SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core i5-14490F + AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT

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)

▼

91 Score

Top 9% Ranking

91 / 100

ULTIMATE READY

Apex Performer

Top 9% 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

91%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core i5-14490F

38,149 Benchmark Score

Top 8% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT

19,765 Benchmark Score

Top 9% 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 i5-14490F and AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT combination targets 1080p gaming with solid multi-threaded CPU performance, but the benchmark database contains no measured FPS rows for this exact pairing. All frame rate discussions below are therefore estimates derived from the CPU and GPU benchmark scores, not direct gameplay measurements. The CPU’s 86th percentile ranking among all processors and the GPU’s 65th percentile ranking among all graphics cards indicate a balanced mid-range pairing, with the combined percentile sitting at 76. This system should handle modern titles at high settings, though the GPU’s 8 GB memory capacity will be the limiting factor at higher resolutions.

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 data exists for the Intel Core i5-14490F combined with the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT. The FACT PACK confirms `dataIsMeasured` is false and `measuredFpsUltraByGame` is empty, so all frame rate figures below are estimates based on benchmark scores. The CPU’s Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 23000 and single-core score of 3247 indicate strong gaming headroom, while the GPU’s PassMark G3D score of 17166 places it in the mid-range tier. At 1080p with ultra settings, expect 60-100 FPS in most AAA titles, with esports titles like competitive shooters exceeding 144 FPS due to the CPU’s high single-thread performance. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1859 suggests the GPU handles DirectX 12 workloads competently, but the 128-bit memory bus and 280.3 GB/s bandwidth will cap performance in texture-heavy scenes.

At 1440p, the RX 6650 XT’s 8 GB GDDR6 memory becomes the primary constraint. The GPU’s 65th percentile ranking means it sits above average but not among high-end cards, so expect 40-70 FPS at ultra settings in demanding titles. The CPU’s 10 cores and 16 threads prevent bottlenecking in most scenarios, as the PassMark multi-thread score of 28662 shows ample parallel processing power. For 4K, the GPU’s 10.79 TFLOPS FP32 performance and 168.6 GPixel/s pixel rate will struggle to maintain 30 FPS in modern games at ultra, making 1080p the sweet spot for this combination. The CPU’s 86th percentile ranking versus the GPU’s 65th percentile indicates the GPU is the weaker link in gaming workloads, meaning frame rates will scale more with GPU settings than CPU changes.

Upgrade Path and Platform — socket, memory support, PCIe, PSU headroom from suggestedPsu/tdp, what a sensible next upgrade looks like

The Intel Core i5-14490F uses the LGA 1700 socket, which supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory through a dual-channel memory bus. This flexibility allows builders to reuse existing DDR4 kits or move to DDR5, though the platform’s memory bandwidth is not specified in the benchmark data. The CPU provides PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the processor, while the GPU uses PCIe 4.0 x8, meaning the graphics card runs at half the available lanes but still benefits from Gen 4 bandwidth. The CPU’s 65W TDP is modest, and the GPU’s suggested PSU of 450 W indicates a system with this pairing needs at least that much power supply capacity, though the actual total system draw will depend on other components.

For a sensible next upgrade, the GPU should be the first priority. The RX 6650 XT’s 8 GB memory and 65th percentile ranking leave room for improvement, and swapping to a higher-tier card with more VRAM would directly address the memory bottleneck seen at 1440p and above. The CPU, with its 86th percentile ranking and 10 cores, has enough headroom to support a stronger GPU without becoming the limiting factor. Alternatively, adding more system memory or moving to DDR5 could improve memory-bound workloads, but the CPU’s memory support already covers both types. The LGA 1700 socket is a mature platform, so future CPU upgrades within the same generation are possible, but the 14490F’s performance relative to rivals like the Intel Core i5-13600KF (0.1% delta) suggests the current chip is already well-positioned.

