SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core i7-13700T + 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

91%

GPU

85%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core i7-13700T

35,403 Benchmark Score

Top 9% 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

The Intel Core i7-13700T and Intel Arc A310 pairing is an unconventional desktop combination, pitting one of Intel’s most power-efficient 16-core processors against an entry-level graphics card with just 4 GB of VRAM. The benchmark data shows a stark performance dichotomy: the CPU sits in the 85th percentile among all processors, while the GPU languishes in the 40th percentile. This review analyzes the measured synthetic scores and estimated frame rates for this configuration, making clear that no measured FPS data exists for this exact combination.

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

The Intel Arc A310 is built on the Xe-HPG architecture, specifically the Alchemist generation, fabricated on a 6 nm TSMC process. The chip, designated DG2-128, contains 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 45.9M per mm². The GPU operates at a fixed clock speed of 1750 MHz for both base and boost, which is conservative for the architecture. Memory consists of 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, delivering 124.0 GB/s of bandwidth; the memory clock runs at 1937 MHz, translating to 15.5 Gbps effective.

The A310’s compute resources are minimal: 768 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output pipelines. It includes 6 ray tracing cores, though the absence of tensor core data in the pack suggests the hardware focuses on RT rather than AI acceleration. Pixel rate is 28.00 GPixel/s, texture rate is 56.00 GTexel/s, and FP32 performance reaches 2.688 TFLOPS, with FP16 at 5.376 TFLOPS (2:1). The GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, meaning modern rendering features are present even if the hardware is weak.

Benchmark results reflect this modest hardware. The PassMark G3D score is 5433, placing the GPU in the 40th percentile of all GPUs. DirectX 12 performance is particularly poor, scoring only 29 in PassMark, while DirectX 11 scores 33 and DirectX 10 scores 31. DirectX 9 is relatively stronger at 69. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 30607 and Vulkan score of 28964 indicate that compute workloads are more efficient than rasterization. The GPU’s average benchmark score is 7550, nearly matching the AMD Radeon R7 250 (7557, -0.1% delta) and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 (7580, -0.4% delta), while trailing the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (7472, 1% delta) by a single percentage point. For rendering, the data suggests the A310 can handle basic 2D and light 3D tasks, but the 4 GB VRAM and 124 GB/s bandwidth will choke on high-resolution textures or complex scenes.

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 rows for this exact CPU-GPU combination, meaning all gaming performance figures here are estimated from the benchmark scores rather than observed data. The GPU’s PassMark G3D score of 5433 and DirectX 12 score of 29 suggest that this pairing will struggle at any resolution above low settings. For esports titles at 1080p, the A310 might deliver playable frame rates, but the lack of measured data means any specific number would be speculative.

Benchmark scores indicate a GPU that performs near the AMD Radeon R7 250, a card from a previous hardware generation, and slightly below the GTX 1650. In practice, this translates to 1080p gaming at low to medium presets for older or less demanding games. The DirectX 9 score of 69 is the strongest API result, implying legacy titles may run acceptably. However, the poor DirectX 12 score of 29 is a red flag for modern AAA releases, which typically require that API. The 4 GB VRAM will also cause texture streaming issues at 1440p or with high-quality packs, and the 64-bit memory bus limits bandwidth to 124 GB/s, further constraining performance.

At 1440p or 4K, the data strongly suggests the GPU becomes the primary bottleneck, with frame rates dropping below playable thresholds in most games. The CPU’s high single-core performance (Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3282) cannot compensate for the GPU’s lack of shading power. For ray tracing, the 6 RT cores are present but the FP32 throughput of 2.688 TFLOPS is far too low for meaningful RT workloads; expect severe performance penalties if RT is enabled. Estimates place this pairing firmly in the entry-level gaming segment, suitable for indie titles, older games, or competitive shooters at low settings, but not for modern AAA experiences.

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

The Intel Core i7-13700T is a 16-core, 24-thread processor based on Raptor Lake architecture, specifically the Raptor Lake-S codename, on a 10 nm Intel process. It features a base clock of 1400.00 MHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz, with a 35 W TDP that emphasizes efficiency over raw speed. The cache hierarchy includes 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3 cache. The CPU supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, and it is not ECC-capable. It uses Intel Socket 1700 and offers PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU. The integrated UHD Graphics 770 is present, which is useful for troubleshooting or basic display output. The processor was released on 2023-01-03 with a launch MSRP of $384, and the multiplier is unlocked for overclocking.

Benchmark scores show a strong all-round performer. Cinebench R23 multi-core score is 23248, with a single-core score of 3282; Cinebench R20 multi-core hits 9764 and single-core 1378; Cinebench R15 multi-core is 2343 and single-core 330. Geekbench scores are 11573 multi-core and 2490 single-core. PassMark results include a multi-thread score of 28211, single-thread of 3821, integer math at 105397, floating point math at 73928, and data compression at 327700. The average benchmark score is 35403, placing the CPU in the 85th percentile of all processors.

