SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core i5-14600K + Intel Arc A310E

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

94%

GPU

74%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core i5-14600K

48,618 Benchmark Score

Top 6% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

Intel Arc A310E

0 Benchmark Score

Top 26% 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 i5-14600K and Intel Arc A310E is an unusual pairing: a high-end 14-core desktop CPU with a low-profile, 75 W entry-level graphics card. The benchmark data for this combination is entirely estimated—the FACT PACK contains no measured FPS rows for this exact pair. All gaming and frame-rate discussion below is therefore framed as estimates derived from the component benchmark scores, not from direct testing. With that caveat clear, the data paints a picture of a system where the CPU vastly outclasses the GPU in raw compute, making the A310E the definitive limiting factor for any graphics-bound workload.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core i5-14600K is a Raptor Lake-R part built on Intel’s 10 nm process, with a die size of 257 mm². It packs 14 cores and 20 threads, a configuration that combines performance and efficiency cores for a blend of single-thread responsiveness and multi-thread throughput. The base clock sits at 3.50 GHz, with a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. This is a desktop-class processor with an unlocked multiplier (part number SRN43), meaning overclocking is supported—though the data does not quantify any overclocking headroom. It supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, and ECC memory is listed as supported, which is notable for workstation or small-server use. The integrated graphics is UHD Graphics 770, which provides a fallback display output but is not a gaming solution.

The benchmark results for the i5-14600K are strong across the board. In Cinebench R23, it scores 24,491 in multi-core and 2,064 in single-core. The Geekbench scores are 16,673 multi-core and 2,491 single-core. PassMark results show a single-thread score of 4,270, a multi-thread score of 38,682, and an average benchmark score of 48,618. The CPU’s percentile versus all CPUs is 90, meaning it outperforms 90% of all processors in the database. Its nearest rivals are close: the Intel Xeon Gold 5318H scores 48,698 (0.2% higher), the AMD EPYC 4345P scores 48,470 (0.3% lower), the Intel Core Ultra 5 245HX scores 48,287 (0.7% lower), and the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 scores 48,995 (0.8% higher). This places the i5-14600K squarely in a competitive band where small percentage differences separate it from its peers—essentially a statistical tie with all four rivals.

Real-world interpretation: the multi-core Cinebench R23 score of 24,491 indicates heavy multi-threaded workloads like video encoding, 3D rendering, and software compilation will run smoothly. The single-core score of 2,064 is equally important for everyday responsiveness, office tasks, and games that rely on one or two fast threads. The PassMark data compression score of 482,020 and floating-point math score of 92,794 further suggest strong performance in data-heavy and scientific tasks. The integer math score of 125,737 and extended instructions score of 28,546 hint at solid cryptography and SIMD workload capabilities. The CPU is not the bottleneck in this pairing; it has ample headroom for demanding applications, but the GPU will cap any visual output.

Balance and Bottleneck

The Core i5-14600K has an average benchmark score of 48,618 and a percentile of 90. The Arc A310E has a percentile of 50 among all GPUs, but its average benchmark score is 0—the FACT PACK lists no GPU benchmarks. This absence of GPU scores, combined with the lack of measured FPS data, means the balance assessment must rely on architectural and spec-level comparison. The CPU’s PassMark multi-thread score of 38,682 is an order of magnitude higher than what a 4 GB, 64-bit memory bus GPU could reasonably drive in most gaming scenarios. The A310E’s 3.072 TFLOPS FP32 performance and 124.0 GB/s memory bandwidth are entry-level figures. The CPU can feed frames far faster than the GPU can render them in modern games, making the GPU the hard limit for any resolution above 1080p or any title with moderate graphics settings.

For non-graphics workloads—like CPU-based video encoding, compilation, or spreadsheet calculations—the balance shifts entirely to the CPU. The i5-14600K’s Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 24,491 would handle such tasks without breaking a sweat, and the GPU would idle. The data shows no FPS scaling figures for this pair, so we cannot cite specific frame-rate bottlenecks. However, the percentile gap (90th for CPU, 50th for GPU) is the clearest evidence: the CPU sits at the top decile of all processors, while the GPU sits at the median. In any graphics-bound scenario, the GPU will be the limiting component; in CPU-bound productivity tasks, the GPU is irrelevant.

Gaming Performance

The FACT PACK contains no measured FPS data for this combination. The `measuredFpsUltraByGame` field is empty, and `dataIsMeasured` is false. Therefore, all gaming figures below are estimates derived from the CPU and GPU benchmark scores, not from direct testing. The Arc A310E has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 124.0 GB/s. It has 768 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. This is a low-power card (75 W TDP) designed for basic graphics output, not high-refresh gaming. At 1080p with ultra settings, the A310E would likely struggle to maintain playable frame rates in modern AAA titles, given its FP32 throughput of 3.072 TFLOPS and memory bandwidth under 125 GB/s. The CPU’s single-core score of 2,064 in Cinebench R23 would not be the constraint; the GPU would be.

