SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core i5-14400F + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010

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)

▼

84 Score

Top 16% Ranking

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%

GPU

79%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core i5-14400F

32,279 Benchmark Score

Top 10% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010

2,893 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 i5-14400F and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010 form a desktop pairing that lands near the middle of the overall performance distribution, with a combined percentile of 51. The CPU is a 10-core, 16-thread Raptor Lake Refresh part, while the GPU is a low-power Ampere-based add-in card with 4 GB of VRAM. Benchmark data shows a stark contrast between the processor’s strong multi-threaded showing and the graphics card’s modest absolute scores, which shapes every workload expectation for this build.

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

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010 is built on the GA107 chip using Samsung’s 8 nm process, with 8,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die. Its memory configuration is the most limiting factor: 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus yields 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth. That is a small pool of VRAM and a narrow interface, which means texture-heavy scenes and high-resolution assets will hit capacity walls quickly. The memory clock is listed as 1500 MHz with 12 Gbps effective transfer, but the bus width caps practical throughput.

Clock speeds are modest for a discrete GPU: base 1417 MHz and boost 1762 MHz. The card contains 768 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output pipelines. Pixel rate is 28.19 GPixel/s and texture rate is 42.29 GTexel/s, figures consistent with a low-end adapter. FP32 performance is 2.706 TFLOPS, with FP16 at the same 2.706 TFLOPS (1:1), indicating no half-rate acceleration advantage. Ray tracing hardware exists in the form of 6 RT cores, and 24 tensor cores are present for AI-accelerated workloads, but the raw throughput is far below what modern rendering demands.

The single benchmark score for the RTX 4010 is a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 result of 2893. That places the GPU at the 18th percentile among all GPUs, meaning the vast majority of graphics cards outperform it in this synthetic test. The nearest rivals are strikingly close: the RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB scores 2907 (−0.5% delta), the RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell SFF scores 2910 (−0.6%), and the RTX 4060 Ti 8 GB scores 2913 (−0.7%). The Quadro P600 is also within 1% at 2923. This clustering suggests that in this specific benchmark, the RTX 4010 trades blows with cards that are otherwise in very different performance classes, but the 4 GB VRAM and 64-bit bus remain hard limits for real-world rendering.

For 3D rendering and GPU compute, the data indicates that the RTX 4010 can handle light tasks but will struggle with large scenes. The 2.706 TFLOPS FP32 throughput is sufficient for basic viewport work and simple ray-traced previews, but the 6 RT cores are not enough for production ray tracing. The 24 tensor cores can accelerate DLSS or similar features, but with only 4 GB of memory, the card cannot hold large model data. Bandwidth of 96.00 GB/s is roughly a third of what mid-range cards offer, so any workload that streams textures or geometry will see stuttering.

Benchmark Performance — exact CPU and GPU scores, percentile positions, and what the combined picture is

The CPU’s benchmark portfolio is extensive. Cinebench R15 multicore is 2181 and single-core is 307. Cinebench R20 multicore is 9090 and single-core is 1283. Cinebench R23 multicore reaches 21645, with single-core at 3055. Geekbench multicore is 11268 and single-core is 2058. Passmark results include multithread 25470, single-thread 3701 (also listed as singlethread 3701), integer math 81524, floating point math 61319, extended instructions 19937, data compression 315521, data encryption 16949, find prime numbers 86, physics 1523, and random string sorting 32680. The average benchmark score is 32279, and the CPU sits at the 83rd percentile among all CPUs.

The nearest CPU rivals are tightly grouped. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U averages 32233 (0.1% delta), the Intel Core i9-11900 averages 32226 (0.2%), and the AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS averages 32354 (−0.2%). The Intel Core i7-12800H is at 32121 (0.5%). The i5-14400F essentially matches these mobile and older desktop parts in aggregate, despite being a desktop chip with a 65 W TDP. In multi-threaded Cinebench R23, the 21645 score is strong for a 10-core part, suggesting that the 16 threads are well-utilized. Single-core Geekbench of 2058 is competitive with the rivals listed, all of which are in the same performance band.

The GPU’s single 3DMark score of 2893 and its 18th percentile position create a clear asymmetry. The combined percentile of 51 reflects the midpoint of these two very different components. For CPU-heavy tasks like compilation, encoding, or spreadsheet processing, the i5-14400F will dominate. For GPU-bound tasks like gaming at high settings or 3D rendering, the RTX 4010 will be the limiting factor. The data shows a machine that can handle productivity and multitasking with ease, but graphics performance will be entry-level.