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 CPU’s single-core Cinebench R23 score of 3247 and PassMark single-thread score of 3873 provide the responsiveness needed for 144Hz displays, but the GPU’s 65th percentile ranking limits frame rates in demanding titles. At 1080p, the RX 6650 XT can likely push past 144 FPS in esports titles, while AAA games will hover around 60-100 FPS, making this a solid but not extreme high-refresh setup.

Streaming: The 10 cores and 16 threads of the 14490F handle encoding and game capture simultaneously, with a PassMark multi-thread score of 28662 showing strong parallel performance. The GPU’s 21.59 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1) and 10.79 TFLOPS FP32 provide compute headroom for hardware encoding, though the 8 GB memory may limit simultaneous game and stream rendering at high settings.

Video editing: Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 23000 places the CPU well above average, and the PassMark data compression score of 340026 indicates efficient handling of codec workloads. The GPU’s 7532 PassMark GPU compute score accelerates effects and rendering, but the 8 GB VRAM will constrain large 4K timelines, making this suitable for 1080p editing with occasional 1440p projects.

3D rendering: The CPU’s 10 cores and 16 threads deliver strong multi-threaded performance, with a Cinebench R20 multi-core score of 9660 and R15 multi-core score of 2318. The GPU’s 10.79 TFLOPS FP32 and 337.3 GTexel/s texture rate support real-time viewport rendering, but the 8 GB memory limits scene complexity, making this pairing viable for small-to-medium projects rather than production-scale work.

Software development: The CPU’s PassMark integer math score of 87844 and extended instructions score of 21731 show strong compile and code execution performance. The 24 MB shared L3 cache helps with frequently accessed data, and the 16 threads handle parallel builds efficiently, though the GPU’s compute capabilities are secondary for most development tasks.

Student and office work: The CPU’s 65W TDP keeps power draw low, and the PassMark single-thread score of 3873 ensures snappy application responsiveness. The GPU’s 918 PassMark G2D score handles basic 2D workloads, and the 8 GB memory is sufficient for document editing, web browsing, and light multitasking, making this overkill for basic office tasks but capable of handling more demanding student projects.

Who Should Build It — target users and industries (gamers at specific resolutions, content creators, developers, students, small business workstations) tied strictly to the measured performance

This build targets gamers playing at 1080p who want high settings without chasing maximum frame rates. The GPU’s 65th percentile ranking and 8 GB memory suit 1080p ultra gaming, while the CPU’s 86th percentile ranking prevents bottlenecks in CPU-bound titles. Content creators working with 1080p video or small 3D scenes benefit from the CPU’s multi-threaded scores (Cinebench R23 multi-core 23000) and the GPU’s compute capabilities (PassMark GPU compute 7532), though 4K workflows would exceed the GPU’s memory capacity. Software developers compiling code and running virtual machines will appreciate the 10 cores and 16 threads, with PassMark integer math score of 87844 indicating strong throughput.

Students in engineering or computer science programs can run simulations and compile projects without waiting, thanks to the CPU’s Cinebench R20 multi-core score of 9660. Small business workstations handling spreadsheets, databases, and light CAD work will find the CPU’s data encryption score of 18225 and random string sorting score of 35608 useful for data processing tasks. The GPU’s end-of-life production status suggests this is a mature, stable component, but builders should consider that the 8 GB VRAM will age quickly as games demand more memory. The combined percentile of 76 indicates this system sits above average for desktop builds, making it suitable for users who want reliable mid-range performance without stepping into high-end territory.

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

The Intel Core i5-14490F packs 10 cores and 16 threads using the Raptor Lake architecture on a 10 nm process node, with a die size of 215 mm². The base clock runs at 2.50 GHz and boosts to 5.00 GHz, providing a wide frequency range that balances power efficiency with burst performance. The 65W TDP keeps thermal requirements modest, and the 24 MB shared L3 cache, along with 80 KB L1 per core and 1.25 MB L2 per core, ensures data stays close to the processing units. The CPU supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in dual-channel mode, giving builders flexibility, but ECC memory is not supported.

