

The 20 MB shared L3 cache is generous for this class, aiding in cache-sensitive workloads like database queries and scientific simulations. The CPU supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory across a dual-channel bus, which gives builders flexibility in platform cost. ECC memory support is present, a feature typically reserved for workstation-class chips, potentially broadening this CPU's appeal for error-sensitive computing.

Who Should Build It

Gamers targeting 1080p or 1440p with high refresh rates would find the CPU sufficient but the GPU questionable. The i5-14400's strong single-core performance supports high frame rates in CPU-bound titles, but the RTX 5080 SUPER's low GPU percentile suggests it would struggle to deliver consistent 144 Hz output at these resolutions. The 24 GB VRAM provides future-proofing for texture-heavy titles, yet the underlying rendering throughput appears inadequate for the GPU's premium positioning.

Content creators working primarily in CPU-bound applications — such as software developers compiling large codebases, video editors using software encoders, or 3D artists relying on CPU renderers — would benefit from the i5-14400's multi-core scores. The PassMark multi-thread score of 25080 and Cinebench R23 multi-core result of 21315 indicate productive render times for moderate projects. These users could offload specific GPU-accelerated tasks to the RTX 5080 SUPER when beneficial, despite its low percentile rank.

Students and small business users running office suites, web applications, and light productivity tools form the most rational target audience. The i5-14400's 65 W TDP allows for compact, quiet cooling solutions, while the integrated UHD Graphics 730 provides a fallback if the discrete GPU is removed or fails. The CPU's 82nd percentile standing ensures long-term viability for everyday tasks, and the GPU's presence adds capability for occasional media work or light gaming.

Developers working on machine learning or data processing would find the CPU's PassMark extended instructions score of 19816 and data encryption score of 16731 useful for preprocessing pipelines. The GPU's 336 tensor cores could accelerate certain ML inference tasks, though the low overall GPU percentile may limit framework support and performance. The combination is better suited for development and testing rather than production training workloads.

Balance and Bottleneck

The performance asymmetry between the CPU at the 82nd percentile and GPU at the 19th percentile creates a clear bottleneck hierarchy. For gaming, the GPU is overwhelmingly the limiting factor — its 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 3075, bracketed by entry-level cards like the Quadro P1000 and GeForce 820A, suggests frame rates would be constrained by graphics rendering rather than CPU throughput. The i5-14400's strong single-core scores would leave significant performance headroom unused in most gaming scenarios.

For productivity workloads, the CPU becomes the primary engine while the GPU's contribution depends on application optimization. Multi-threaded tasks like video encoding, 3D rendering, and data compression (PassMark compression score of 314995) rely almost entirely on CPU performance, where the i5-14400 performs well. GPU-accelerated effects, ray tracing, or AI features would see inconsistent results given the GPU's low percentile rank relative to other graphics cards.

The combined percentile of 51 suggests a system that is neither clearly above nor below average overall, which makes sense given the disparate component tiers. In CPU-heavy workloads, this build performs at the 82nd percentile level; in GPU-heavy workloads, it drops to the 19th percentile level. The practical impact is that users must carefully match their primary applications to the CPU's strengths rather than expecting balanced performance across all tasks.

The power envelope further complicates balance. The CPU's 65 W TDP is modest, while the GPU's 415 W TDP is substantial for a dual-slot card. This 6.4x difference in power draw means the system's thermal and power delivery requirements are dictated by the GPU, even in CPU-bound workloads where the graphics card sits largely idle. Builders must provision cooling and power supply capacity for the GPU's demands regardless of actual usage patterns.

Gaming Performance

The FACT PACK contains no measured FPS data for this exact CPU+GPU combination, and the dataIsMeasured field is false. Therefore, all gaming performance figures presented here are estimates derived from synthetic benchmark scores and component specifications, not from actual gameplay testing.

Estimated 1080p performance: Based on the GPU's 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 3075 and its position near entry-level GPUs, expect low-to-medium settings to achieve playable frame rates in modern titles. The CPU's single-core strength would prevent CPU-side frame drops, but the GPU would likely cap maximum FPS well below 60 in demanding games. Esports titles with modest graphics requirements might reach 60-90 FPS on medium settings.

Estimated 1440p performance: The GPU's low percentile rank suggests significant struggles at this resolution. With 24 GB of VRAM, texture quality could be set high without memory capacity issues, but raw rendering throughput would likely limit overall detail levels. Expect medium settings with reduced shadows and effects for smooth gameplay, with frame rates in the 30-50 range for AAA titles.

Estimated 4K performance: This resolution would likely exceed the GPU's capabilities for most modern games. The 1.02 TB/s memory bandwidth provides sufficient data throughput, but the underlying shader and RT core performance appears insufficient for 4K native rendering. Upscaling techniques might enable playable frame rates at lower internal resolutions, but the GPU's percentile position suggests this would be a stretch.

The CPU's contribution to gaming is largely positive: the Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3009 and PassMark single-thread score of 3741 ensure that game logic, physics, and draw call processing would not bottleneck the GPU. The PassMark physics score of 1396 further supports smooth in-game physics simulation.

