SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core i7-14701TE + NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF 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)

▼

93 Score

Top 7% Ranking

93 / 100

ULTIMATE READY

Apex Performer

Top 7% of systems. Capable of 4K Ultra gaming and advanced rendering.

4K 60+ FPSVR ReadyRay Tracing

System Balance Analysis

CPU vs GPU performance ratio

Well Balanced

CPU

87%

GPU

99%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core i7-14701TE

26,013 Benchmark Score

Top 13% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation

117,088 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

Optimal Performance

Your system is in the top tier. You can run any modern game at maximum settings.

4K Gaming Ready

Consider a 4K 144Hz monitor to fully utilize your hardware capabilities.

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 i7-14701TE paired with the NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation represents a specific niche in the desktop market: a low-power CPU engineered for efficiency combined with a professional-grade workstation GPU designed for compact form factors. The benchmark data reveals a system that prioritizes sustained throughput in constrained environments over raw gaming dominance. This analysis examines the quantitative evidence from the FACT PACK to determine where this pairing excels, where it struggles, and who should consider building it.

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

The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is a workstation-class GPU built on the Ada Lovelace architecture with a 5 nm process from TSMC. Its transistor count of 35,800 million on a 294 mm² die gives it a transistor density of 121.8M per mm², indicating a dense, modern design. The GPU operates with a base clock of 720 MHz and a boost clock of 1560 MHz, which are modest figures, but the memory subsystem tells a different story. It features 20 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 160-bit bus, producing a bandwidth of 280.0 GB/s. This memory capacity is substantial, positioning it for large datasets and high-resolution textures rather than raw speed.

The compute configuration includes 6144 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operation units. For specialized workloads, it has 48 RT cores and 192 tensor cores. These numbers are significant for rendering tasks. The FP32 performance is 19.17 TFLOPS, with FP16 also rated at 19.17 TFLOPS due to a 1:1 ratio. The pixel rate is 99.84 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 299.5 GTexel/s. In practical terms, the OpenCL benchmark score of 124812 and Vulkan score of 109364 place the GPU in the 95th percentile of all GPUs, per the FACT PACK. This percentile is the key indicator: it outperforms the vast majority of graphics cards, which is expected for a workstation part.

The nearest rivals confirm its standing. It is virtually tied with the NVIDIA GB10, which scores 117393, a difference of only -0.3%. It sits slightly behind the AMD Radeon PRO W7700, which scores 118976, a -1.6% delta. The comparison becomes more favorable against older or mobile parts: it leads the NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB by 2.4% and the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile by 2.8%. The data suggests this GPU is not about brute force clock speeds but about balanced compute and memory capacity. For rendering, the 20 GB VRAM is the standout feature, allowing scenes that exceed the memory limits of typical 8-12 GB consumer cards. The RT cores and tensor cores enable hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI-assisted denoising, though the exact performance gains are not quantified in the benchmark scores. The 280.0 GB/s bandwidth is sufficient for the 160-bit bus, but it is not class-leading; the data implies that capacity, not bandwidth, is the primary design goal.

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

The balance between the Core i7-14701TE and the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is asymmetric. The CPU sits in the 78th percentile for all CPUs, while the GPU is in the 95th percentile. This 17-point gap suggests that in many workloads, the CPU will be the limiting factor. The combined percentile for the build is 87, which is between the two individual scores, indicating that the system as a whole is strong but not perfectly balanced.

The CPU’s benchmark scores provide evidence of its ceiling. In Cinebench R23, it scores 17035 multicore and 2405 single-core. The PassMark single-thread score is 2637. These are respectable numbers, but the GPU’s compute power is proportionally higher. For instance, the GPU’s OpenCL score of 124812 dwarfs the CPU’s PassMark multithread score of 20042. In GPU-bound tasks like rendering or high-resolution gaming, the GPU will be the primary driver. However, in CPU-bound scenarios like physics calculations or data compression, the CPU’s performance will cap the system. The PassMark physics score is 1860, and the data compression score is 220520. These scores suggest the CPU can handle these tasks, but they are not exceptional.

