SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core i9-12900 + 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)

▼

89 Score

Top 11% Ranking

89 / 100

HIGH-END

Power Build

Top 11% of systems. Excellent for 1440p Ultra or 4K High gaming.

1440p Ultra4K High

System Balance Analysis

CPU vs GPU performance ratio

Well Balanced

CPU

93%

GPU

85%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core i9-12900

42,906 Benchmark Score

Top 7% 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

This pairing unites one of Intel’s most capable 12th Gen desktop processors with the company’s entry-level Arc 3 discrete GPU. The Core i9-12900 is a 16-core, 24-thread Alder Lake-S part designed for heavy multi-threaded workloads, while the Arc A310 is a 4 GB low-profile card aimed at basic rendering and media tasks. Benchmark data confirms a stark performance gap: the CPU sits at the 88th percentile among all tested processors, while the GPU lands at only the 40th percentile. The result is a desktop build where the processor is the dominant component by a wide margin, and the GPU serves as a functional, rather than performance-oriented, addition.

GPU Analysis

The Intel Arc A310 is built on the Xe-HPG architecture using TSMC’s 6 nm process, with a die size of 157 mm² and 7,200 million transistors. The chip, designated DG2-128, operates at a fixed 1750 MHz base and boost clock, which is modest by modern discrete GPU standards. Memory configuration consists of 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, delivering 124.0 GB/s of bandwidth—a figure that limits high-resolution texture streaming but is adequate for light 1080p workloads. The GPU’s compute resources include 768 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output pipelines, yielding a pixel rate of 28.00 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 56.00 GTexel/s.

For real-time ray tracing, the A310 includes 6 dedicated RT cores, a feature set that allows DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) support, though the raw compute power is constrained. FP32 performance is rated at 2.688 TFLOPS, with FP16 reaching 5.376 TFLOPS via a 2:1 ratio. These figures place the GPU firmly in the entry-level segment; benchmark results reflect this positioning. The PassMark G3D score of 5433 and a percentile of 40 against all GPUs indicate that the A310 performs below the median for modern discrete graphics cards. Its nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Radeon R7 250 (delta -0.1%), the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 (delta -0.4%), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (delta +1%). The GTX 1650 comparison is notable: the A310 trails it by 1% in average benchmark score, suggesting that while the Arc card is not competitive with higher-tier gaming GPUs, it is not entirely outclassed by older entry-level parts.

Compute-oriented benchmarks reinforce this assessment. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 30607 and Vulkan score of 28964 indicate reasonable performance for basic parallel workloads, but the PassMark GPU Compute score of 2157 is low, reflecting limited double-precision and complex instruction throughput. DirectX 10, 11, and 12 scores of 31, 33, and 29, respectively, are all within a narrow band, showing that the GPU does not scale well with API complexity—likely a driver and hardware limitation. For rendering tasks, the A310 can handle 2D acceleration (PassMark G2D score of 625) and light 3D scenes, but it is not suited for high-fidelity rendering or modern AAA titles at elevated settings. The single-slot design, lack of power connectors, and 30 W TDP make it a low-power solution, but the suggested PSU of 200 W suggests it is intended for minimal system draw, not high-performance configurations.

Benchmark Performance

The Core i9-12900 delivers benchmark scores that classify it as a high-end desktop processor. In Cinebench R23, it achieves 18628 points in multi-core and 1825 points in single-core tests. The R20 scores are 11994 (multi-core) and 1693 (single-core), while the older R15 test yields 3299 (multi-core) and 262 (single-core). These results place the CPU at the 88th percentile among all processors, with an average benchmark score of 42906. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i9-12900KF (avg score 42830, delta +0.2%), the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H (avg score 43210, delta -0.7%), the Intel Core i9-12950HX (avg score 42487, delta +1%), and the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 (avg score 43326, delta -1%). The deltas are small, meaning the i9-12900 is statistically tied with these parts, but the data shows it is marginally ahead of the KF variant and the HX mobile chip in aggregate performance.

