SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core i7-13650HX + NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q

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)

▼

82 Score

Top 18% Ranking

82 / 100

HIGH-END

Power Build

Top 18% 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

74%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core i7-13650HX

33,089 Benchmark Score

Top 10% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q

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

This is a laptop build pairing the Intel Core i7-13650HX with the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q. The CPU is a 14-core, 20-thread Raptor Lake-HX part with a 2.60 GHz base clock and 4.90 GHz boost clock, while the GPU is a Turing-generation professional mobile card with 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus. The combined percentile for this pairing sits at 67, meaning it outperforms roughly two-thirds of all tested builds in the database. No measured FPS rows exist for this exact combination, so all frame rate discussions in this analysis are estimated from the individual benchmark scores of the CPU and GPU.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core i7-13650HX is built on the Raptor Lake architecture and manufactured on Intel’s 10 nm process. It contains 14 cores with 20 threads, a configuration that splits between performance and efficiency cores to balance throughput with power draw. The base clock is 2.60 GHz, boosting up to 4.90 GHz under load. Cache is arranged as 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. The CPU supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory on a dual-channel bus, and it includes ECC memory support, which is notable for workstation reliability. The socket is Intel BGA 1964, making this a soldered mobile part, not a socketed desktop CPU.

The benchmark data shows a strong multi-threaded performer. In Cinebench R23, the CPU scores 24,580 in multicore and 3,470 in single-core. The single-core score is competitive for a mobile part, indicating good responsiveness in lightly-threaded tasks such as web browsing, office documents, and legacy applications. The multicore score, however, is where the 14-core design pays off. For workloads that scale across threads — video encoding, 3D rendering, compilation, or scientific simulations — this CPU delivers roughly 7 times the multicore score of its single-core result, demonstrating excellent parallel scaling. Cinebench R20 shows a similar pattern: 10,731 multicore versus 1,514 single-core.

PassMark results reinforce the picture. The multithread score is 30,704, with integer math at 102,929 and floating-point math at 75,643. Data compression scores 383,943, while encryption hits 21,649. Extended instructions score 23,146, which matters for AVX-512-style workloads if the software uses them. The single-thread PassMark score is 3,769, consistent with the Cinebench single-core numbers. The average benchmark score across all tests is 33,089, placing this CPU in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs in the database.

Relative to its nearest rivals, the i7-13650HX is essentially tied with the AMD Ryzen 7 8700G (deltaPct 0), the AMD Ryzen 7 7745HX (deltaPct 0), and the AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D (deltaPct 0). It is only 0.3% behind the AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 6950H. This means the CPU is in a dense performance cluster where no single part holds a decisive advantage. Real-world differences between these chips will be within noise for most applications, though the i7-13650HX’s 14 cores give it an edge in heavily threaded tasks where core count directly translates to throughput.

GPU Analysis

The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q is a Turing-architecture mobile GPU built on TSMC’s 12 nm process. The chip is TU104, containing 13,600 million transistors on a 545 mm² die. It has 3,072 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operation pipelines. The GPU includes 48 RT cores and 384 tensor cores, providing hardware acceleration for ray tracing and AI inference respectively. Clock speeds are conservative for a Max-Q design: base is 600 MHz, boost is 1,350 MHz. Memory is 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 384.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock is 1,500 MHz, translating to 12 Gbps effective.

The performance numbers are modest by modern standards. FP32 throughput is 8.294 TFLOPS, with FP16 at 16.59 TFLOPS via a 2:1 ratio. Pixel rate is 86.40 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 259.2 GTexel/s. The GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, making it compatible with current APIs. The bus interface is PCIe 3.0 x16, which is older than the PCIe Gen 5 available on the CPU, but for most GPU workloads the bandwidth difference is not a primary bottleneck. The TDP is 80 W, a low value that reflects the Max-Q power-saving design. The GPU is listed as end-of-life, released in 2019, with a predecessor of Quadro Pascal-M and a successor of Ampere-MW.

The GPU benchmarks array is empty, and the percentile is 50, meaning it sits exactly at the median of all GPUs. The average benchmark score is zero, so there are no computed performance averages to reference. The lack of measured FPS data for this pairing means we cannot cite specific frame rates. However, the specifications indicate a GPU designed for professional rendering work rather than high-end gaming. The 16 GB VRAM is large for a mobile GPU from its era, suited for large textures, complex 3D scenes, or deep learning models that need memory capacity. The RT cores and tensor cores provide hardware support for ray-traced rendering and AI-based denoising, common in DCC applications like Blender or Autodesk tools. The 384.0 GB/s bandwidth is adequate for 1440p asset streaming but may limit 4K texture-heavy scenarios.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU delivers strong numbers across the board. In 3DMark, the single-thread score is 1,015, scaling to 1,988 for 2 threads, 3,698 for 4 threads, 5,871 for 8 threads, 8,060 for 16 threads, and 8,741 at max threads. This scaling curve shows near-linear gains up to 8 threads, then diminishing returns as the 16-thread mark approaches the physical core limit. Cinebench R15 scores are 2,477 multicore and 349 single-core. The CPU’s average benchmark score is 33,089, placing it in the 83rd percentile. The nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen 7 8700G, Ryzen 7 7745HX, and Ryzen 7 7800X3D, all with a deltaPct of 0, plus the Ryzen 9 PRO 6950H at -0.3%.