Benchmark results show the CPU performs strongly across both single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 23000 and single-core score of 3247 place it in the top 86th percentile of all CPUs, meaning it outperforms roughly 86% of processors in the database. The PassMark multi-thread score of 28662 and single-thread score of 3873 reinforce this picture, with the CPU’s nearest rival being the Intel Core i5-13600KF at a 0.1% delta and the Intel Core Ultra 5 245T at -0.1%, indicating near-identical performance to those chips. The PassMark floating point math score of 66558 and integer math score of 87844 show balanced arithmetic capabilities, while the extended instructions score of 21731 indicates solid SIMD performance for multimedia and scientific workloads.

For real workloads, the CPU’s 10 cores handle parallel tasks like video encoding, 3D rendering, and compilation efficiently, as evidenced by the Cinebench R15 multi-core score of 2318 and R20 score of 9660. The high boost clock of 5.00 GHz ensures snappy single-threaded responsiveness in gaming and office applications, with the PassMark find prime numbers score of 122 indicating adequate integer throughput. The 86th percentile ranking versus the GPU’s 65th percentile shows the CPU is the stronger component in this pairing, meaning it will not bottleneck the GPU in most gaming scenarios and has headroom for future GPU upgrades.

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

The AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT uses the Navi 23 chip on the RDNA 2.0 architecture, manufactured on a 7 nm process by TSMC with 11,060 million transistors and a die size of 237 mm². The GPU has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 280.3 GB/s of bandwidth, which is adequate for 1080p but limiting at higher resolutions. Clock speeds reach 2055 MHz base, 2410 MHz game, and 2635 MHz boost, with memory running at 2190 MHz or 17.5 Gbps effective. The 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs provide the core rendering pipeline, while 32 RT cores handle ray tracing workloads, though no tensor cores are present.

Benchmark results show the GPU performs at the 65th percentile among all graphics cards, with a PassMark G3D score of 17166 and an average benchmark score of 19765. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1859 indicates competent DirectX 12 performance, while Geekbench scores of 10111 in OpenCL, 81306 in Vulkan, and 97969 in Metal show cross-platform compute capabilities. The nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Tesla K40m at -0.6% delta and the AMD FirePro W7000 at -0.7%, which are older professional cards, suggesting the RX 6650 XT outperforms them slightly. The PassMark DirectX scores (215 for DX9, 169 for DX11, 109 for DX10, 62 for DX12) reveal that older API performance is stronger than newer API performance, which may indicate driver optimization gaps.

For rendering workloads, the GPU’s 10.79 TFLOPS FP32 and 21.59 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1) provide substantial compute throughput, while the 337.3 GTexel/s texture rate and 168.6 GPixel/s pixel rate handle texture-heavy scenes. The 8 GB VRAM limits scene complexity in 3D rendering, as larger textures and higher-resolution assets will exceed memory capacity. The GPU’s 176W TDP and suggested 450W PSU indicate moderate power requirements, and the 1x 8-pin power connector simplifies installation. The dual-slot design and PCIe 4.0 x8 interface mean the card runs at half the CPU’s PCIe Gen 5 lanes, but this is unlikely to bottleneck performance given the GPU’s mid-range positioning.

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

The CPU’s 86th percentile versus the GPU’s 65th percentile clearly identifies the GPU as the limiting component in gaming workloads. The combined percentile of 76 sits between the two, reflecting that the CPU has more headroom than the GPU. In CPU-bound scenarios like high-refresh esports gaming or physics simulations, the CPU’s PassMark physics score of 2093 and single-thread score of 3873 will sustain high frame rates, but the GPU’s 8 GB memory and 280.3 GB/s bandwidth will cap frame rates in texture-heavy titles. The 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1859 suggests the GPU handles modern DX12 games, but the PassMark DirectX 12 score of 62 indicates weaker performance in the newest API, potentially creating a bottleneck in games that rely heavily on DX12 features.

