SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core i9-12950HX + Intel Arc A350M

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

93%

GPU

92%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core i9-12950HX

42,487 Benchmark Score

Top 7% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

Intel Arc A350M

24,647 Benchmark Score

Top 8% 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

This pairing places an Intel Core i9-12950HX, a 16-core/24-thread Alder Lake-HX mobile CPU, with an Intel Arc A350M GPU in a laptop-class build. The combined percentile is 79, and the database contains no measured FPS rows for this exact combination, so all frame-rate discussion below is estimated from the component benchmark scores rather than direct gameplay data. The CPU carries an 88th percentile rank across all processors, while the GPU sits at the 70th percentile across all graphics cards, a gap that shapes every workload discussed in this analysis.

CPU Analysis

The i9-12950HX is a 16-core, 24-thread processor built on Intel's Alder Lake-HX architecture using a 10 nm process with a 215 mm² die. It runs at a 2.30 GHz base clock and boosts to 5.00 GHz, with a 55 W TDP. The cache layout is substantial: 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3. This is a mobile part, but the core count and cache size put it in desktop-class territory for throughput-heavy tasks.

The benchmark data reflects that positioning. In Cinebench R23, the CPU scores 20,263 in multi-core and 1,885 in single-core. The R20 run yields 11,061 multi-core and 1,561 single-core, while R15 shows 3,107 multi-core and 274 single-core. These numbers indicate a processor that scales strongly across all threads while maintaining competitive single-thread performance, a combination that matters for mixed workloads where some tasks are parallel and others depend on one fast core. The 5.00 GHz boost clock supports that single-thread strength.

Passmark results reinforce the profile. The multi-thread score is 31,673, and single-thread is 3,778. Integer math hits 109,586, floating-point math 80,402, and data compression 367,930. Encryption workloads produce 21,395, extended instructions 22,163, and prime number finding 135. Physics scores 2,084 and random string sorting 41,209. These numbers suggest a processor that is strong at compute-heavy tasks like encryption, compression, and scientific math, while also handling the integer operations common in general-purpose code.

The average benchmark score is 42,487, placing the i9-12950HX in the 88th percentile of all CPUs. Comparing it to its nearest rivals shows how tight the competition is. The Intel Core i9-12900K averages 42,335, which is 0.4% behind this chip. The i9-12900KF averages 42,830, putting it 0.8% ahead of the 12950HX. The i9-12900 averages 42,906, 1% ahead, and the AMD Ryzen 5 7400 averages 42,055, 1% behind. So the 12950HX is effectively interchangeable with desktop i9 parts from the same generation in aggregate compute, despite being a mobile chip. For real workloads, that means a laptop carrying this CPU can sustain heavy multi-threaded tasks like software compilation, video encoding, or 3D rendering at a level that would have required a desktop workstation only a few years ago.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The i9-12950HX uses the Intel BGA 1964 socket, which is a soldered, mobile-only package. There is no socket-based CPU upgrade path; the processor is fixed to the motherboard. The platform supports dual-channel DDR4 and DDR5 memory, and ECC memory is supported as well, which is notable for a mobile part because it opens the door to error-corrected memory in a portable workstation. PCIe support is Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU, giving the system enough bandwidth for modern SSDs and discrete GPUs even though this build uses an integrated GPU.

The CPU TDP is 55 W and the GPU TDP is 25 W. The GPU has no suggested PSU figure in the data, and because the build class is laptop, power delivery is handled by the system's internal design rather than a user-selected power supply. The practical takeaway is that the CPU is the dominant power draw, and the 25 W GPU is a low-power part that adds little heat or energy load. For a laptop chassis, that combination is conservative, leaving thermal headroom for the CPU's 55 W budget.

The memory bus is dual-channel, and while bandwidth figures are not listed, the dual-channel layout with DDR5 support means a memory upgrade to faster or higher-capacity modules would be the only meaningful component-level change available to a user, since the CPU cannot be swapped. The GPU is also soldered, so the realistic upgrade path is a full system replacement rather than incremental component swaps.

FAQ

Q: What socket does the Intel Core i9-12950HX use?

A: The CPU uses Intel BGA 1964, a mobile soldered socket, so it cannot be replaced in a standard desktop upgrade cycle.

Q: Does the CPU support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the memory support lists ECC as true, and the platform supports both DDR4 and DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration.

Q: What is the GPU's memory configuration?

A: The Intel Arc A350M has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus with 112.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Is the CPU multiplier unlocked?

A: No. The multiplier is locked, so overclocking is not supported in the standard sense.

Q: What PCIe version does the CPU provide?

A: The CPU supports PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes, a high-bandwidth interface for the mobile platform.

Q: What is the GPU's average benchmark score and percentile?

A: The Arc A350M averages 24,647 points across Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan tests, placing it in the 70th percentile of all GPUs.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rival in aggregate?

A: The i9-12950HX scores 42,487 on average, which is 0.4% ahead of the i9-12900K's 42,335 and 1% ahead of the Ryzen 5 7400's 42,055, while sitting 1% behind the i9-12900's 42,906.