The GPU has no benchmark entries, so no scores exist to compare. Its 50th percentile rank is an aggregate position, but without specific test results, the GPU’s performance cannot be quantified beyond its specifications. The combined percentile for the build is 67, indicating that this pairing outperforms 67% of all builds in the database, but the CPU is the clear driver of that result given its 83rd percentile standing.

The combined picture is one of a CPU-heavy system. The CPU is a top-tier mobile processor for its generation, while the GPU is a mid-tier professional card. In tasks like CPU-bound compilation, data processing, or physics simulation, this build will feel fast. In GPU-bound rendering or gaming, the GPU will limit overall throughput. The 67th percentile combined rank reflects this imbalance: the build is above average but not elite, with the CPU dragging the score upward and the GPU pulling it down.

Balance and Bottleneck

The data shows a clear imbalance. The CPU sits in the 83rd percentile, while the GPU is at the 50th percentile. This means the CPU is approximately 33 percentile points stronger than the GPU relative to their respective pools. In workload terms, the CPU will rarely be the limiting factor. For tasks like 3D rendering that use both CPU and GPU, the GPU’s 8.294 TFLOPS FP32 performance will cap throughput long before the CPU’s Cinebench R23 multicore score of 24,580 becomes a constraint.

In gaming, the GPU is almost always the bottleneck. The CPU’s single-thread score of 1,015 in 3DMark is sufficient to feed most games at high frame rates, but the GPU’s 80 W TDP and 1,350 MHz boost clock limit its ability to push high resolutions. At 1080p, the CPU may still have headroom, but at 1440p or 4K, the GPU will saturate first. The 16 GB VRAM and 384.0 GB/s bandwidth are generous, but the raw shading power is not high. For professional workloads like ray-traced rendering, the 48 RT cores provide acceleration, but the low clock speeds mean each RT core is slower than newer designs.

FPS scaling is not measured for this build, but the pattern is predictable. In CPU-light games, the GPU will set the frame ceiling. In CPU-heavy simulations or strategy games, the CPU’s 14 cores will help maintain frame pacing, but the GPU will still determine the final output. The balance is acceptable for a workstation that occasionally games, but for a dedicated gaming machine, the GPU is underpowered relative to the CPU.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The CPU uses Intel BGA 1964, a soldered mobile socket. This means the CPU cannot be upgraded without replacing the entire motherboard, which in a laptop is impractical. The GPU is also soldered, so no discrete GPU upgrade is possible. The platform is therefore closed; users cannot swap components. Memory support includes DDR4 and DDR5, dual-channel, which allows for a memory upgrade if the laptop has accessible SODIMM slots. ECC memory support is a plus for workstation stability, though it depends on the laptop’s BIOS implementation.

PCIe connectivity is Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU. This is a forward-looking feature, but the GPU only uses PCIe 3.0 x16, so current PCIe bandwidth is underutilized. Future external GPU enclosures might benefit from the Gen 5 lanes, but that is speculative. The TDP is 55 W for the CPU and 80 W for the GPU, totaling 135 W for the compute components. The suggested PSU is null, meaning no specific power supply recommendation exists in the data. For a laptop, the power adapter must handle the combined load, but no wattage figure is provided. The GPU’s power connectors are listed as “None,” which is expected for a Max-Q mobile design that draws power from the motherboard.

A sensible next upgrade would be adding more memory if the laptop supports it, moving from a base configuration to 32 GB or 64 GB to support larger datasets. Storage upgrades are also possible, but the fact pack does not list storage specifications. The platform is otherwise static, so users should buy a laptop with the maximum RAM and storage they can afford at purchase time.

Who Should Build It

This pairing targets users who need strong CPU throughput in a mobile form factor. Content creators who work with video editing or 3D modeling will benefit from the CPU’s 14 cores and Cinebench R23 multicore score of 24,580. The GPU’s 16 GB VRAM supports large scene files and high-resolution textures, making it suitable for 3D rendering in Blender or Maya, though the rendering speed will be moderate. Software developers compiling large codebases will see fast build times due to the high multithreaded PassMark score of 30,704. Data scientists running machine learning training that uses tensor cores will have access to 384 tensor cores for accelerated inference, though the 12 nm process limits efficiency.

Students in engineering or computer science programs will find the CPU capable of running simulations and compilers, while the GPU handles CAD visualization. Small business workstations that need ECC memory support and professional drivers from the Quadro line will appreciate the stability. Gamers are a secondary audience, as the GPU’s 50th percentile rank means it is average for gaming, but the CPU will handle modern titles at medium settings. The build is not ideal for high-refresh gaming at 1440p or 4K, but it is a competent all-rounder for mixed workloads.

Gaming Performance

No measured FPS data exists for this CPU+GPU combination. The dataIsMeasured field is false, and the measuredFpsUltraByGame object is empty. Therefore, all frame rate figures below are estimates based on the CPU’s and GPU’s benchmark scores and specifications, not actual test results. These estimates should be treated as approximations.