At lower resolutions like 720p or with reduced graphical settings, the A310E could deliver playable performance in esports or older titles, but the data does not support specific numbers. The CPU’s PassMark single-thread score of 4,270 indicates it can handle high frame-rate scenarios if the GPU could keep up, but the A310E’s 16 ROPs and 32 GPixel/s pixel rate cap fill-rate-heavy scenes. For 1080p gaming, consider this an entry-level experience: playable in light titles, but not for high-refresh or high-detail gaming. At 1440p or 4K, the A310E would be severely underpowered. The 4 GB VRAM also limits texture quality in modern games, which frequently exceed that capacity. The data suggests this is a pairing for productivity or basic desktop use, not for serious gaming.

Who Should Build It

The i5-14600K + Arc A310E combination targets specific users where CPU compute matters more than graphics. The CPU’s 90th percentile ranking and 24,491 Cinebench R23 multi-core score make this a viable system for content creators who work primarily with CPU-based rendering or encoding, but who do not need high-end GPU acceleration. Software developers compiling large codebases would benefit from the 14 cores and 20 threads, and the PassMark integer math score of 125,737 supports heavy computation. Students in engineering or computer science fields would find the CPU powerful for simulations or data processing, while the GPU handles basic display output.

Small business workstations handling spreadsheets, databases, or office productivity suites would see the CPU’s single-thread score of 4,270 provide snappy responsiveness. The ECC memory support adds a layer of reliability for data-sensitive workloads, though the FACT PACK does not specify which memory types support ECC. Gamers at 720p or with low settings in esports titles might find the A310E adequate, but the 4 GB VRAM and 64-bit bus severely limit modern game performance. This is not a build for high-refresh 1080p gaming or above; it is a CPU-centric workstation with a basic GPU for display and light acceleration. The 75 W GPU TDP and 250 W suggested PSU indicate a low-power, compact build—ideal for office or lab environments where noise and heat are concerns.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: Not viable. The Arc A310E’s 3.072 TFLOPS and 124 GB/s bandwidth cannot sustain high frame rates at any resolution above 720p in modern titles. The CPU could, but the GPU caps everything.

Streaming: The CPU’s 20 threads and integrated UHD Graphics 770 could handle software encoding for a stream, but the A310E would struggle to render the game simultaneously. The 4 GB VRAM limits detail settings, so streaming would require low graphical presets.

Video editing: The i5-14600K’s Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 24,491 provides strong CPU-based encoding and timeline performance. The A310E’s 6 RT cores and 768 shading units offer some acceleration, but the 4 GB VRAM limits preview resolution and effects. Basic 1080p editing is feasible; 4K editing would be constrained by the GPU.

3D rendering: CPU rendering in software would excel, given the 14 cores and PassMark multi-thread score of 38,682. GPU-accelerated rendering in Blender or similar would be limited by the A310E’s 3.072 TFLOPS, which is entry-level. Expect long render times for complex scenes.

Software development: Excellent. The 14 cores and 20 threads handle parallel builds efficiently, and the PassMark data compression score of 482,020 indicates fast file operations. The GPU is sufficient for multiple displays and IDE rendering.

Student and office work: Overkill in CPU power, but the GPU is sufficient for document editing, web browsing, and spreadsheet analysis. The 250 W suggested PSU keeps the system quiet and efficient. The ECC memory support is a bonus for data integrity in long-running tasks.

GPU Analysis

The Intel Arc A310E is a DG2-128 chip based on the Xe-HPG architecture, built on TSMC’s 6 nm process. It contains 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, with a transistor density of 45.9M per mm². The GPU is clocked at a fixed 2000 MHz for both base and boost, with memory running at 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective). It has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 124.0 GB/s. The compute configuration includes 768 shading units, 32 TMUs, 16 ROPs, and 6 RT cores. Pixel rate is 32.00 GPixel/s, texture rate is 64.00 GTexel/s, and FP32 performance is 3.072 TFLOPS. FP16 performance is 6.144 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio).

This is an entry-level, low-power part with a 75 W TDP, single-slot design, and no power connectors. It draws power solely from the PCIe slot. It supports PCIe 4.0 x8 interface and has four mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs, which is unusual for the class. API support includes DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, meaning it supports modern rendering features like ray tracing (6 RT cores) and mesh shaders. However, the raw throughput is limited. The GPU’s percentile is 50, placing it at the median of all GPUs, but the average benchmark score is 0, indicating no benchmark data was captured. The production status is end-of-life, with the predecessor being Xe Graphics and the successor being Battlemage.

