SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core i5-14490F + 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)

▼

88 Score

Top 12% Ranking

88 / 100

HIGH-END

Power Build

Top 12% of systems. Excellent for 1440p Ultra or 4K High gaming.

1440p Ultra4K High

System Balance Analysis

CPU vs GPU performance ratio

Well Balanced

CPU

92%

GPU

85%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core i5-14490F

38,149 Benchmark Score

Top 8% 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

This pairing combines a high-core-count desktop CPU with an entry-level discrete GPU. The Intel Core i5-14490F is a 10-core, 16-thread processor built on the Raptor Lake architecture, while the Intel Arc A310 is a low-power, 4 GB graphics card based on the Xe-HPG architecture. The benchmark data indicates a significant performance disparity between the two components, with the CPU ranking in the 86th percentile among all processors and the GPU ranking in the 40th percentile among all GPUs. This analysis walks through the benchmark scores, workload implications, and platform characteristics to provide a clear picture of what this system can and cannot do.

Balance and Bottleneck

The data presents a clear picture of a CPU-bound system. The processor’s average benchmark score of 38,149 places it in the 86th percentile of all CPUs, indicating strong multi-threaded capability. In contrast, the GPU’s average benchmark score of 7,550 places it in the 40th percentile of all GPUs, which is a markedly weaker position. This imbalance suggests that in most workloads, the graphics card will be the limiting factor, particularly in scenarios that demand high graphical fidelity or resolution.

The CPU’s PassMark multithread score of 28,662 and Cinebench R23 multicore score of 23,000 demonstrate robust parallel processing power. These scores indicate that the processor can handle heavy computational tasks, such as video encoding or 3D rendering, without becoming the primary constraint. However, the GPU’s PassMark G3D score of 5,433 and Geekbench Vulkan score of 28,964 are modest figures that will likely cap frame rates in gaming and slow down GPU-accelerated workloads like ray tracing.

The bottleneck shifts depending on the workload type. For CPU-intensive tasks like data compression (PassMark score of 340,026) or integer math (PassMark score of 87,844), the processor will operate near its full potential. For GPU-intensive tasks like DirectX 12 gaming, the PassMark DirectX 12 score of 29 indicates a severe limitation, making the GPU the clear bottleneck. The combined percentile of 63 reflects this imbalance, showing that the overall system performance is dragged down by the weaker component.

In gaming at 1080p resolution, the CPU’s single-thread performance (Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3,247) is sufficient to feed the GPU, but the GPU’s raw compute power (FP32 of 2.688 TFLOPS) is insufficient for high frame rates in modern titles. The system is balanced only for light, non-graphical tasks or older games; for anything modern, the GPU will be the limiting factor.

Benchmark Performance

The Intel Core i5-14490F delivers strong benchmark results across the board. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 23,000 is a standout figure, placing it in the 86th percentile of all CPUs. The single-core score of 3,247 in the same test is also respectable, indicating good per-thread performance. The PassMark single-thread score of 3,873 reinforces this, showing that the processor handles lightly-threaded tasks well.

The CPU’s nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 5 245T with an average score of 38,194 and a delta of -0.1%, the AMD Ryzen 7 250 with 38,221 and a delta of -0.2%, and the Intel Core i5-13600HX with 38,261 and a delta of -0.3%. The i5-14490F’s average score of 38,149 is essentially on par with these parts, trailing the closest competitor by only 0.1%. It is also 0.1% ahead of the Intel Core i5-13600KF, which scores 38,103. This indicates the processor performs within a tight competitive band, offering no significant advantage or disadvantage over its immediate peers.

The Intel Arc A310, by contrast, posts much lower scores. Its PassMark G3D score of 5,433 places it in the 40th percentile of all GPUs. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 30,607 and Vulkan score of 28,964 are moderate figures for entry-level graphics. The GPU’s nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon R7 250 with an average score of 7,557 and a delta of -0.1%, the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 with 7,580 and a delta of -0.4%, and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 with 7,472 and a delta of 1%. The A310’s average score of 7,550 is 1% ahead of the GTX 1650 and 0.4% behind the Radeon Pro WX 3100, showing it competes directly with older, lower-tier cards.

The combined picture is a system with a top-tier CPU and a bottom-tier GPU. The processor’s 86th percentile rank contrasts sharply with the GPU’s 40th percentile rank, and the combined system percentile of 63 reflects this gap. Benchmark results indicate that the CPU will not be a limiting factor in most tasks, while the GPU will struggle with anything beyond basic graphical output.

FAQ

Q: What is the CPU’s average benchmark score and how does it compare to its closest rival?

A: The Intel Core i5-14490F has an average benchmark score of 38,149. Its closest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 5 245T, scores 38,194, making the i5-14490F 0.1% slower. It is also 0.1% faster than the Intel Core i5-13600KF, which scores 38,103.

Q: How does the GPU’s performance compare to the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650?