At 1080p with ultra settings, the GPU’s 8.294 TFLOPS FP32 performance suggests it can handle older titles at 60 FPS, but modern AAA games may drop to 40-50 FPS. The CPU’s 3DMark single-thread score of 1,015 is sufficient for most game engines, so the GPU will be the primary limiter. At 1440p, the GPU’s 384.0 GB/s bandwidth and 16 GB VRAM are adequate for textures, but the shading power is insufficient for high frame rates; expect 30-45 FPS in demanding titles. At 4K, the GPU will struggle, likely producing 20-30 FPS in recent releases, making it only playable in less demanding games or at reduced settings.

The 48 RT cores enable ray tracing, but the low boost clock of 1,350 MHz means ray-traced scenes will be heavy. DLSS is not mentioned in the fact pack, so no upscaling advantage can be cited. For esports titles like CS:GO or Valorant, the CPU’s strong single-thread performance could push frame rates above 144 FPS at 1080p, but the GPU may cap at 120 FPS in some cases. Overall, this is a 1080p gaming machine for medium-to-high settings, not a high-refresh or 4K gaming rig.

Build Overview

This is a laptop-class build (buildClass: “laptop”) pairing the Intel Core i7-13650HX with the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q. The CPU is a 14-core, 20-thread Raptor Lake-HX processor with a 4.90 GHz boost clock, placing it in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs. The GPU is a Turing-based professional mobile card with 16 GB GDDR6 memory and a 50th percentile rank. The combined percentile is 67, indicating this build outperforms 67% of all tested systems. The CPU is the dominant component, while the GPU is average. This is a workstation-oriented laptop that can handle gaming at moderate settings, but it is not a specialized gaming or workstation machine.

FAQ

Q: What is the core and thread count of the Intel Core i7-13650HX?

A: The CPU has 14 cores and 20 threads, with a base clock of 2.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz.

Q: How much VRAM does the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q have?

A: The GPU has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 384.0 GB/s.

Q: What is the combined percentile of this build?

A: The combined percentile is 67, meaning it outperforms 67% of all builds in the database.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The CPU’s average benchmark score is 33,089, with a deltaPct of 0 compared to the AMD Ryzen 7 8700G, Ryzen 7 7745HX, and Ryzen 7 7800X3D, and -0.3% compared to the Ryzen 9 PRO 6950H.

Q: Does the GPU support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the GPU has 48 RT cores and 384 tensor cores, providing hardware acceleration for ray tracing and AI workloads.

Q: What memory types does the CPU support?

A: The CPU supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory on a dual-channel bus, and it includes ECC memory support.

Q: Is there measured FPS data for this build?

A: No, the fact pack contains no measured FPS rows for this exact combination, so all frame rate figures in this analysis are estimates from benchmark scores.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: The CPU’s single-thread 3DMark score of 1,015 can drive high frame rates in CPU-light games, but the GPU’s 50th percentile rank limits performance. At 1080p, older titles may exceed 100 FPS, but modern AAA games will likely stay below 60 FPS at ultra settings. This build is not suitable for 1440p or 4K high-refresh gaming.

Streaming: The CPU’s 14 cores and 20 threads provide enough headroom for software encoding while gaming, with Cinebench R23 multicore score of 24,580 indicating robust parallel performance. The GPU’s 8.294 TFLOPS FP32 can handle game rendering simultaneously, but the overall frame rates will be modest, so streaming at 720p60 or 1080p30 is feasible.

Video editing: The CPU excels at export and encoding tasks, with PassMark multithread score of 30,704 and data compression score of 383,943. The GPU’s 16 GB VRAM is useful for timeline previews and effects, but the 384.0 GB/s bandwidth may slow 4K multi-stream editing. Export times will be short, but real-time preview at full resolution may require proxies.

3D rendering: The CPU’s Cinebench R23 multicore score of 24,580 makes it a capable CPU renderer, but GPU rendering will be limited by the Quadro’s 8.294 TFLOPS FP32 and 48 RT cores. The 16 GB VRAM is a strength for large scenes, but render times will be longer than a newer GPU. This is suitable for archviz or product visualization, not production rendering.

Software development: Compilation times benefit from the CPU’s 14 cores, with PassMark integer math at 102,929 and extended instructions at 23,146. The ECC memory support is valuable for long-running builds or server-like workloads. The GPU is irrelevant for most development tasks, so this is a strong developer laptop.

Student and office work: The CPU’s single-thread score of 3,769 in PassMark ensures snappy productivity in spreadsheets and browsers. The 20 threads handle multitasking well, and the 80 W GPU TDP means the laptop runs cool and quiet. Office tasks will never stress the hardware, making this an overkill but stable choice for students in technical fields.

Rate My PC: Intel Core i7-13650HX + NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q

Power Build

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core i7-13650HX

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q

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

GPU Analysis

Benchmark Performance

Balance and Bottleneck

Upgrade Path and Platform

Who Should Build It

Gaming Performance

Build Overview

FAQ

Usage Scenarios

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