SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core i7-13790F + Intel Arc A350

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)

▼

85 Score

Top 15% Ranking

85 / 100

HIGH-END

Power Build

Top 15% of systems. Excellent for 1440p Ultra or 4K High gaming.

1440p Ultra4K High

System Balance Analysis

CPU vs GPU performance ratio

GPU Bottleneck

CPU

96%

GPU

74%

Your GPU is limiting system performance. Consider upgrading to a more powerful graphics card to better utilize your CPU.

PROCESSOR

Intel Core i7-13790F

63,080 Benchmark Score

Top 4% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

Intel Arc A350

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.

Bottleneck Detected

GPU 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 i7-13790F paired with the Intel Arc A350 represents a desktop build that is firmly divided by capability. The CPU is a high-end 16-core processor with a 93rd percentile ranking, while the GPU is a low-power entry-level part sitting exactly at the 50th percentile. This combination creates a system where the processor’s substantial multi-threaded performance is the primary asset, but the graphics card’s limited VRAM and bandwidth restrict the overall experience to specific, non-demanding graphical workloads. The data shows a clear hierarchy: this is a compute-centric platform with a token display adapter.

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

The Intel Arc A350 is built on the Xe-HPG architecture and uses the DG2-128 chip, manufactured on a 6 nm process by TSMC. The GPU contains 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 24 raster output pipelines. Clock speeds are fixed at a modest 2000 MHz for both base and boost, which helps keep the thermal and power envelope exceptionally low. The memory subsystem is a significant constraint: the card has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 124.0 GB/s. The memory clock runs at 1937 MHz, translating to 15.5 Gbps effective.

Rendering performance is limited by several factors. The pixel rate is 48.00 GPixel/s and the texture rate is 96.00 GTexel/s, which are low figures for modern workloads. The FP32 compute performance is 3.072 TFLOPS, with FP16 at 6.144 TFLOPS (2:1). For hardware-accelerated ray tracing, the card includes 6 dedicated RT cores, but with only 4 GB of VRAM and 124.0 GB/s of bandwidth, complex ray-traced scenes are likely to exceed the memory capacity quickly. There is no data on tensor cores, meaning AI-accelerated features cannot be quantified from the FACT PACK. The GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API compatibility is modern, but the raw throughput is not. The Arc A350 has no display outputs, which is a critical detail—it cannot drive a monitor directly. This suggests it is intended for compute offload or as a secondary device. The GPU’s percentile rank of 50 indicates it performs at the median of all GPUs, but the lack of any benchmark scores or nearest rivals in the data makes it impossible to state specific performance deltas. For rendering, the data implies that the card is suitable only for lightweight 2D workloads or basic video decode, not for serious 3D rendering.

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 the Intel Socket 1700, using the Raptor Lake architecture. The Core i7-13790F requires a motherboard with this socket and supports dual-channel DDR4 or DDR5 memory. The CPU provides PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only), which offers substantial bandwidth for storage or a future discrete GPU. The TDP of the CPU is 65 W, which is remarkably efficient for a 16-core part, meaning a modest cooling solution and power delivery are sufficient. The GPU’s TDP is even lower at 25 W, and the suggested PSU for the entire system is 200 W. This leaves enormous headroom; a user could upgrade the graphics card to a much more powerful model without needing to replace the power supply, as long as the new card’s requirements stay within the 200 W budget.

The upgrade path is clear: the CPU is the strong point, so the first logical upgrade would be the GPU. The current Arc A350 has no display outputs and only 4 GB of VRAM, which is a bottleneck for any visual task. Swapping it for a higher-tier GPU with more VRAM and bandwidth would transform the system’s capabilities without touching the CPU or motherboard. The memory support for both DDR4 and DDR5 gives flexibility, though the FACT PACK does not specify maximum speeds or capacities. The PCIe Gen 5 lanes ensure that a future GPU or NVMe drive will not be bandwidth-limited. The production status of the CPU is Active, so availability is not a concern. The GPU is End-of-life, with a successor named Battlemage, which suggests that replacements may be harder to find. Overall, the sensible next upgrade is to replace the Arc A350 with a more capable graphics card, leveraging the CPU’s strong multi-threaded performance and the platform’s headroom.

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

The balance between the CPU and GPU is heavily skewed. The CPU ranks in the 93rd percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 63080. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX, has an average score of 63173, which is only 0.1% higher. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 scores 62839, 0.4% lower. This places the i7-13790F at the top of its class. The GPU, in contrast, sits at the 50th percentile, with an average benchmark score of 0, meaning no measured data exists to compare it against. The combined percentile of the build is 72, which is dragged down by the weak GPU.