A: The Intel Arc A310 has an average benchmark score of 7,550, which is 1% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650’s score of 7,472. This places the A310 slightly ahead of that older card in synthetic tests.

Q: What is the CPU’s percentile ranking among all processors?

A: The Intel Core i5-14490F ranks in the 86th percentile of all CPUs. This indicates it outperforms the majority of processors on the market in aggregate benchmark scores.

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

A: The Intel Arc A310 ranks in the 40th percentile of all GPUs. This is a below-average position, indicating it performs worse than most discrete graphics cards.

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

A: The combined percentile for this desktop build is 63. This reflects the system’s overall performance tier, which is dragged down by the GPU’s weaker scores.

Q: Does the CPU support DDR5 memory?

A: Yes, the Intel Core i5-14490F supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory types, with a dual-channel memory bus. This provides flexibility in choosing a motherboard and memory kit.

Q: What is the power consumption of the GPU?

A: The Intel Arc A310 has a thermal design power (TDP) of 30 W. The suggested power supply for a system with this GPU is 200 W.

Usage Scenarios

For high-refresh gaming, this pairing is not suitable. The GPU’s low PassMark G3D score of 5,433 and DirectX 12 score of 29 indicate it cannot sustain high frame rates in modern titles. The CPU’s strong single-thread score of 3,873 would help in CPU-bound scenarios, but the GPU will bottleneck at 1080p and above, preventing the system from reaching high refresh rates.

Streaming is a mixed scenario. The CPU’s 10 cores and 16 threads, evidenced by a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 23,000, can handle encoding workloads while gaming. However, the GPU’s limited compute power will struggle with the gaming portion, leading to poor stream quality or low in-game performance.

Video editing benefits from the CPU’s strong multi-threaded performance. The PassMark multithread score of 28,662 and floating-point math score of 66,558 suggest smooth timeline scrubbing and export times in software that leverages the CPU. The GPU’s 4 GB VRAM and 124.0 GB/s bandwidth are minimal for GPU-accelerated effects, so those tasks will be slow.

3D rendering is CPU-bound, and this system excels there. The Cinebench R20 multicore score of 9,660 and R15 multicore score of 2,318 show that the processor can handle complex scenes. The GPU’s 2.688 TFLOPS FP32 performance is negligible for rendering, so expect CPU-only rendering times.

Software development is a strong suit for this CPU. The PassMark integer math score of 87,844 and data encryption score of 18,225 indicate fast compilation and cryptographic operations. The GPU is irrelevant for most development tasks, making this a good workstation for coding.

Student and office work is where this system shines. The CPU’s 86th percentile ranking ensures snappy responsiveness for documents, spreadsheets, and web browsing. The GPU’s 625 PassMark G2D score is sufficient for 2D desktop acceleration, and the low 30 W TDP of the GPU means the system runs cool and quiet.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core i5-14490F is a desktop processor from the Core 14th Gen series, built on Intel’s 10 nm Raptor Lake architecture. It has 10 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The chip features 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache, providing ample cache for data-heavy workloads.

Benchmark results show a balanced performer. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 23,000 is 0.1% higher than the Intel Core i5-13600KF’s average score of 38,103, indicating near-identical performance to that previous-generation part. The single-core score of 3,247 in R23 is strong, and the PassMark single-thread score of 3,873 confirms good per-core performance. The processor’s 65 W TDP is modest, making it efficient for a 10-core part.

The chip supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory, with a dual-channel bus, and offers PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU. It has no integrated graphics, meaning a discrete GPU is required. The processor is unlocked? No, the multiplier is not unlocked, so overclocking is limited. The avgBenchmarkScore of 38,149 places it in the 86th percentile, and its nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 5 245T and AMD Ryzen 7 250, all within a 0.3% performance band.

For real workloads, the CPU excels at multi-threaded tasks like video rendering and data processing, as shown by the PassMark data compression score of 340,026. Its single-thread performance is also adequate for everyday tasks and gaming, though the GPU will limit the latter. The 24 MB L3 cache helps with cache-sensitive applications, and the 10 nm process node ensures reasonable power efficiency.

Gaming Performance

The FACT PACK contains no measured FPS data for this CPU and GPU combination. As such, all frame rate figures discussed below are estimates based on the benchmark scores of the components. The dataIsMeasured field is false, so these figures should be treated as qualitative expectations rather than precise measurements.

Given the Intel Arc A310’s PassMark G3D score of 5,433 and DirectX 11 score of 33, the GPU is expected to handle older or less demanding games at 1080p with low to medium settings. At 4K resolution, the 4 GB VRAM and 64-bit memory bus will be severe limiting factors, likely causing stuttering and low frame rates in any modern title. The CPU’s strong single-thread score of 3,873 means it will not be the bottleneck, but the GPU’s 2.688 TFLOPS FP32 performance caps overall throughput.