For rendering, the A310E is best suited for basic 2D acceleration, video decode, and light 3D work. The 4 GB VRAM is a hard constraint for modern games or GPU rendering, as many titles exceed 4 GB at 1080p with high textures. The 124 GB/s bandwidth further limits performance in bandwidth-sensitive tasks. The 6 RT cores provide ray tracing capability, but with only 3.072 TFLOPS FP32, ray tracing performance would be very low. This is not a card for serious rendering; it is a display adapter with some compute capability. The 250 W suggested PSU indicates negligible system power draw, making it suitable for low-power builds.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU’s benchmark scores are comprehensive and strong. Cinebench R15 scores are 3,640 multi-core and 297 single-core. Cinebench R20 scores are 13,709 multi-core and 1,935 single-core. Cinebench R23 scores are 24,491 multi-core and 2,064 single-core. Geekbench scores are 16,673 multi-core and 2,491 single-core. PassMark scores include data compression at 482,020, data encryption at 27,533, extended instructions at 28,546, find prime numbers at 162, floating-point math at 92,794, integer math at 125,737, multi-thread at 38,682, physics at 2,473, random string sorting at 51,949, and single-thread at 4,270. The average benchmark score is 48,618, with a percentile of 90. Its nearest rivals are all within 1%: the Xeon Gold 5318H is 0.2% higher, the EPYC 4345P is 0.3% lower, the Core Ultra 5 245HX is 0.7% lower, and the Core Ultra 5 245 is 0.8% higher.

The GPU has no benchmark scores listed. Its average benchmark score is 0, and its percentile is 50. The nearestRivals array is empty for the GPU. The combined percentile for the build is 70, reflecting the strong CPU and mid-tier GPU. The combined picture is a system that excels in CPU-bound tasks but is ordinary in graphics performance. The CPU’s 90th percentile ranking means it outperforms 90% of processors, while the GPU’s 50th percentile means it is exactly average. This asymmetry defines the build: compute-heavy, graphics-light. The pair rank by FPS is null, confirming no FPS data exists. Any gaming claim must be treated as an estimate, not a measurement.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The CPU uses Intel Socket 1700, which supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in dual-channel mode. This gives builders flexibility on memory choice, though the FACT PACK does not specify which generations are supported on which chipsets. The CPU provides PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes for the CPU, meaning a future high-end GPU could be installed without changing the motherboard, provided the board supports Gen 5. The CPU’s TDP is 125 W, and the power supply requirement is not stated for the CPU alone, but the GPU’s suggested PSU is 250 W. The GPU has no power connectors and draws only 75 W, so the current system is very low power.

A sensible next upgrade would be a more powerful GPU. The CPU’s PCIe Gen 5 x16 interface and 14 cores can easily drive a mid-range or high-end graphics card. The 125 W TDP leaves thermal headroom for a larger cooler, but the FACT PACK does not specify cooler requirements. The GPU’s end-of-life status and 4 GB VRAM are the primary bottlenecks; replacing it with a card that has more VRAM and bandwidth would unlock the CPU’s gaming potential. The motherboard socket (LGA 1700) supports 14th Gen, but future generations may require a new board. Memory support for both DDR4 and DDR5 means a DDR4 build could be upgraded to DDR5 only by changing the motherboard. The ECC support is a plus for stability. The power supply headroom is substantial: the A310E’s 250 W suggested PSU is far below what a high-end GPU would need, so a PSU upgrade would accompany a GPU upgrade.

FAQ

Q: Does the Core i5-14600K support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the FACT PACK lists `eccMemory: true`. However, it does not specify whether ECC is supported on both DDR4 and DDR5, so motherboard compatibility must be verified by the builder.

Q: What is the CPU’s average benchmark score and percentile?

A: The average benchmark score is 48,618, and the percentile versus all CPUs is 90, meaning it outperforms 90% of all processors in the database.

Q: Is the Arc A310E a good GPU for modern gaming?

A: No. It has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus with 124 GB/s bandwidth, and 3.072 TFLOPS FP32. The 4 GB VRAM and low bandwidth are inadequate for modern games at 1080p with high settings.

Q: What is the GPU’s TDP and power connector requirement?

A: The GPU TDP is 75 W, and it has no power connectors, drawing all power from the PCIe slot. The suggested PSU is 250 W.

Q: How does the i5-14600K compare to its nearest rivals?

A: It is statistically tied with all four: the Intel Xeon Gold 5318H is 0.2% higher, the AMD EPYC 4345P is 0.3% lower, the Intel Core Ultra 5 245HX is 0.7% lower, and the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 is 0.8% higher.

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

A: The socket is Intel Socket 1700, and the CPU provides PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes.

Q: Is there any measured FPS data for this CPU-GPU combination?

A: No. The FACT PACK contains no measured FPS rows, and `dataIsMeasured` is false. All gaming performance is estimated from the component benchmark scores.

Q: What is the GPU’s production status?

A: The production status is end-of-life, with the predecessor being Xe Graphics and the successor being Battlemage.

Rate My PC: Intel Core i5-14600K + Intel Arc A310E

Power Build

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core i5-14600K

Intel Arc A310E

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

CPU Analysis

Balance and Bottleneck

Gaming Performance

Who Should Build It

Usage Scenarios

GPU Analysis

Benchmark Performance

Upgrade Path and Platform

FAQ

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