Gaming Performance — measured FPS by game and resolution from measuredFpsUltraByGame (or, if dataIsMeasured is false, frame expectations qualitatively from the benchmark scores and say the figures are estimates)

No measured FPS rows exist for this exact CPU+GPU combination. The FACT PACK contains no measuredFps data for any game or resolution. Therefore, all frame rate figures below are estimates derived from the benchmark scores, not from direct testing. The GPU’s 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 2893 and its 18th percentile position indicate that the RTX 4010 will produce low-to-moderate frame rates in modern titles. The CPU’s high single-core score of 3055 in Cinebench R23 suggests that CPU-bound scenarios will not be a bottleneck at lower resolutions, but the GPU will cap performance.

At 1080p with ultra settings, the RTX 4010’s 4 GB VRAM and 96.00 GB/s bandwidth will be saturated by most contemporary games. Expect frame rates in the range of 30-60 FPS for esports or older titles, and below 30 FPS for demanding AAA releases with ray tracing enabled. The 6 RT cores can enable some ray-traced effects, but the 2.706 TFLOPS FP32 throughput will not sustain high ray counts. At 1440p, the GPU will likely fall below playable thresholds in all but the lightest games. The 64-bit memory bus is a particular handicap, as even modest texture packs can exceed the bandwidth.

The CPU’s 83rd percentile performance means that in CPU-light games, the i5-14400F will not hold the GPU back. However, the GPU is so far below the CPU in relative standing that the pairing will almost always be GPU-limited. The data suggests that esports titles like CS or Valorant could run at 100+ FPS at 1080p low settings, but this is an estimate. For single-player games with high-quality assets, the 4 GB VRAM will cause texture pop-in or outright crashes. The RTX 4010 is best suited for 720p or 1080p low-to-medium settings, where the low pixel rate and texture rate can keep up with modest demands.

Balance and Bottleneck — which component limits which workload, using percentiles and FPS scaling as evidence

The CPU’s 83rd percentile versus the GPU’s 18th percentile creates a massive imbalance. In gaming, the GPU will be the bottleneck in nearly every scenario. The CPU can deliver high single-thread performance (Cinebench R23 single-core 3055, Geekbench single-core 2058), which is sufficient for feeding a graphics card, but the RTX 4010’s 2.706 TFLOPS and 96.00 GB/s bandwidth will be exhausted long before the CPU reaches its limits. The FPS scaling evidence, though estimated, points to GPU-bound behavior: frame rates will be low even at 1080p, and lowering resolution will yield diminishing returns because the GPU’s compute and memory limits are absolute.

For productivity workloads like video editing or 3D rendering, the bottleneck shifts. The CPU’s multi-threaded scores (Cinebench R23 multicore 21645, Passmark multithread 25470) are strong, but the GPU’s low FP32 throughput and 4 GB VRAM will limit GPU-accelerated rendering. In CPU-only tasks like code compilation or data compression (Passmark data compression 315521), the i5-14400F will perform well, and the GPU is irrelevant. For hybrid workloads that offload to the GPU, the RTX 4010 becomes the limiting factor due to its 18th percentile ranking.

The deltaPct values among the CPU’s nearest rivals are all within 0.5%, indicating that the i5-14400F is a stable, well-balanced processor in its class. The GPU’s nearest rivals are similarly clustered within 1%, but those rivals (RTX 4060 Ti variants) are known to be far more powerful in practice, which underscores that the Steel Nomad score is not indicative of real-world gaming performance for this card. The balance here is clearly CPU-favored, meaning the processor will often sit idle while waiting for the GPU to complete frames.

CPU Analysis — cores, clocks, architecture, what the benchmark scores mean for real workloads

The Intel Core i5-14400F is a 10-core, 16-thread processor based on the Raptor Lake architecture, specifically the Raptor Lake-R refresh. It uses Intel’s 10 nm process and has a die size of 215 mm². The base clock is 2.50 GHz, and the boost clock reaches 4.70 GHz. The TDP is 65 W, which is modest for a desktop part. Cache is structured as 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and 20 MB shared L3. Memory support includes both DDR4 and DDR5 in dual-channel mode, with ECC memory supported. The CPU has 16 PCIe Gen 5 lanes (CPU only) and no integrated graphics. The launch MSRP is $196. The multiplier is not unlocked, so overclocking is limited.