The nearest rivals highlight its positioning. The Intel Core 5 213PE scores 35428 (-0.1% delta), the Core i7-12700KF scores 35365 (0.1% delta), the Core i5-13600T scores 35305 (0.3% delta), and the Core i7-12700K scores 35287 (0.3% delta). The 13700T edges out the 12700K by a hair, despite the 12700K’s higher clock speeds, due to the 13700T’s superior core count and cache efficiency. For real workloads, this CPU excels at multi-threaded tasks like video encoding, 3D rendering, and software compilation. The 24 threads handle heavy parallel loads, while the 4.9 GHz boost clock ensures snappy single-threaded performance for everyday applications. The low 35 W TDP means sustained all-core loads will run at reduced clocks, but the benchmark scores indicate the efficiency design does not cripple throughput.

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

The data presents a clear imbalance: the CPU operates in the 85th percentile while the GPU sits in the 40th percentile, creating a massive 45-percentage-point gap. For gaming, the GPU is the unequivocal bottleneck. The PassMark G3D score of 5433 and DirectX 12 score of 29 are far below what the CPU’s Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 23248 could feed. Even in CPU-light titles, the A310’s 2.688 TFLOPS FP32 performance will cap frame rates well before the 13700T’s single-core score of 3282 becomes relevant. At 1080p, expected FPS scaling shows the GPU limiting performance; at higher resolutions, the GPU bottleneck worsens due to the 4 GB VRAM and 124 GB/s bandwidth.

For productivity and compute workloads, the CPU dominates. The PassMark GPU compute score of 2157 is low, but tasks like data compression (327700), integer math (105397), and floating-point math (73928) are CPU-bound, and the 13700T handles them with the efficiency of its 16 cores. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 30607 for the GPU indicates some compute capability, but it is not comparable to the CPU’s multithreaded throughput. In mixed workloads, such as streaming while gaming, the CPU will have ample headroom (85th percentile) to encode video while the GPU struggles with rendering, but the overall experience will be limited by the GPU’s 40th-percentile standing.

The combined percentile is 63, which reflects the average of the two components’ positions. This pairing is CPU-overkill for gaming but GPU-underpowered for any graphics-intensive task. The FPS scaling evidence, or lack thereof (no measured data), supports the conclusion that the GPU is the limiting factor in all visual workloads, while the CPU is the limiting factor in computational tasks. Upgrading the GPU would rebalance the system, but the current configuration is best suited for CPU-heavy non-gaming applications where the Arc A310 merely provides display output.

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

The CPU’s average benchmark score is 35403, placing it in the 85th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core 5 213PE, scores 35428, a -0.1% delta, meaning the 13700T is essentially tied with it. The Core i7-12700KF scores 35365 (0.1% delta), the Core i5-13600T scores 35305 (0.3% delta), and the Core i7-12700K scores 35287 (0.3% delta). These deltas under 0.3% indicate the 13700T is statistically indistinguishable from its closest competitors, despite differences in clock speeds and core configurations. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 23248 demonstrates strong multi-threaded performance, while the single-core score of 3282 ensures responsiveness.

The GPU’s average benchmark score is 7550, placing it in the 40th percentile. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon R7 250 (7557, -0.1% delta), the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 (7580, -0.4% delta), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (7472, 1% delta), and the AMD Radeon HD 8850M (7447, 1.4% delta). The A310 is competitive with these older or lower-tier cards, but the 1% delta behind the GTX 1650 is notable because that GPU is several generations old. The PassMark G3D score of 5433 and Geekbench Vulkan score of 28964 confirm the GPU’s entry-level status.

The combined percentile for this pairing is 63, which is dragged down by the GPU’s low position. The CPU’s 85th percentile is an outlier for a system with a 40th-percentile GPU, indicating a mismatch in capability. The overall picture is a high-end CPU paired with an entry-level GPU, resulting in a system that excels at CPU-bound tasks but underperforms in graphics-heavy applications. The benchmark data suggests that for any workload involving 3D rendering, gaming, or GPU compute, the A310 will be the primary constraint, while the CPU remains underutilized.

FAQ

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

A: The Intel Core i7-13700T is in the 85th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 35403.

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

A: The Intel Arc A310 has an average score of 7550, while the GTX 1650 scores 7472, giving the A310 a 1% delta advantage over the GTX 1650.

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

A: The combined percentile is 63, reflecting the average of the CPU’s 85th percentile and the GPU’s 40th percentile.

Q: Does the CPU support overclocking?

A: Yes, the multiplier is unlocked, and the CPU has a boost clock of 4.90 GHz.

Q: What is the GPU’s memory configuration?

A: The Arc A310 has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 124.0 GB/s.

Q: Are there measured FPS data for this specific combination?

A: No, the FACT PACK contains no measured FPS rows for this exact CPU-GPU combination, so all gaming frame rates are estimates.

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

A: The CPU uses Intel Socket 1700 and supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration.

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

The platform is built around Intel Socket 1700, which is the foundation for 12th, 13th, and 14th generation Core processors. The CPU supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory, giving builders flexibility, but the dual-channel bus means a matched pair of modules is recommended for optimal bandwidth. The PCIe interface is Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU, and the GPU uses PCIe 4.0 x8, which is sufficient for the Arc A310’s bandwidth needs. The CPU’s TDP is 35 W, and the GPU’s TDP is 30 W, with a suggested PSU of 200 W for the GPU. This leaves substantial PSU headroom for upgrades, as a typical 500 W power supply would have ample capacity.