GPU Analysis

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER uses the GB203 chip built on TSMC's 5 nm process, containing 45,600 million transistors on a 378 mm² die. The architecture is Blackwell 2.0, representing NVIDIA's latest graphics design. The GPU features 10,752 shading units, 336 texture mapping units, and 112 render output units, along with 84 RT cores and 336 tensor cores.

The memory subsystem is substantial: 24 GB of GDDR7 on a 256-bit bus delivers 1.02 TB/s of bandwidth. Clock speeds are set at 2295 MHz base and 2617 MHz boost, with memory running at 2000 MHz (32 Gbps effective). The pixel rate of 293.1 GPixel/s and texture rate of 879.3 GTexel/s are derived from these specifications.

Compute performance is rated at 56.28 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16 (1:1), which is impressive on paper. However, the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 3075 — the only GPU benchmark available — paints a different picture. This score places the GPU at the 19th percentile, with nearest rivals including the Quadro P1000, GeForce 820A, and GTX 860M, all significantly older or lower-tier products.

The discrepancy between specifications and benchmark results suggests either driver limitations, thermal throttling, or a benchmark that does not align with this GPU's architectural strengths. The 84 RT cores and 336 tensor cores indicate hardware ray tracing and AI acceleration capability, yet the low benchmark score implies these features may not be fully utilized in the tested workload. The 415 W TDP and dual-slot design indicate a power-hungry card that requires substantial cooling.

FAQ

Q: What is the combined performance percentile of this CPU+GPU pairing?

A: The combined percentile is 51, placing it at the median of all tested desktop builds.

Q: How does the i5-14400 compare to its nearest CPU rivals?

A: It scores 32115 on average, essentially tied with the Core i7-12800H (32121, 0% delta), Core i7-13705H (32076, 0.1% faster), Core i5-14450HX (32040, 0.2% faster), and Core i9-11900 (32226, 0.3% slower).

Q: What is the GPU's 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score and percentile?

A: The RTX 5080 SUPER scores 3075 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, placing it at the 19th percentile among all GPUs.

Q: Does this system have measured gaming FPS data?

A: No, the FACT PACK contains no measured FPS rows for this combination; all gaming performance discussion is estimated from benchmark scores.

Q: What memory types does the i5-14400 support?

A: The CPU supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, with ECC memory support available.

Q: What is the GPU's memory capacity and bandwidth?

A: The RTX 5080 SUPER has 24 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 1.02 TB/s of bandwidth.

Q: What are the launch MSRP values for these components?

A: The i5-14400 has a launch MSRP of $221, and the RTX 5080 SUPER has a launch MSRP of 999 USD.

Build Overview

This is a desktop-class build combining the Intel Core i5-14400, a mainstream 10-core processor from the Raptor Lake refresh, with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER, a flagship Blackwell-architecture GPU. The CPU sits at the 82nd percentile among all processors, while the GPU ranks at just the 19th percentile among all graphics cards. The combined percentile of 51 places the overall system at the median of tested configurations.

The i5-14400 represents a solid mid-range CPU choice with its 10 cores, 16 threads, and 20 MB L3 cache. The RTX 5080 SUPER, despite its premium positioning with 24 GB VRAM and 1.02 TB/s bandwidth, benchmarks far below expectations, raising questions about its real-world gaming and rendering capability. The system's overall tier is average, driven primarily by the CPU's strong showing and dragged down by the GPU's weak benchmark performance.

The pairing makes sense only if the user's primary workloads are CPU-bound and the GPU is a secondary consideration. For gaming or GPU-accelerated tasks, this build would likely underperform compared to alternatives with a more balanced CPU-GPU pairing. The 415 W GPU TDP versus the 65 W CPU TDP further emphasizes the GPU's dominance in power and cooling requirements.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The i5-14400 uses Intel Socket 1700, which supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory across a dual-channel bus. The CPU provides PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes, while the GPU uses a PCIe 5.0 x16 interface. The platform supports ECC memory, a feature that may appeal to workstation users.

The 65 W CPU TDP allows for modest cooling solutions, but the 415 W GPU TDP requires a robust power supply and case airflow. The suggested PSU is not specified in the FACT PACK, but the GPU's power draw alone dictates a high-capacity unit with a 16-pin connector. Builders should prioritize the power delivery and thermal design around the GPU's requirements.

A sensible next upgrade would be to replace the RTX 5080 SUPER with a GPU that benchmarks higher, given the CPU's 82nd percentile standing leaves substantial headroom for graphics performance. The i5-14400 could comfortably drive a much more powerful GPU in gaming scenarios. Alternatively, users seeking better GPU compute performance could consider a completely different graphics card, as the current GPU's 19th percentile rank suggests fundamental limitations beyond simple clock speed adjustments.

The Socket 1700 platform is nearing the end of its upgrade lifecycle for new CPU releases, but the i5-14400 itself remains competitive at the 82nd percentile. Memory upgrades from DDR4 to DDR5 would require a motherboard change, while adding more DDR4 capacity is straightforward if the current board supports it. PCIe Gen 5 support ensures the platform is ready for future storage and expansion cards, though the GPU's PCIe 5.0 x16 interface already uses the full available bandwidth.