Geekbench scores further corroborate the CPU’s strength: a multi-core score of 13088 and a single-core score of 1993. PassMark results show exceptional throughput in specific workloads—integer math scores 127512, floating-point math 91514, and extended instructions 24777. The multi-thread PassMark score of 33608 is particularly high, indicating strong parallel processing capability. However, the single-thread score of 4003 is more modest, suggesting that while the CPU excels in multi-threaded tasks, its single-thread performance is merely average for a processor in this class.

The Arc A310’s GPU scores are dramatically lower in relative terms. The PassMark G3D score of 5433 and a 40th percentile ranking place it below most dedicated gaming GPUs. The combined percentile for this CPU-GPU pairing is 64, reflecting the CPU’s high standing pulling the average up. The data indicates a clear imbalance: the i9-12900 is a top-tier compute processor, while the A310 is an entry-level graphics solution. For users running CPU-intensive applications like compilation, video encoding, or 3D rendering on the CPU, the system will perform admirably; for GPU-accelerated tasks, the A310 becomes the limiting factor.

Gaming Performance

No measured FPS data exists for this exact combination of the Intel Core i9-12900 and Intel Arc A310. The FACT PACK contains no entries in the measuredFpsUltraByGame field, and the dataIsMeasured flag is false. All gaming performance figures discussed here are estimates derived from the benchmark scores of each component, not from direct frame rate testing.

Based on the GPU’s PassMark G3D score of 5433 and its 40th percentile ranking, the A310 is expected to deliver low-to-mid 1080p performance in less demanding titles. For esports games like Counter-Strike or League of Legends, the CPU’s strong single-core performance (Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1825) could push frame rates to playable levels, potentially exceeding 60 FPS at medium settings. However, for modern AAA games, the 4 GB VRAM and 124.0 GB/s bandwidth will likely cause stuttering and texture pop-in at high resolutions. The GPU’s DirectX 12 score of 29 and DirectX 11 score of 33 are very low, indicating that the card struggles with modern API overhead. Older DirectX 9 titles score 69, suggesting better compatibility with legacy games.

The CPU, with its high multi-threaded scores (Cinebench R23 multi-core 18628), can handle game logic and physics without bottlenecking, but the GPU will cap frame rates. At 1080p ultra settings, frame rates are estimated to be in the 20-35 FPS range for demanding titles, based on the GPU’s low texture fill rate and compute throughput. At 720p or with reduced settings, 60 FPS may be achievable in some titles. The 16 ROPs and 28.00 GPixel/s pixel rate limit resolution scaling, so higher resolutions will degrade performance linearly. For 1440p or 4K gaming, the A310 is not a viable option, as the memory bandwidth alone will choke data flow. Overall, this is not a gaming build; the GPU is best suited for desktop acceleration, video playback, and light 2D workloads.

Balance and Bottleneck

The performance disparity between the Core i9-12900 and the Arc A310 creates a severe bottleneck in GPU-bound workloads. The CPU’s 88th percentile ranking versus the GPU’s 40th percentile means that, in any task that relies on the graphics card, the A310 will be the limiting component. For example, in 3D rendering using GPU acceleration, the A310’s 2.688 TFLOPS FP32 performance will cap output, while the CPU sits idle waiting for data. The PassMark GPU Compute score of 2157 is a fraction of the CPU’s PassMark multi-thread score of 33608, indicating that the GPU cannot keep pace with the CPU’s processing capability.

Conversely, in CPU-bound workloads like software compilation, data compression (PassMark data compression score of 407899), or encryption (23203), the i9-12900 will operate at full capacity, and the GPU will have minimal impact. The CPU’s 16 cores and 24 threads provide ample parallel resources, and the 30 MB L3 cache reduces memory latency. The bottleneck is therefore workload-dependent: for gaming and GPU compute, the A310 is the weak link; for multi-threaded CPU tasks, the system is well-balanced. The FPS scaling evidence is absent due to no measured data, but the benchmark scores suggest that any gaming performance will be dictated entirely by the GPU’s limits, not the CPU’s potential. The CPU could easily drive a much more powerful GPU without becoming a constraint, as its single-core performance (Geekbench single-core 1993) is sufficient for modern game engines.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core i9-12900 is a 16-core, 24-thread processor based on the Alder Lake architecture, manufactured on Intel’s 10 nm process with a die size of 215 mm². It features a hybrid design, though the FACT PACK does not specify the exact P-core and E-core distribution; the data lists base clock of 2.40 GHz and boost clock of 5.10 GHz. The cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3 cache, which is substantial for a desktop part. Memory support includes DDR4 and DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration, with a theoretical bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s; ECC memory is also supported, making it suitable for workstation use. The integrated UHD Graphics 770 provides a fallback display output, though the discrete A310 is the primary GPU.