The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 21645 is indicative of strong multi-threaded performance for a 65 W part. This translates to real workloads such as video encoding, 3D rendering in CPU mode, and software compilation. The Passmark integer math score of 81524 and floating point math of 61319 show solid arithmetic throughput. Data compression at 315521 is excellent, suggesting fast file archiving and database operations. The single-thread score of 3701 in Passmark and 3055 in Cinebench R23 point to good responsiveness in office applications and lightly-threaded games. The 83rd percentile among all CPUs means the i5-14400F outperforms the majority of processors in the database.

The nearest rivals, including the Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U and Ryzen 7 6800HS, are mobile parts with lower TDPs, yet the i5-14400F barely edges them out (0.1% and −0.2% deltas). This suggests that the desktop chip’s higher power budget does not translate into a large performance advantage in aggregate, but the 65 W TDP is efficient. The lack of integrated graphics means a discrete GPU is mandatory, which is already the case in this build. The 20 MB L3 cache is adequate for gaming and productivity, though not exceptional.

Usage Scenarios — grounded in the scores: high-refresh gaming, streaming, video editing, 3D rendering, software development, student and office work. One short paragraph per scenario, citing the numbers that support the verdict

High-refresh gaming: The GPU’s 18th percentile and 2893 Steel Nomad score make high-refresh (144 Hz+) gaming unrealistic except in very light esports titles at 1080p low settings. The CPU’s single-core strength (Cinebench R23 3055) will not be the limiter, but the RTX 4010’s low pixel rate and 4 GB VRAM will cap frame rates well below 144 FPS in most games.

Streaming: The CPU’s 10 cores and 16 threads, with a Passmark multithread score of 25470, can handle software encoding at moderate bitrates. However, the GPU’s 6 RT cores and 24 tensor cores may offer some NVENC-like acceleration, but the card’s overall weakness means streaming at high quality while gaming will be difficult. The 65 W TDP CPU leaves headroom for encoding overhead.

Video editing: The CPU’s Cinebench R23 multicore score of 21645 and Passmark data compression of 315521 support fast timeline scrubbing and export in CPU-based editors. The GPU’s 2.706 TFLOPS and 4 GB VRAM will accelerate some effects, but 4K timelines or heavy color grading will exceed the card’s memory. The dual-channel DDR4/DDR5 support helps with media cache.

3D rendering: CPU rendering will be respectable for a 65 W part, as the 21645 Cinebench R23 score indicates. GPU rendering will be severely limited by the RTX 4010’s 4 GB VRAM and 96.00 GB/s bandwidth, causing out-of-core spills on moderate scenes. The 6 RT cores are insufficient for production ray tracing, so expect CPU renders to be faster for complex scenes.

Software development: The CPU’s high integer math (81524) and extended instructions (19937) scores are ideal for compilation tasks. The 16 threads handle parallel builds efficiently, and the 65 W TDP keeps thermals low. The GPU is irrelevant for most development, though the 4 GB VRAM is enough for basic UI rendering.

Student and office work: The single-thread Passmark score of 3701 ensures snappy word processing, spreadsheet calculations, and web browsing. The 83rd CPU percentile means this machine will handle multitasking with many open tabs and documents. The GPU is more than enough for 2D applications and light video playback, making this a capable general-purpose desktop.

Who Should Build It — target users and industries tied strictly to the measured performance

This build targets users who prioritize CPU performance for productivity but have minimal graphics demands. The i5-14400F’s 83rd percentile makes it suitable for office workers handling large spreadsheets, data analysis with Passmark integer math 81524, or software developers compiling code. Students will benefit from the fast single-core performance (Geekbench 2058) for research and writing, while the 65 W TDP keeps electricity costs low. Small business workstations can rely on the CPU’s multi-threaded scores for inventory management, accounting software, and light database work.

Gamers at 1080p with older or less demanding titles may find the RTX 4010 acceptable, but the 18th percentile means it is not recommended for modern AAA gaming. Content creators should avoid this GPU for any GPU-accelerated rendering, as the 4 GB VRAM will bottleneck. However, CPU-based video editing with the Cinebench R23 multicore 21645 is viable for 1080p projects. The build is also suitable for industrial control systems or point-of-sale terminals where the GPU is only needed for basic display output. The 250 W suggested PSU indicates very low system power draw, making this an efficient choice for always-on workstations.