In gaming workloads, the GPU will be the limiting factor. The CPU has ample headroom to feed frames, but the Arc A350’s 4 GB VRAM and 124.0 GB/s bandwidth will cap performance at low resolutions and settings. The data shows no measured FPS for any game, so the bottleneck must be inferred. For CPU-intensive tasks like data compression, encryption, or multi-threaded rendering, the CPU is the star. The PassMark data compression score is 567473, and the multi-thread score is 44737, indicating strong parallel performance. The GPU only matters for graphics output, and its low FP32 compute (3.072 TFLOPS) means it cannot keep up with the CPU’s output in any 3D scenario. Therefore, the CPU limits nothing in gaming, but the GPU limits everything graphical. In compute workloads, the GPU is irrelevant, and the CPU is the sole driver. The conclusion is that this is a mismatched pairing: the CPU is overkill for the GPU’s capabilities, and the GPU is underpowered for the CPU’s potential.

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

The target user for this build is someone who prioritizes CPU compute power over graphics. The Core i7-13790F’s 93rd percentile ranking and strong multi-threaded scores make it ideal for software developers compiling code, data scientists running simulations, or students working on parallel computing projects. The PassMark integer math score of 151416 and floating point math score of 110512 indicate robust number-crunching ability. For content creators, the CPU’s Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 35404 means video encoding or 3D modeling software that relies on the CPU will perform excellently, but the GPU will be a bottleneck for any GPU-accelerated effects or rendering. Small business workstations that handle spreadsheets, databases, or virtualization would benefit from the CPU’s 16 cores and 24 threads, with the GPU serving only as a basic display adapter (though the lack of display outputs means a separate GPU is required regardless). Gamers at 1080p with low settings might see playable frame rates, but the 4 GB VRAM and 50th percentile GPU rank suggest that high-refresh gaming is out of reach. The build is not for gamers seeking high fidelity; it is for professionals who need a high-end CPU and are willing to pair it with a minimal GPU for basic output.

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: This scenario is not viable. The Arc A350’s 50th percentile GPU rank, 4 GB VRAM, and 124.0 GB/s bandwidth will struggle to maintain high frame rates at any resolution above 720p. The CPU’s 4212 single-thread PassMark score is strong, but it cannot compensate for the GPU’s low 3.072 TFLOPS FP32 compute. Expect low settings and low refresh rates.

Streaming: The CPU can handle encoding. The PassMark data encryption score of 31703 and multi-thread score of 44737 suggest that x264 encoding on the CPU would be smooth, but the GPU’s lack of display outputs means it cannot capture or render game footage directly. A separate capture card or GPU would be needed, making this scenario impractical.

Video Editing: The CPU excels in this task. Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 35404 means timeline scrubbing and export using CPU-based codecs will be fast. However, the GPU’s low VRAM and bandwidth will slow down GPU-accelerated effects, color grading, or 4K previews, making the experience inconsistent.

3D Rendering: CPU-based rendering is strong, with Cinebench R20 multi-core score of 14869, but GPU-based rendering is poor. The Arc A350’s 3.072 TFLOPS FP32 and 6 RT cores are insufficient for modern renderers, and the 4 GB VRAM will be exhausted quickly. This build is for CPU rendering only.

Software Development: This is the best-case scenario. The 16 cores and 24 threads handle parallel builds efficiently, as evidenced by the PassMark multithread score of 44737. The single-thread score of 4212 ensures snappy IDE responsiveness. The GPU is irrelevant for most development tasks, making this a solid workstation.

Student and Office Work: The CPU is overkill but effective. The PassMark single-thread score of 4212 ensures fast application launches, and the 33 MB L3 cache helps with multitasking. The GPU is unnecessary for office tasks, but the lack of display outputs means a separate GPU is required, adding cost and complexity.

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 combination. The `measuredFpsUltraByGame` field is empty, and `dataIsMeasured` is false. Therefore, all frame rates discussed here are estimates based on the benchmark scores, not measured results. The GPU’s 50th percentile rank, 4 GB VRAM, and 124.0 GB/s bandwidth indicate that at 1080p with ultra settings, frame rates would be low, likely below 30 FPS in modern titles. At 720p, the card might achieve playable 30-60 FPS in older or esports titles, but the 3.072 TFLOPS FP32 compute limits even that. The CPU’s high single-thread score of 4212 suggests it will not cause frame drops, but the GPU will be the ceiling. For 1440p or 4K, the 4 GB VRAM is insufficient, causing texture pop-in or crashes. The lack of display outputs on the GPU further complicates gaming, as a monitor cannot be connected directly. Users would need to rely on a different GPU for any gaming scenario, making the Arc A350 effectively a compute-only accelerator. Estimates suggest that this build is not suitable for gaming at any resolution above 720p with low-to-medium settings.