In multi-threaded workloads like video editing and 3D rendering, the CPU is the stronger performer, with Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 23000 placing it well above average. The GPU’s compute score of 7532 in PassMark GPU compute supports acceleration, but the 8 GB VRAM limits the size of render scenes or video timelines. For software development, the CPU’s integer math score of 87844 and data compression score of 340026 provide the primary throughput, while the GPU plays a minor role. The FPS scaling evidence suggests that lowering graphics settings from ultra to high will yield larger frame rate gains than CPU overclocking, since the GPU is the bottleneck. The CPU’s nearest rival delta of -0.1% to 0.1% indicates that swapping the 14490F for a similar chip would have negligible impact, whereas upgrading the GPU would provide measurable improvements.

FAQ — 5-7 Q&A pairs answerable from FACT PACK data (format: Q: ... A: ...)

Q: What is the CPU’s core and thread count?

A: The Intel Core i5-14490F has 10 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and boost clock of 5.00 GHz.

Q: How much VRAM does the RX 6650 XT have, and what is its memory bandwidth?

A: The GPU has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 280.3 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Does the CPU support both DDR4 and DDR5 memory?

A: Yes, the Intel Core i5-14490F supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, though ECC memory is not supported.

Q: What is the GPU’s percentile ranking among all graphics cards?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT ranks in the 65th percentile among all GPUs, with a PassMark G3D score of 17166.

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

A: The suggested PSU for the RX 6650 XT is 450 W, and the GPU uses a single 8-pin power connector.

Q: How does the CPU compare to the Intel Core i5-13600KF?

A: The Intel Core i5-14490F has a 0.1% higher average benchmark score than the Intel Core i5-13600KF, making them nearly identical in performance.

Q: What is the GPU’s production status and launch MSRP?

A: The RX 6650 XT is end-of-life in production status, with a launch MSRP of 399 USD.

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

The Intel Core i5-14490F achieves an average benchmark score of 38149, ranking in the 86th percentile of all CPUs. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 23000 and single-core score of 3247 highlight strong multi-threaded and single-threaded performance, while the PassMark multi-thread score of 28662 and single-thread score of 3873 confirm consistency across test suites. The CPU’s nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 5 245T at -0.1% delta, the Intel Core i5-13600KF at 0.1% delta, the AMD Ryzen 7 250 at -0.2% delta, and the Intel Core i5-13600HX at -0.3% delta, showing the 14490F sits squarely in a competitive mid-range cluster. The AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT achieves an average benchmark score of 19765, ranking in the 65th percentile of all GPUs. Its PassMark G3D score of 17166 and 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1859 indicate solid but not exceptional gaming performance, with nearest rivals including the NVIDIA Tesla K40m at -0.6% delta and AMD FirePro D300 at 0.7% delta.

The combined percentile of 76 reflects a system that outperforms three-quarters of desktop builds in the database, with the CPU providing the stronger half of the pairing. The CPU’s Cinebench R20 scores of 9660 multi-core and 1363 single-core, along with R15 scores of 2318 multi-core and 327 single-core, show scaling across benchmark generations. The GPU’s Geekbench scores of 10111 in OpenCL, 81306 in Vulkan, and 97969 in Metal demonstrate compute versatility, while the PassMark GPU compute score of 7532 indicates adequate acceleration for non-gaming tasks. The data shows this pairing is well-balanced for 1080p gaming and productivity workloads, with the GPU being the primary upgrade path to improve performance. The lack of measured FPS data means these scores serve as the best available predictor of real-world performance, and the 86th versus 65th percentile gap suggests users should prioritize GPU upgrades before CPU changes.

Rate My PC: Intel Core i5-14490F + AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT

Apex Performer

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core i5-14490F

AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT

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

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)

Upgrade Path and Platform — socket, memory support, PCIe, PSU headroom from suggestedPsu/tdp, what a sensible next upgrade looks like

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 (gamers at specific resolutions, content creators, developers, students, small business workstations) tied strictly to the measured performance

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

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

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

FAQ — 5-7 Q&A pairs answerable from FACT PACK data (format: Q: ... A: ...)

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

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