The FPS scaling evidence is absent from the FACT PACK, as no measured FPS rows exist for this exact combination. The dataIsMeasured flag is false, meaning all FPS discussions are estimates. Based on the percentile gap, it is reasonable to infer that at lower resolutions (1080p), the CPU would bottleneck the GPU in many games, preventing the GPU from reaching its full potential. At higher resolutions (1440p or 4K), the GPU becomes the bottleneck, and the CPU’s relative weakness is less impactful. The 45 W TDP of the CPU versus the 70 W TDP of the GPU reinforces this dynamic. The CPU is designed for efficiency, not maximum performance, so it will likely saturate before the GPU in lightly threaded tasks. The data implies a system that is balanced for professional workloads where GPU compute dominates, but unbalanced for high-refresh gaming where CPU single-core performance is critical.

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 RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is a top-tier GPU in the 95th percentile, but the CPU’s 78th percentile and a single-core Cinebench R23 score of 2405 suggest it may not sustain high frame rates in CPU-intensive titles. For 1080p high-refresh gaming, the CPU could be a bottleneck, limiting the GPU’s output. At 1440p or 4K, the GPU’s 20 GB VRAM and 19.17 TFLOPS FP32 performance would handle the load, but frame rates would still be constrained by the CPU’s single-thread ceiling. The data points to a system better suited for immersive, high-resolution gaming rather than competitive esports at maximum refresh rates.

Streaming: The CPU’s 8 cores and 16 threads provide a solid foundation for encoding, with a Cinebench R20 multicore score of 7154. The GPU’s 192 tensor cores could accelerate AI-based encoding features, though this is not explicitly quantified. The PassMark multithread score of 20042 suggests the CPU can handle simultaneous gaming and streaming workloads, but the 45 W TDP implies thermal and power constraints that might limit sustained multi-task performance. The system would likely handle streaming at moderate settings without major issues, but it is not optimized for this use case.

Video editing: This is a strong scenario. The GPU’s 20 GB VRAM and 280.0 GB/s bandwidth are ideal for video timelines with high-resolution footage and effects. The OpenCL score of 124812 indicates excellent compute performance for rendering and effects. The CPU’s multicore scores, such as Cinebench R23 at 17035, are adequate for timeline scrubbing and exports, but the GPU would handle the heavy lifting in effects-heavy projects. The combination is well-suited for 4K video editing, with the GPU providing the muscle and the CPU offering sufficient support.

3D rendering: The data strongly supports this scenario. The GPU’s RT cores (48) and tensor cores (192) are designed for ray-traced rendering and AI denoising. The 20 GB VRAM allows for large scenes and complex textures without memory overflow. The GPU’s 95th percentile ranking confirms its capability. The CPU’s Cinebench R23 multicore score of 17035 means it can handle scene preparation and simulation tasks, but the GPU will dominate render times. This is a professional-grade rendering system for small to medium-sized projects.

Software development: The CPU’s 8 cores and 16 threads with a boost clock of 5.20 GHz provide a responsive environment for compilation and multi-threaded build tools. The PassMark data encryption score of 11699 and extended instructions score of 14354 suggest solid performance for security and cryptography tasks. The GPU is not a primary factor, but its compute power could accelerate certain workloads like machine learning inference. The system is capable, but not specialized, for development tasks.

Student and office work: This scenario is overkill. The CPU’s single-core Cinebench R23 score of 2405 is more than sufficient for office applications and web browsing. The GPU’s 95th percentile is unnecessary for spreadsheets or documents. However, the 45 W CPU TDP and 70 W GPU TDP mean the system is relatively power-efficient, which could be a benefit in a shared space. The 20 GB VRAM is wasted on this workload. The data suggests this is a powerful system that would excel at any student or office task, but it would be underutilized.

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 primary audience for this build is professionals in content creation and 3D rendering. The GPU’s 20 GB VRAM, 48 RT cores, and 192 tensor cores, combined with its 95th percentile ranking, make it a compelling choice for video editors, 3D artists, and architects who need to work with large, complex scenes. The CPU’s 8 cores and 16 threads, with a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 17035, provide sufficient support for the CPU-side tasks in these workflows. The system is also well-suited for small business workstations that require reliable, high-performance compute for tasks like CAD, scientific visualization, or data analysis, where the GPU’s FP32 performance of 19.17 TFLOPS is a significant asset.

Gamers at 1440p or 4K resolutions would benefit from the GPU’s power, as the 20 GB VRAM is future-proof for high-resolution textures. However, the CPU’s 78th percentile ranking and single-core score of 2405 in Cinebench R23 mean that gamers seeking maximum frame rates at 1080p would be better served by a different CPU. The system is not ideal for budget-conscious builders, as the professional GPU commands a premium, but the data does not include pricing, so this is not a factor in the analysis. Developers working on machine learning or compute-intensive applications would find the GPU’s tensor cores valuable, while the CPU’s 33 MB of L3 cache supports data-heavy workloads. Students in engineering or design programs would have a powerful tool, but it would be more than needed for standard coursework.