The most sensible next upgrade is the GPU. The CPU is in the 85th percentile and will not bottleneck any modern graphics card up to the high-end tier. Replacing the Arc A310 with a more powerful GPU would move the combined percentile significantly higher, as the CPU has the multi-threaded and single-threaded performance to feed even a top-tier card. The 4 GB VRAM and 64-bit bus of the current GPU are the primary limitations; any upgrade with 8 GB or more VRAM and a wider bus would be a clear improvement. The PCIe 4.0 x8 slot is compatible with most modern GPUs, though high-end cards may require PCIe 4.0 x16 for full bandwidth.

Memory is another potential upgrade path. The CPU supports DDR5, so moving from DDR4 to DDR5 could improve memory-bound workloads, though the benchmark scores do not indicate a memory bottleneck. The 30 MB of shared L3 cache helps mitigate memory latency. For storage, the PCIe Gen 5 lanes support the fastest NVMe drives, but this is not a priority given the CPU-GPU imbalance. The power connectors are absent on the GPU (it draws power from the slot), and the suggested 200 W PSU confirms that any GPU upgrade will require a PSU check, but the low TDP of both components means even a modest PSU can handle a mid-range replacement.

Build Overview — what this CPU+GPU pairing is, its class (desktop/laptop from buildClass), and overall tier from the percentiles

This is a desktop build, as indicated by the buildClass field, combining the Intel Core i7-13700T with the Intel Arc A310. The CPU is a 16-core, 24-thread Raptor Lake processor with a 35 W TDP, designed for efficiency in compact or low-power systems. The GPU is an entry-level Arc A310 with 4 GB VRAM, targeting basic graphics tasks rather than high-performance gaming. The overall tier is defined by the combined percentile of 63, which places this system in the mid-range category, but the distribution is heavily skewed: the CPU is in the 85th percentile, while the GPU is in the 40th percentile.

The pairing represents a workstation-style CPU with a display-only GPU. The CPU’s average benchmark score of 35403 rivals the Core i7-12700K, indicating it can handle professional workloads like video editing, 3D modeling, and software development. The GPU’s average score of 7550 is comparable to the Radeon R7 250, meaning it is only suitable for 2D applications, light photo editing, or basic video playback. The combined percentile of 63 suggests a system that is above average overall, but the GPU drags down the gaming and graphics potential.

In benchmark terms, this build is a CPU-centric machine where the GPU serves as a placeholder. The data shows that for compute-heavy tasks, the system performs at a high level, but for any graphics-intensive workload, it falls to the 40th percentile. The 35 W CPU TDP and 30 W GPU TDP make this a low-power build, suitable for quiet or energy-conscious environments, but the performance asymmetry means it is not a balanced gaming rig. It is a desktop system where the CPU is the star and the GPU is a peripheral.

Who Should Build It — target users and industries tied strictly to the measured performance

The Intel Core i7-13700T + Intel Arc A310 build targets users whose primary workloads are CPU-bound, given the CPU’s 85th percentile standing and the GPU’s 40th percentile. Software developers and data analysts will benefit from the 24 threads and high PassMark integer math score of 105397, which accelerates compilation and data processing. The data compression score of 327700 and floating-point math score of 73928 make this suitable for scientific computing or financial modeling, where the GPU is rarely used. Content creators who work with 2D graphics, audio editing, or code-based workflows will find the CPU’s single-core score of 3282 (Cinebench R23) responsive enough for daily tasks.

Students and small business workstations are a fit, as the low 35 W CPU TDP and 200 W suggested PSU for the GPU mean low operational costs, though the launch MSRP of $384 for the CPU is a notable investment. The GPU’s DirectX 9 score of 69 and G2D score of 625 suggest it can handle office applications, web browsing, and legacy software without issue. For gamers, this build is only appropriate for esports titles at 1080p low settings, where the CPU’s high single-thread performance can partially compensate for the GPU’s weak DirectX 12 score of 29; however, the lack of measured FPS data and the GPU’s 4 GB VRAM limit make this a poor choice for modern AAA gaming.

Industries such as education, IT administration, or call centers, which rely on multi-tasking and CPU throughput, would find this pairing adequate. The GPU’s 6 RT cores and Vulkan 1.4 support are irrelevant for these tasks. The build is not suited for 3D rendering, video editing with GPU acceleration, or machine learning, as the GPU’s compute score of 2157 is too low. In summary, this is a CPU-first system for professionals who need compute power without graphics demands, and who accept the GPU as a basic output device.

Rate My PC: Intel Core i7-13700T + Intel Arc A310

Power Build

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core i7-13700T

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

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)

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

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

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

FAQ

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

Build Overview — what this CPU+GPU pairing is, its class (desktop/laptop from buildClass), and overall tier from the percentiles

Who Should Build It — target users and industries tied strictly to the measured performance

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