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

The Intel Core i7-13790F is a 16-core, 24-thread processor based on the Raptor Lake architecture, manufactured on a 10 nm process by Intel. The base clock is 2.10 GHz, which boosts up to 5.20 GHz. The cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and a 33 MB shared L3 cache. The TDP is 65 W, which is low for the core count, indicating strong efficiency. Memory support includes both DDR4 and DDR5 in dual-channel mode, with ECC memory not supported. The CPU uses PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes, providing high bandwidth for storage and expansion.

Benchmark scores reveal the CPU’s strengths. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score is 35404, which is excellent for rendering and video encoding. The single-core score of 4998 in R23 and 503 in R15 show strong per-thread performance, important for gaming and legacy applications. The PassMark tests are comprehensive: integer math at 151416, floating point math at 110512, and data compression at 567473. The multithread score of 44737 confirms the CPU’s ability to handle parallel workloads. The data encryption score of 31703 is notable, suggesting strong security performance. The extended instructions score of 34828 indicates good SIMD performance for scientific computing. The average benchmark score is 63080, placing it in the 93rd percentile. Compared to rivals, it is nearly identical to the Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX (63173, -0.1%) and slightly ahead of the AMD Ryzen AI 7 450G (63331, -0.4%). This CPU is a top-tier part for compute-heavy tasks, but its 65 W TDP and 2.10 GHz base clock mean it relies on boosting to reach peak performance.

FAQ — 5-7 Q&A pairs answerable from FACT PACK data (format: Q:... A:...)

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

A: The combined percentile is 72, indicating the system performs better than 72% of all builds, though this is skewed by the CPU’s high rank.

Q: Does the Intel Arc A350 have any display outputs for connecting a monitor?

A: No, the FACT PACK lists "No outputs" for the GPU’s display outputs, meaning it cannot drive a display directly.

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

A: The CPU’s average benchmark score is 63080, which is 0.1% lower than the Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX’s score of 63173.

Q: How much VRAM does the Arc A350 have and what is its memory bandwidth?

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

Q: What is the TDP of the CPU and the GPU, and what PSU is suggested?

A: The CPU has a TDP of 65 W, the GPU has a TDP of 25 W, and the suggested PSU for the system is 200 W.

Q: What is the launch MSRP for the Intel Core i7-13790F?

A: The launch MSRP for the CPU is $441.

Q: Which architecture is the GPU based on, and what is its production status?

A: The GPU is based on the Xe-HPG architecture with the DG2-128 chip, and its production status is End-of-life.

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

The CPU’s benchmark performance is exceptional. The average benchmark score is 63080, placing it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX, scores 63173, a mere 0.1% difference, indicating the i7-13790F is at the modern of performance. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 scores 62839, which is 0.4% lower, and the AMD Ryzen AI 7 450G scores 63331, 0.4% higher. Specific scores include a Cinebench R23 multi-core result of 35404 and a single-core result of 4998. The PassMark multithread score is 44737, and the single-thread score is 4212. These numbers indicate a processor that excels in both multi-threaded and single-threaded tasks.

The GPU’s benchmark performance is undefined. The FACT PACK shows no benchmark scores for the Arc A350, and its average benchmark score is 0. Its percentile rank is 50, meaning it sits at the median of all GPUs, but without specific scores, this rank is unverifiable. The GPU has no nearest rivals listed, further indicating a lack of comparative data. The combined percentile of the build is 72, which is a weighted average that reflects the CPU’s high rank and the GPU’s median rank. The data shows a clear picture: the CPU is a top-tier performer, while the GPU is a low-end part with unproven capabilities. The overall system is only as strong as its weakest link, which is the GPU.

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

This is a desktop-class build, as indicated by the `buildClass` field. The pairing consists of the Intel Core i7-13790F, a 16-core desktop processor, and the Intel Arc A350, a low-power GPU. The combined percentile is 72, which places the system in the upper-middle tier of all builds. However, this percentile is misleading because the CPU is in the 93rd percentile, while the GPU is in the 50th percentile. The CPU is a high-end part with a launch MSRP of $441, while the GPU has no launch MSRP and is end-of-life. The system’s tier is determined by the CPU’s dominance, but the GPU’s limitations cap the overall experience. The build is best described as a high-performance compute workstation with a minimal graphics component. The CPU’s 65 W TDP and the GPU’s 25 W TDP mean the system is power-efficient, but the GPU’s lack of display outputs requires a separate solution for video output. Overall, this pairing is unbalanced, with the CPU far exceeding the GPU’s capabilities, making it suitable for CPU-intensive tasks but not for gaming or GPU-accelerated workloads.

Rate My PC: Intel Core i7-13790F + Intel Arc A350

Power Build

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core i7-13790F

Intel Arc A350

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

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

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

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

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

FAQ — 5-7 Q&A pairs answerable from FACT PACK data (format: Q:... A:...)

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

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

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