For esports titles like Counter-Strike or League of Legends, the system might achieve playable frame rates at 1080p with lowered settings. For AAA games, the PassMark DirectX 12 score of 29 suggests very poor performance, with frame rates likely dropping below 30 FPS even at 720p. The GPU’s 6 ray tracing cores are present, but the low compute power means ray tracing will be impractical. The 15.5 Gbps effective memory speed is too low for high-bandwidth gaming.

In summary, this is not a gaming system. The CPU is capable, but the GPU holds it back significantly. Users seeking 60 FPS in modern games at 1080p would need a more powerful graphics card.

Who Should Build It

This build targets users who need strong CPU performance but have minimal graphical requirements. Gamers at 1080p with older or indie titles might find it acceptable, but those seeking high-refresh or 1440p gaming should look elsewhere. The CPU’s 86th percentile ranking makes it ideal for content creators who rely on CPU-heavy tasks like video encoding or 3D rendering, though the GPU will not accelerate those workflows.

Developers will benefit from the fast compilation times indicated by the PassMark integer math score of 87,844 and multithread score of 28,662. Students and office workers will find the system more than adequate for productivity tasks, with the CPU’s strong single-thread performance ensuring smooth application responsiveness. Small business workstations that run database or virtualization workloads will leverage the 10 cores and 16 threads effectively.

The GPU is the weak point. It is suitable for basic display output, 2D desktop work, and light GPU compute, but it is not designed for modern gaming or professional rendering. Users who pair this CPU with a more capable GPU will see the system’s combined percentile rise significantly from the current 63.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The Intel Core i5-14490F uses the Intel Socket 1700 platform. It supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory with a dual-channel bus, giving builders a choice between older and newer memory technologies. The CPU provides PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes, which is future-proof for high-bandwidth NVMe drives and graphics cards, though the current GPU uses PCIe 4.0 x8.

The GPU’s suggested PSU is 200 W, and its TDP is 30 W. This leaves substantial headroom for a more powerful graphics card. The CPU’s 65 W TDP is also low, so the total system power draw is modest. A sensible next upgrade would be replacing the Arc A310 with a higher-tier GPU, which would alleviate the current bottleneck and allow the CPU to reach its full potential in gaming and GPU-accelerated tasks.

The platform supports up to 16 PCIe Gen 5 lanes from the CPU, which is sufficient for a single high-end graphics card. Memory support for both DDR4 and DDR5 means users can choose a motherboard and RAM based on budget and performance needs. The CPU has no integrated graphics, so a discrete GPU is mandatory. The socket is shared with other 14th Gen parts, so future CPU upgrades within the same generation are possible, though the platform is nearing end-of-life.

Build Overview

This is a desktop build combining the Intel Core i5-14490F with the Intel Arc A310. The CPU is a high-performance part ranking in the 86th percentile of all CPUs, while the GPU is an entry-level card in the 40th percentile. The combined percentile of 63 places the system in the mid-range tier overall, though this is heavily skewed by the CPU’s strength.

The build is intended for users who prioritize CPU performance over graphics. It is suitable for productivity, development, and light content creation, but not for modern gaming at high settings. The CPU’s 10 cores and 16 threads provide ample processing power, while the GPU’s 4 GB VRAM and 2.688 TFLOPS FP32 are minimal. The system is balanced only for non-graphical workloads; any graphical task will expose the GPU as the primary limitation.

GPU Analysis

The Intel Arc A310 is based on the Xe-HPG architecture, with a DG2-128 chip manufactured on a 6 nm process by TSMC. It has 768 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 render output units. The GPU features 6 ray tracing cores, though its compute power is limited. The memory subsystem consists of 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, providing 124.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

The GPU’s clocks are fixed at 1750 MHz for both base and boost. The memory runs at 1937 MHz, translating to 15.5 Gbps effective. Its pixel rate is 28.00 GPixel/s and texture rate is 56.00 GTexel/s. The FP32 performance is 2.688 TFLOPS, with FP16 at 5.376 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio. The GPU has a TDP of 30 W and requires no external power connectors, with a suggested PSU of 200 W.

Benchmark scores show a weak performer. The PassMark G3D score of 5,433 places it in the 40th percentile, and its DirectX 12 score of 29 is very low. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 30,607 and Vulkan score of 28,964 are moderate for entry-level cards. The GPU’s nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650, scores 7,472, which is 1% lower than the A310’s 7,550. This puts the A310 on par with older budget cards.

For rendering, the GPU’s low FP32 and 4 GB VRAM limit its use to light workloads or 2D tasks. The 6 ray tracing cores are present but lack the compute power for practical ray tracing. The 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs support modern displays, but the GPU is end-of-life, with Battlemage as its successor. The 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die show a dense design, but the 64-bit memory bus severely restricts bandwidth.

Rate My PC: Intel Core i5-14490F + Intel Arc A310

Power Build

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core i5-14490F

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

Balance and Bottleneck

Benchmark Performance

FAQ

Usage Scenarios

CPU Analysis

Gaming Performance

Who Should Build It

Upgrade Path and Platform

Build Overview

GPU Analysis

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