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, which supports the Core 14th Gen series. The CPU supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, giving builders flexibility in choosing memory. The CPU also supports ECC memory, which is a critical feature for workstation reliability. The PCIe interface is Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU, which is a modern standard, but the GPU uses a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface, so it will run at Gen 4 speeds, which is not a bottleneck given the GPU’s bandwidth.

The power requirements are modest. The CPU has a TDP of 45 W, and the GPU has a TDP of 70 W. The suggested PSU for the GPU is 250 W, which indicates that the entire system could run on a relatively small power supply. This leaves significant headroom for future upgrades, as a 250 W PSU is far below what most high-end systems require. The GPU has no power connectors, meaning it draws power solely from the PCIe slot, which simplifies installation and cable management.

A sensible next upgrade would be to the CPU, as the GPU is already in the 95th percentile. Since the socket is 1700, a user could upgrade to a higher-tier Core 14th Gen processor with more cores and a higher TDP, which would improve CPU-bound workloads. The 45 W TDP of the current CPU is a limiting factor for sustained multicore performance, so a higher-TDP chip would be a logical step. Alternatively, the GPU could be upgraded to a successor, but the data suggests the current GPU is already powerful enough for most tasks. The memory support for both DDR4 and DDR5 means that a user could upgrade to faster memory without changing the motherboard, though the exact performance gains are not quantified in the FACT PACK.

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, as the measuredFpsUltraByGame field is empty and dataIsMeasured is false. Therefore, all FPS figures discussed here are estimates based on the benchmark scores, not actual measurements. The GPU’s 95th percentile ranking and 19.17 TFLOPS FP32 performance suggest it is capable of high frame rates at 1440p and 4K in most games. The 20 GB VRAM is ample for ultra settings at these resolutions, preventing texture streaming issues. However, the CPU’s 78th percentile ranking and single-core score of 2405 in Cinebench R23 imply that in CPU-bound games, particularly at 1080p, the frame rate could be limited.

For esports titles like competitive shooters, the CPU’s single-thread performance would be the primary driver, and the data suggests it would not achieve the extremely high frame rates (200+ FPS) that competitive gamers seek. For AAA single-player games at 1440p or 4K, the GPU would be the bottleneck, and the system would likely deliver smooth, high-quality experiences. The estimate is that the system excels at visually demanding games at high resolutions, but it is not optimized for maximum frame rates at low resolutions. The absence of measured FPS data means these conclusions are inferential, based on the relative strengths of the CPU and GPU.

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

The Intel Core i7-14701TE is a desktop processor from the Core 14th Gen series, built on the Raptor Lake architecture with a 10 nm process node from Intel. It has 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 2.10 GHz and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz. The TDP is 45 W, which is low for a desktop CPU, indicating a focus on efficiency. The cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 33 MB of shared L3 cache. This cache configuration is generous and supports data-heavy workloads.

The benchmark scores paint a picture of a balanced, efficient processor. In Cinebench R23, it scores 17035 multicore and 2405 single-core. The multicore score is strong, but not exceptional, for an 8-core chip. The single-core score is competitive, benefiting from the 5.20 GHz boost clock. The PassMark results show a multithread score of 20042, a single-thread score of 2637, and specific workloads: data compression at 220520, data encryption at 11699, extended instructions at 14354, floating-point math at 50219, integer math at 65792, physics at 1860, and random string sorting at 22760. The find prime numbers score is 143, which is a specialized test.

These numbers indicate that the CPU is well-suited for a variety of real workloads. The multicore scores support video encoding, 3D rendering (as a complement to the GPU), and software compilation. The single-core scores are adequate for general productivity and gaming. The 45 W TDP means it generates less heat and consumes less power, making it suitable for compact or thermally constrained builds. The percentile ranking of 78th for all CPUs confirms it is above average, but not a top-tier performer. The nearest rivals, such as the AMD Ryzen 5 8640HS, score 26106, which is only -0.4% different, showing the CPU is in a competitive mid-range segment. The architecture is mature and reliable, with support for both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, giving builders options.

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

Q: What is the benchmark percentile ranking of the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation GPU?

A: The GPU is in the 95th percentile for all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 117088.