The CPU’s benchmark scores indicate excellent multi-threaded performance. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 18628 is strong, and the PassMark multi-thread score of 33608 is near the top of the database. Single-thread performance is less impressive but still solid, with a Geekbench single-core score of 1993. The real-world implications are clear: the i9-12900 excels at video rendering, 3D modeling, scientific simulations, and any workload that can utilize 24 threads. The data encryption score of 23203 and extended instructions score of 24777 suggest strong cryptographic and SIMD performance, beneficial for code compilation and data processing. The CPU’s 65 W TDP is modest for a 16-core part, likely due to power management, but the multiplier is unlocked, allowing overclocking for users who prioritize performance over efficiency.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The Core i9-12900 uses the Intel Socket 1700 platform, which supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, giving builders flexibility in choosing memory type and budget. The CPU provides PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes, which is forward-looking for future GPU upgrades, though the Arc A310 uses only PCIe 4.0 x8. The motherboard must be compatible with Alder Lake-S, and the 30 MB L3 cache and dual-channel memory controller are standard. The GPU’s suggested PSU is 200 W, which is very low, and the CPU’s TDP is 65 W, meaning a modest power supply is sufficient for the current configuration. However, the PCIe Gen 5 lanes suggest that a user could upgrade to a high-end GPU without needing a new motherboard, as long as the power supply is also upgraded.

The CPU’s memory support for both DDR4 and DDR5 means that an upgrade path exists for memory bandwidth, though the 76.8 GB/s figure is based on a specific configuration. For a sensible next upgrade, the GPU is the obvious candidate; the A310’s 40th percentile ranking is the weakest link. Replacing it with a more powerful card would unlock the CPU’s full potential, as the i9-12900’s high multi-threaded scores would not bottleneck modern GPUs. The platform also supports ECC memory, which is unusual for consumer parts and may appeal to workstation builders. The production status of the CPU is listed as Active, while the GPU is End-of-life, so the GPU is likely in need of replacement sooner. The socket 1700 platform is mature, with a wide range of motherboards available, but future CPU upgrades would require a newer socket, so the platform is not forward-compatible beyond 12th Gen.

Who Should Build It

This build targets users who prioritize CPU performance and need only basic graphics capability. The Core i9-12900’s 88th percentile ranking makes it ideal for content creators working with video editing, 3D rendering, and software development—tasks that rely heavily on multi-threading. The CPU’s PassMark scores for integer math (127512) and floating-point math (91514) indicate strong performance for data analysis and scientific computing. Students in engineering or computer science fields would benefit from the CPU’s compilation speed and simulation capabilities, while the GPU handles everyday desktop tasks.

For gamers, this build is not suitable beyond casual or esports titles. The Arc A310’s 40th percentile GPU ranking suggests it can only handle low-demand games at reduced settings. Small business workstations could use this for office productivity, spreadsheet processing, and web browsing, where the CPU’s single-thread performance (Geekbench 1993) ensures smooth operation. The ECC memory support is a boon for financial or data-intensive environments where error correction is critical. However, any user needing GPU acceleration for rendering or machine learning would be severely hampered by the A310’s compute scores (PassMark GPU Compute 2157). The build is, therefore, a CPU-centric workstation with a placeholder GPU, best suited for developers, researchers, and professionals who do not require high-end graphics.