The combined percentile of 51 places this build at the median of all configurations, but that median is skewed by the strong CPU. Users who never game or render will see excellent performance. Users who expect any 3D acceleration will be disappointed. The target audience is explicitly CPU-bound professionals and students, not gamers or 3D artists.

FAQ

Q: What is the CPU’s multi-threaded performance compared to its nearest rivals?

A: The i5-14400F scores 21645 in Cinebench R23 multicore and has an average benchmark score of 32279. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U, averages 32233 (0.1% delta), and the Intel Core i9-11900 averages 32226 (0.2%). The i5-14400F is essentially tied with these parts.

Q: How much VRAM does the RTX 4010 have, and what is the memory bandwidth?

A: The GPU has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 96.00 GB/s. The memory clock is 1500 MHz with 12 Gbps effective transfer.

Q: Does the RTX 4010 support ray tracing?

A: Yes, it has 6 RT cores, but the 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 2893 and the 18th percentile position indicate that ray-traced workloads will be very slow. The FP32 throughput is 2.706 TFLOPS.

Q: What is the CPU’s socket and memory support?

A: The Intel Core i5-14400F uses Intel Socket 1700 and supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in dual-channel mode. ECC memory is also supported.

Q: Is the CPU overclockable?

A: No, the multiplier is not unlocked. The base clock is 2.50 GHz and boost is 4.70 GHz, with a TDP of 65 W.

Q: What is the GPU’s PCIe interface and power requirement?

A: The RTX 4010 uses PCIe 4.0 x8 and has no power connectors. Its TDP is 50 W, and the suggested PSU is 250 W.

Q: What is the build’s overall performance tier?

A: The combined percentile is 51, placing it at the median of all systems. The CPU is at the 83rd percentile, while the GPU is at the 18th percentile.

Build Overview

This is a desktop build pairing the Intel Core i5-14400F with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010. The CPU is a 10-core, 16-thread Raptor Lake Refresh part with a 65 W TDP and a launch MSRP of $196. The GPU is a 50 W Ampere-based card with 4 GB VRAM and a single-slot design, requiring no external power connectors. The combined percentile of 51 means this system sits at the median of all tracked builds, but the distribution is highly uneven.

The CPU’s 83rd percentile performance makes this a strong productivity machine, capable of handling multi-threaded workloads like compilation, data compression, and CPU rendering. The GPU’s 18th percentile performance limits it to basic display output and light 2D work. The build class is desktop, indicating a stationary workstation or home PC. The 250 W suggested PSU confirms a very low overall power draw. This is not a gaming or GPU-compute system; it is a CPU-first configuration for users who need processing power without graphics acceleration.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The Intel Core i5-14400F uses Intel Socket 1700, which supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in dual-channel mode. The CPU has 16 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, allowing for high-bandwidth storage or future GPU upgrades. The RTX 4010 uses PCIe 4.0 x8, so a full x16 Gen 5 slot is available for a more powerful graphics card. The 250 W suggested PSU leaves substantial headroom for a GPU upgrade, as most mid-range cards require more power but the current system draws very little.

The CPU’s 65 W TDP is low, so the existing cooling solution should handle a more demanding GPU without thermal issues. The platform supports ECC memory, which is rare for consumer parts and beneficial for workstation use. A sensible next upgrade would be replacing the RTX 4010 with a higher-end GeForce 40-series card, as the CPU’s 83rd percentile can feed a much faster GPU. The 4 GB VRAM of the current GPU is the primary bottleneck for any graphics work, so increasing memory capacity and bandwidth would yield the largest performance gain. The CPU itself is near its performance class’s ceiling, with nearest rivals within 0.5%, so a CPU swap would offer minimal improvement without a platform change.

Rate My PC: Intel Core i5-14400F + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010

Power Build

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core i5-14400F

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010

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

Benchmark Performance — exact CPU and GPU scores, percentile positions, and what the combined picture is

Gaming Performance — measured FPS by game and resolution from measuredFpsUltraByGame (or, if dataIsMeasured is false, frame expectations qualitatively from the benchmark scores and say the figures are estimates)

Balance and Bottleneck — which component limits which workload, using percentiles and FPS scaling as evidence

CPU Analysis — cores, clocks, architecture, what the benchmark scores mean for real workloads

Usage Scenarios — grounded in the scores: high-refresh gaming, streaming, video editing, 3D rendering, software development, student and office work. One short paragraph per scenario, citing the numbers that support the verdict

Who Should Build It — target users and industries tied strictly to the measured performance

FAQ

Build Overview

Upgrade Path and Platform

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