Q: How much VRAM does the GPU have, and what is its bandwidth?

A: The GPU has 20 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 160-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 280.0 GB/s.

Q: What is the CPU’s TDP and what are its core and thread counts?

A: The Intel Core i7-14701TE has a TDP of 45 W and features 8 cores and 16 threads.

Q: What is the CPU’s boost clock speed?

A: The CPU has a boost clock of 5.20 GHz.

Q: Does the CPU support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the CPU supports ECC memory, as indicated in the FACT PACK.

Q: What is the GPU’s FP32 performance in TFLOPS?

A: The GPU has an FP32 performance of 19.17 TFLOPS.

Q: What is the suggested PSU wattage for the GPU?

A: The suggested PSU for the GPU is 250 W.

Q: What is the combined percentile for this CPU+GPU build?

A: The combined percentile for the build is 87.

Q: What is the GPU’s process node and foundry?

A: The GPU is built on a 5 nm process by TSMC.

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

The CPU demonstrates a consistent performance profile across multiple benchmark suites. In Cinebench, it scores 1716 in R15 multicore and 242 in R15 single-core, 7154 in R20 multicore and 1010 in R20 single-core, and 17035 in R23 multicore and 2405 in R23 single-core. The PassMark suite shows a multithread score of 20042 and a single-thread score of 2637. Specialized PassMark tests include data compression at 220520, data encryption at 11699, extended instructions at 14354, find prime numbers at 143, floating-point math at 50219, integer math at 65792, physics at 1860, and random string sorting at 22760. The average benchmark score is 26013, and the CPU is in the 78th percentile for all CPUs. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen AI 5 340 (25981, +0.1%), AMD Ryzen 5 8640HS (26106, -0.4%), AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 5655GE (25880, +0.5%), and AMD Ryzen 5 8540U (26187, -0.7%). These deltas are all within 1%, indicating the CPU is tightly grouped with its direct competitors.

The GPU’s benchmark scores are fewer but more decisive. It scores 124812 in Geekbench OpenCL and 109364 in Geekbench Vulkan. The average benchmark score is 117088, and the GPU is in the 95th percentile for all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GB10 (117393, -0.3%), AMD Radeon PRO W7700 (118976, -1.6%), NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB (114395, +2.4%), and NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile (113944, +2.8%). The GPU clearly outperforms the older Tesla V100 and the mobile RTX A5500, while trading blows with the GB10 and Radeon PRO W7700.

The combined picture is a system where the GPU is the dominant component. The CPU is solidly mid-range, sitting in the 78th percentile, while the GPU is top-tier, in the 95th percentile. The combined percentile of 87 reflects this imbalance. In workloads that leverage the GPU, such as 3D rendering or machine learning, the system performs at a high level. In CPU-bound tasks, the system performs adequately but not exceptionally. The data suggests a pairing that is synergistic for professional applications but leaves performance on the table in CPU-heavy scenarios.

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. It pairs the Intel Core i7-14701TE, an 8-core, 16-thread processor from the Core 14th Gen series, with the NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation, a workstation GPU. The CPU is designed for efficiency with a 45 W TDP, while the GPU is a compact, dual-slot card with a 70 W TDP and no power connectors, drawing power from the PCIe slot. The GPU’s suggested PSU is 250 W, making this a low-power system by modern standards.

The overall tier of the build is high, driven primarily by the GPU. The GPU’s 95th percentile ranking places it among the top 5% of all GPUs, making it a professional-grade component. The CPU’s 78th percentile ranking is respectable, but it is not in the same tier as the GPU. The combined percentile of 87 indicates that the system as a whole is above average, but it is not a top-tier enthusiast build. The GPU’s 20 GB VRAM and 19.17 TFLOPS FP32 performance make it a formidable workstation tool, while the CPU’s 5.20 GHz boost clock and 33 MB L3 cache provide competent support. This is a system built for professional content creation and rendering, not for competitive gaming or budget-conscious builds. The data shows a pairing that leverages the GPU’s strengths while accepting the CPU’s limitations, resulting in a specialized tool for specific workloads.

Rate My PC: Intel Core i7-14701TE + NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation

Apex Performer

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core i7-14701TE

NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation

Market Position

Game Performance Benchmarks

Cyberpunk 2077

Red Dead Redemption 2

Microsoft Flight Simulator

Control

Call of Duty: Warzone

Fortnite

Performance Insights

Optimal Performance

4K Gaming Ready

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

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

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

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

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

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