SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core i5-14501E + NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation

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)

▼

70 Score

Top 30% Ranking

70 / 100

HIGH-END

Power Build

Top 30% of systems. Excellent for 1440p Ultra or 4K High gaming.

1440p Ultra4K High

System Balance Analysis

CPU vs GPU performance ratio

CPU Bottleneck

CPU

41%

GPU

99%

Your CPU is limiting system performance. Consider upgrading to a faster processor to better utilize your GPU.

PROCESSOR

Intel Core i5-14501E

0 Benchmark Score

Top 59% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation

135,218 Benchmark Score

Top 1% 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.

Bottleneck Detected

CPU Bottleneck - Upgrading the weaker component will improve overall performance.

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 i5-14501E and NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation pairing represents a desktop workstation configuration with a significant performance disparity between its components. The data shows a CPU that sits at the 50th percentile among all processors, while the GPU ranks at the 95th percentile among all graphics cards, indicating a system designed for graphics-heavy tasks rather than CPU-bound workloads. The combined percentile for this pairing is 73, positioning this build in the upper-midrange tier of desktop systems, but the specific strengths and weaknesses require a detailed examination of the benchmark data and architectural specifications.

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

The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation is built on the AD104 chip using a 5 nm process at TSMC, containing 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die. The GPU operates with a base clock of 1500 MHz and a boost clock of 2175 MHz, which is relatively modest for a high-end card, but the architecture’s efficiency compensates for the clock speeds. The memory subsystem is notable for its capacity: 20 GB of GDDR6 on a 160-bit bus, delivering 360.0 GB/s of bandwidth. This configuration is unusual in that it prioritizes capacity over sheer bandwidth, making it suitable for large datasets and complex scenes rather than raw frame throughput.

The RTX 4000 Ada Generation includes 6144 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operation pipelines. The ray tracing hardware consists of 48 RT cores, while the tensor hardware includes 192 tensor cores, which are essential for AI-accelerated workflows and DLSS-based rendering techniques. The pixel rate is 139.2 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 417.6 GTexel/s, indicating strong fill-rate capabilities for high-resolution rendering. The FP32 performance is rated at 26.73 TFLOPS, with FP16 performance matching at 26.73 TFLOPS (1:1), which is particularly relevant for workloads that leverage mixed-precision computing.

The benchmark scores for this GPU are derived from Geekbench tests, with an OpenCL score of 146593 and a Vulkan score of 123842. The average benchmark score of 135218 places it at the 95th percentile of all GPUs, which is exceptionally high. The nearest rivals provide context: the NVIDIA A10M scores 135230 with a delta of 0%, meaning the RTX 4000 Ada Generation is effectively tied with it. The AMD Radeon PRO W6800 scores 135396, which is 0.1% higher, and the AMD Radeon Pro W6800X Duo scores 135774, 0.4% higher. The AMD Radeon PRO V620 scores 136472, which is 0.9% higher. These deltas are minuscule, suggesting that the RTX 4000 Ada Generation is performance-competitive with its immediate workstation rivals, though not leading the pack.

For rendering workloads, the high VRAM capacity and the balance of RT and tensor cores make this GPU suitable for complex 3D scenes, AI denoising, and real-time ray tracing. The 20 GB frame buffer is a critical advantage for large textures and multi-model assemblies, while the 360.0 GB/s bandwidth ensures data can be fed to the cores without becoming a bottleneck. The Vulkan score of 123842 is 15.5% lower than the OpenCL score, which may indicate some driver-level optimization differences between the two APIs, but both scores are robust enough to support demanding graphics applications.

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)

The FACT PACK contains no measured FPS data for this exact CPU-GPU combination, and the `dataIsMeasured` field is false. Therefore, all frame rate discussions are estimates based on the benchmark scores and architectural characteristics, not empirical results. The gaming performance of this system would be dominated by the GPU, given its 95th percentile ranking, but the CPU’s 50th percentile position could limit frame rates in CPU-bound scenarios.

At 1080p resolution with ultra settings, the RTX 4000 Ada Generation’s raw compute power and high pixel rate would likely produce very high frame rates in most titles, but the CPU’s six cores and 12 threads might become a limiting factor in games that are heavily dependent on single-thread performance. The boost clock of 5.20 GHz on the i5-14501E is competitive, but the 50th percentile ranking suggests that it may not sustain the highest frame rates in the most demanding esports or simulation titles.