Build Overview

This is a desktop-class build pairing a high-end 12th Gen Intel processor with an entry-level Intel Arc 3 GPU. The combined percentile of 64 reflects the CPU’s dominance, pulling the average up from the GPU’s low ranking. The Core i9-12900 is an active, unlocked processor with a launch MSRP of $519, positioned as a top-tier Alder Lake-S part. The Arc A310 is an end-of-life GPU with no launch MSRP listed, indicating it is a budget component. The system is, at its core, a powerful CPU platform with a weak graphics solution, making it a niche product for CPU-intensive workloads rather than a balanced gaming or general-purpose machine. The data shows that the CPU can handle almost any computational task, but the GPU limits the system to basic 2D acceleration and light 3D work. For users with a clear need for multi-threaded processing power and minimal GPU demands, this pairing is functional; for others, the GPU would need to be upgraded to match the CPU’s capabilities.

FAQ

Q: What is the most significant performance difference between the CPU and GPU in this build?

A: The Core i9-12900 ranks at the 88th percentile among all CPUs, while the Arc A310 ranks at the 40th percentile among all GPUs, showing a 48-percentile-point gap that makes the GPU the limiting component.

Q: Can this system handle modern AAA games at high settings?

A: No. With a PassMark G3D score of 5433 and only 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, the GPU is estimated to deliver low frame rates (likely 20-35 FPS) at 1080p ultra settings for demanding titles, based on its benchmark scores.

Q: What workloads benefit most from the Core i9-12900?

A: The CPU’s high multi-threaded scores (Cinebench R23 multi-core 18628, PassMark multi-thread 33608) make it excellent for video rendering, 3D modeling, software compilation, and data encryption, as shown by its PassMark data encryption score of 23203.

Q: Is the Arc A310 suitable for any GPU-accelerated tasks?

A: Basic 2D acceleration and light compute are possible, with OpenCL score of 30607, but the low PassMark GPU Compute score of 2157 indicates it is not suited for serious rendering or machine learning workloads.

Q: What is the upgrade path for this build?

A: The GPU is the primary upgrade target; replacing the Arc A310 with a higher-performing card would leverage the CPU’s PCIe Gen 5 lanes, while the CPU’s 65 W TDP and the GPU’s 200 W suggested PSU leave ample power headroom for a stronger GPU.

Q: Does the CPU support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Core i9-12900 supports ECC memory, which is listed in the FACT PACK, making it suitable for workstation environments where data integrity is critical.

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

A: The i9-12900 has an average benchmark score of 42906, which is 0.2% ahead of the Core i9-12900KF (42830), 1% ahead of the Core i9-12950HX (42487), but 0.7% behind the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H (43210) and 1% behind the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 (43326).

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: This scenario is not viable. The Arc A310’s low DirectX 11 and 12 scores (33 and 29, respectively) and 40th percentile GPU ranking mean that even at 1080p, frame rates will struggle to reach 60 FPS in modern titles, making high-refresh monitors a waste of the CPU’s potential.

Streaming: The CPU can handle encoding workloads, with a PassMark data compression score of 407899, but the GPU’s lack of dedicated encoding hardware data (no tensor cores or NVENC equivalents listed) means streaming will rely on the CPU, which is capable but will compete with game rendering for resources.

Video editing: The i9-12900 excels here, with Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 18628 and Geekbench multi-core 13088, ensuring smooth timeline scrubbing and fast exports. The GPU offers minimal acceleration, but the CPU can handle most editing tasks in software.

3D rendering: CPU-based rendering will be strong, with floating-point math score of 91514, but GPU-accelerated rendering will be slow due to the A310’s 2.688 TFLOPS FP32 performance and limited 4 GB VRAM, making this a poor choice for GPU-rendered scenes.

Software development: Compilation and code execution benefit from the CPU’s 24 threads and integer math score of 127512, while the GPU is irrelevant for most development tasks, making this a solid environment for building large codebases.

Student and office work: The CPU’s single-thread score of 4003 in PassMark ensures responsive document editing and web browsing, while the GPU handles 2D desktop acceleration (G2D score of 625) adequately, making this a capable, if overkill, workstation for everyday tasks.

Rate My PC: Intel Core i9-12900 + Intel Arc A310

Power Build

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core i9-12900

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

Benchmark Performance

Gaming Performance

Balance and Bottleneck

CPU Analysis

Upgrade Path and Platform

Who Should Build It

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