At 1440p and 4K resolutions, the GPU’s advantage becomes more pronounced, as the rendering load shifts from the CPU to the GPU. The 20 GB VRAM would allow for high-resolution textures without memory pressure, and the 360.0 GB/s bandwidth is sufficient for 4K textures and effects. The FP32 performance of 26.73 TFLOPS indicates strong fill-rate capabilities, which translates to smooth frame rates in graphically intensive games. However, without measured data, these are qualitative estimates; the actual FPS would depend on specific game optimizations and driver maturity.

For ray tracing, the 48 RT cores would provide hardware acceleration, but the gaming performance would be more modest compared to dedicated gaming GPUs in the same price tier, as the RTX 4000 Ada Generation is a workstation card. The Vulkan score of 123842 suggests that Vulkan-based titles would perform well, but the OpenCL score of 146593 is higher, indicating that compute-heavy workloads are the primary strength. In summary, this system would be capable of high-refresh gaming at 1440p and solid 4K performance, but the lack of measured FPS data means these are informed estimates rather than verified figures.

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

The GPU benchmark data is explicit: the RTX 4000 Ada Generation achieves a Geekbench OpenCL score of 146593 and a Vulkan score of 123842, with an average benchmark score of 135218. This places the GPU at the 95th percentile of all GPUs, which is a strong indicator of its high-end positioning. The nearest rivals show a tight cluster: the NVIDIA A10M is exactly tied at 135230 with a 0% delta, the AMD Radeon PRO W6800 is 0.1% higher, the AMD Radeon Pro W6800X Duo is 0.4% higher, and the AMD Radeon PRO V620 is 0.9% higher. This means the RTX 4000 Ada Generation is within 1% of its closest competitors, making it a highly competitive workstation GPU.

The CPU presents a different picture. The FACT PACK lists no benchmark scores for the Intel Core i5-14501E, and its `avgBenchmarkScore` is 0. The percentile versus all CPUs is 50, which places it squarely in the middle of the performance distribution. This is a stark contrast to the GPU’s 95th percentile, indicating that the CPU is not the primary driver of this system’s performance. The combined percentile for the pairing is 73, which is a weighted average that reflects the GPU’s dominance.

The combined picture is one of imbalance. The GPU is a top-tier workstation part, while the CPU is a mainstream mid-range processor. This means that in GPU-bound workloads such as 3D rendering, video encoding, and AI inference, the system will perform exceptionally well, likely at the level of systems costing significantly more. However, in CPU-bound tasks such as software compilation, physics simulations, or database operations, the system will perform at a mid-range level, potentially leaving the GPU underutilized. The 73rd combined percentile reflects this duality: the system is better than average overall, but its performance is not uniform across all workload types.

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 95th percentile ranking and 26.73 TFLOPS FP32 performance would support high frame rates at 1440p and playable frame rates at 4K, but the CPU’s 50th percentile may cap frame rates in CPU-bound titles. The 5.20 GHz boost clock helps, but the six cores and 12 threads are adequate rather than exceptional, so expect good but not elite gaming performance.

Streaming: The 192 tensor cores on the GPU enable hardware-accelerated encoding and AI-enhanced streaming features, while the CPU’s 12 threads can handle encoding overhead. The 20 GB VRAM provides ample headroom for game capture buffers, and the 360.0 GB/s bandwidth ensures smooth data transfer. This system would be well-suited for streaming at high quality settings, though the CPU’s mid-range position may require some quality adjustments in CPU-intensive games.

Video editing: The GPU’s 20 GB VRAM and 26.73 TFLOPS compute power are ideal for 4K and 8K video editing, as the large frame buffer can hold multiple high-resolution streams. The OpenCL score of 146593 indicates strong compute performance for effects and color grading. The CPU’s 50th percentile is sufficient for timeline editing and export tasks, but the GPU will carry the bulk of the processing load.

3D rendering: This is the strongest scenario for this system. The GPU’s 95th percentile ranking, combined with 48 RT cores and 192 tensor cores, makes it a formidable rendering engine. The 20 GB VRAM allows for large scenes and complex textures, and the FP32 performance of 26.73 TFLOPS accelerates ray tracing and path tracing. The CPU’s role in scene preparation and physics simulation is adequate, but the GPU is the clear workhorse.

Software development: The CPU’s 50th percentile ranking and 12 threads are adequate for code compilation, but not exceptional. The 5.20 GHz boost clock helps with single-threaded build steps, but large multi-threaded compilations may take longer than on higher-end CPUs. The GPU’s compute power would accelerate machine learning model training and inference, making this a capable development machine for AI-focused work.

Student and office work: The CPU’s 65 W TDP and 6 cores provide efficient performance for everyday tasks, while the GPU’s power is wasted on typical office workloads. The 20 GB VRAM is overkill for document editing or web browsing, but the system would handle any academic software with ease. The 50th percentile CPU ranking means it is not a top performer, but it is more than sufficient for standard productivity.

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

The data clearly indicates that the CPU is the primary bottleneck in this system. The CPU’s 50th percentile ranking versus the GPU’s 95th percentile creates a significant imbalance that manifests differently across workloads. In GPU-bound tasks such as 3D rendering and video encoding, the GPU is the limiting factor, but it operates at such a high level that the CPU’s mid-range performance is unlikely to hinder overall throughput. For example, in a ray tracing render, the GPU’s 48 RT cores and 26.73 TFLOPS would process frames faster than the CPU could prepare scene data, but the CPU’s 5.20 GHz boost clock and 12 threads would still keep up with the preparation tasks.

In CPU-bound workloads, the bottleneck is more pronounced. Software compilation, physics simulations, and single-threaded applications would be limited by the CPU’s 50th percentile performance. The GPU would be underutilized in these scenarios, as its compute power would sit idle while the CPU grinds through tasks. This is a common issue with pairing a high-end GPU with a mid-range CPU, and the data suggests that users should prioritize CPU-intensive tasks or accept the imbalance.

For gaming, the FPS scaling would show diminishing returns at lower resolutions. At 1080p, the CPU’s 50th percentile ranking would likely limit frame rates in many titles, as the CPU must process game logic and physics before the GPU can render frames. At 1440p and 4K, the GPU becomes the limiting factor, and the system’s performance would scale more favorably with the GPU’s 95th percentile ranking. The lack of measured FPS data means this is an inference from the percentile positions, but the pattern is consistent with typical CPU-GPU interactions.

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 system is best suited for professionals who prioritize GPU compute performance over CPU throughput. Content creators working with 3D rendering, video editing, and AI applications would benefit most from the RTX 4000 Ada Generation’s 95th percentile ranking, 20 GB VRAM, and 26.73 TFLOPS FP32 performance. The GPU’s 192 tensor cores would accelerate machine learning workloads, making this an attractive option for data scientists and AI researchers who need both compute power and memory capacity.

Gamers at 1440p and 4K resolutions would also find this system capable, as the GPU’s high percentile ranking and substantial VRAM would support high-quality settings. However, the CPU’s 50th percentile means that esports titles at 1080p might not achieve the highest refresh rates, so competitive gamers seeking 360 Hz or 500 Hz displays would be better served by a faster CPU. For casual and AAA gaming at higher resolutions, this system would deliver a smooth experience, but the workstation GPU may lack the driver optimizations that dedicated gaming cards receive.

Developers working on AI or graphics-intensive applications would appreciate the GPU’s compute capabilities, but the CPU’s 12 threads and 50th percentile ranking may limit compilation speed. Students and small business users would find the system overkill for their needs, as the GPU’s power would be wasted on word processing or spreadsheet tasks. The 65 W TDP of the CPU and the 130 W TDP of the GPU mean the system is relatively power-efficient, which could be a consideration for small business workstations that run continuously.

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

The Intel Core i5-14501E is a 6-core, 12-thread processor based on the Raptor Lake architecture, specifically the Raptor Lake-R refresh. It operates with a base clock of 3.30 GHz and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz, which is a significant boost headroom that benefits single-threaded workloads. The CPU is built on Intel’s 10 nm process node with a die size of 215 mm². The cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache, which is a substantial amount for a mid-range processor and helps with data-heavy workloads.

The CPU supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, and it supports ECC memory, which is unusual for a consumer-grade processor and adds reliability for workstation use. The integrated graphics are UHD Graphics 770, which is sufficient for basic display output but not for gaming or compute. The PCIe support is Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU, providing high bandwidth for the GPU and NVMe storage. The processor is based on the LGA 1700 socket and has a TDP of 65 W, which is efficient for a desktop part.

The benchmark scores for the CPU are not listed in the FACT PACK, and the average benchmark score is 0, so the 50th percentile ranking is the only performance indicator. This ranking suggests that the CPU is average compared to all CPUs, meaning it would handle everyday tasks with ease but would not be a leader in multi-threaded workloads. The 12 threads are adequate for most productivity applications, and the 5.20 GHz boost clock would provide snappy performance in single-threaded tasks like web browsing and office applications. However, for heavy multi-threaded workloads like 3D rendering or video encoding, the CPU would lag behind higher-end processors with more cores and threads.

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

The platform is based on the Intel Socket 1700, which supports 12th, 13th, and 14th generation Core processors. The CPU’s TDP is 65 W, and the GPU’s TDP is 130 W, with a suggested PSU of 300 W for the GPU alone. This means a system with a 500 W or 550 W PSU would have ample headroom, and a 650 W PSU would provide significant overhead for future upgrades. The total system power draw is modest, which is a benefit for smaller form factor builds or those focused on energy efficiency.

The motherboard would need to support both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, as the CPU supports both types. Users could choose to upgrade from DDR4 to DDR5 for improved memory bandwidth, though the CPU’s dual-channel memory bus means the gains would be moderate. The PCIe Gen 5 support from the CPU provides 16 lanes, which is sufficient for the GPU’s PCIe 4.0 x16 interface, and leaves headroom for future GPUs that may use PCIe 5.0.

A sensible next upgrade would be to replace the CPU with a higher-end 14th generation processor, such as an i7 or i9 with more cores and threads, to address the CPU bottleneck. This would require a motherboard with a robust VRM design and adequate cooling, but the LGA 1700 socket ensures compatibility. Alternatively, users could upgrade the GPU to a newer generation, but the RTX 4000 Ada Generation is already at the 95th percentile, so the gains would be incremental. The 20 GB VRAM is generous, and the 360.0 GB/s bandwidth is sufficient for most workloads, so the GPU is likely to remain relevant for several years.

FAQ

Q: What is the GPU’s benchmark score and percentile ranking?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation has an average benchmark score of 135218, with a Geekbench OpenCL score of 146593 and a Vulkan score of 123842. It ranks at the 95th percentile of all GPUs.

Q: How does the CPU compare to the GPU in terms of performance?

A: The Intel Core i5-14501E ranks at the 50th percentile of all CPUs, while the GPU ranks at the 95th percentile. This indicates a significant performance disparity, with the GPU being far more capable than the CPU.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the limiting factor in gaming?

A: At lower resolutions like 1080p, the CPU’s 50th percentile ranking is likely to limit frame rates. At higher resolutions like 1440p and 4K, the GPU becomes the limiting factor, and its 95th percentile ranking would support high frame rates.

Q: What memory types does the CPU support?

A: The Intel Core i5-14501E supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration. It also supports ECC memory, which is beneficial for workstation reliability.

Q: What is the GPU’s VRAM capacity and bandwidth?

A: The RTX 4000 Ada Generation has 20 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 160-bit bus, delivering 360.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: What is the suggested PSU for this GPU?

A: The suggested PSU for the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation is 300 W, and the GPU itself has a TDP of 130 W.

Q: Are there any measured FPS results for this system?

A: No, the FACT PACK contains no measured FPS data for this exact CPU-GPU combination. All frame rate discussions are estimates based on benchmark scores.

Build Overview

This build pairs the Intel Core i5-14501E with the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation in a desktop configuration. The GPU is the dominant component, with a 95th percentile ranking and an average benchmark score of 135218, making it a top-tier workstation card. The CPU is a mid-range processor at the 50th percentile, with 6 cores and 12 threads, which is adequate for most tasks but not exceptional. The combined percentile for the pairing is 73, indicating an overall upper-midrange system that excels in GPU-bound workloads like 3D rendering, video editing, and AI inference, while being more modest in CPU-bound tasks like software compilation and physics simulation. The system is best suited for professionals who need high-end graphics compute power and are willing to accept a CPU that may not fully keep pace with the GPU’s capabilities.

Rate My PC: Intel Core i5-14501E + NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation

Power Build

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core i5-14501E

NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation

Market Position

Game Performance Benchmarks

Cyberpunk 2077

Red Dead Redemption 2

Microsoft Flight Simulator

Control

Call of Duty: Warzone

Fortnite

Performance Insights

Strong Performance

Bottleneck Detected

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

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)

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

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

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

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

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

FAQ

Build Overview

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