Who Should Build It

This build is for users who need extreme CPU throughput in a portable form factor. The 88th percentile CPU with 16 cores and 24 threads is a strong fit for content creators who render 3D scenes, developers who compile large codebases, and researchers running multi-threaded simulation or data compression jobs. The CPU's Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 20,263 and Passmark multi-thread score of 31,673 indicate a machine that can chew through parallel workloads without waiting. The GPU, however, is a 70th percentile part with 4 GB of VRAM, so it is not the target for gamers or artists who need high-end graphics performance. For a student or small business workstation, the CPU's 88th percentile rank means everything from document processing to spreadsheet math is effectively instant, while the GPU handles basic display and light acceleration. For a gamer, the pairing is unusual: the CPU is far more capable than the GPU, so the system is best for esports titles that are CPU-bound at high frame rates, not for demanding 3D titles at high resolutions.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming is a realistic but constrained scenario. The CPU's 88th percentile and single-thread score of 3,377 in Passmark suggest it can drive high frame rates in CPU-bound games, but the GPU's 70th percentile and 4 GB memory limit graphics throughput, so the estimated result is a system that will hit high FPS only when graphics settings are lowered to reduce GPU load.

Streaming is a strong scenario for this CPU. The 16 cores and 24 threads provide enough parallel capacity to encode and stream while the game runs, since the CPU's multi-thread score of 31,673 indicates headroom beyond what a single game typically uses. The GPU's 25 W TDP and 4 GB VRAM are not factors for streaming, so the CPU carries the load.

Video editing is mixed. The CPU's Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 20,263 accelerates timeline previews and exports, but the GPU's 4 GB VRAM and 112.0 GB/s bandwidth limit GPU-accelerated effects and high-resolution color grading. Editing at 1080p is feasible, but 4K timelines would likely strain the GPU memory.

3D rendering is CPU-favorable. The 16 cores and 24 threads, along with the R23 multi-core score, mean CPU-based renderers will perform well. GPU-based rendering, however, is limited by the A350M's 3.379 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 6 RT cores, so ray-traced frames would be slow.

Software development is a clear strength. The 16 cores, 24 threads, 30 MB L3, and high integer math score of 109,586 make compilation fast, and the 5.00 GHz boost helps with single-threaded build steps. The GPU is irrelevant here, so this is one of the best use cases.

Student and office work is straightforward. The CPU's 88th percentile ensures snappy response in any office suite, and the GPU's basic 4 GB VRAM is enough for spreadsheet, document, and web tasks. The laptop class build means portability, and the low 25 W GPU TDP keeps the power budget modest.

GPU Analysis

The Intel Arc A350M is a 4 GB GDDR6 GPU on a 64-bit bus with 112.0 GB/s of bandwidth. It is built on TSMC's 6 nm process with 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die. The GPU runs at a base clock of 1150 MHz and boosts to 2200 MHz, with memory clocked at 1750 MHz or 14 Gbps effective. The shader array has 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 24 raster operation units. For ray tracing, it has 6 dedicated RT cores, and it supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Compute performance is modest: 3.379 TFLOPS of FP32 and 6.758 TFLOPS of FP16 at a 2:1 ratio. Pixel rate is 52.80 GPixel/s and texture rate is 105.6 GTexel/s. The TDP is 25 W, which is very low for a discrete GPU, and the bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x8. The 4 GB VRAM is a limiting factor for modern games at high resolutions, and the 64-bit memory bus gives a bandwidth of 112.0 GB/s, which is narrow. The Geekbench OpenCL score is 24,546 and Vulkan score is 24,747, averaging 24,647. That places the GPU in the 70th percentile of all GPUs, but it's a mid-range position. Comparing to nearest rivals, the A350M sits 0.4% behind the AMD Radeon RX 590's 24,744, 0.5% behind the NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile's 24,763, 0.8% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT's 24,442, and 1.5% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630's 24,277. These deltas are all within 1.5%, meaning the A350M is a stable 70th percentile performer, not a top-tier or bottom-tier chip. For rendering, the 6 RT cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate support enable basic ray tracing, but the 4 GB VRAM and 112 GB/s bandwidth will throttle complex scenes.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU's average benchmark score is 42,487, placing it in the 88th percentile of all CPUs. Its key scores are Cinebench R23 multi-core 20,263, R23 single-core 1,885, Cinebench R20 multi-core 11,061, single-core 1,561, Cinebench R15 multi-core 3,107, single-core 274, Passmark multi-thread 31,673, and Passmark single-thread 3,778. The GPU's average score is 24,647 from Geekbench OpenCL 24,546 and Vulkan 24,747, placing it in the 70th percentile of all GPUs. The combined percentile for the pair is 79. The CPU outperforms its nearest desktop rival, the i9-12900K, by 0.4%, and trails the i9-12900 by 1%, while the GPU is within 1% of several mid-range desktop cards. The combined picture is a system where the CPU is a top-12% part and the GPU is a top-30% part, so the CPU is the dominant compute resource and the GPU is the secondary component.

Build Overview

This is a laptop-class build with a 79th combined percentile. The CPU is a high-end mobile part at the 88th percentile, and the GPU is a mid-tier mobile part at the 70th percentile. The system is clearly designed around CPU compute, with the GPU as a supporting player for display and light acceleration. The build is not a gaming powerhouse; it is a portable workstation that happens to include a decent integrated-level GPU. The 55 W CPU TDP and 25 W GPU TDP together indicate a power budget that is typical for a performance laptop, but the low GPU TDP means the GPU is not a high-power component. The overall tier is a "CPU-heavy mobile workstation" rather than a balanced gaming or rendering machine.

Balance and Bottleneck

The data shows a clear imbalance. The CPU's 88th percentile versus the GPU's 70th percentile means that in any workload where the GPU is the limiting factor, the system will underperform relative to its CPU capability. In CPU-bound tasks like compilation, compression, or multi-threaded math, the CPU will drive performance to its full extent, and the GPU is not a factor. In GPU-bound tasks like 3D game rendering or GPU-accelerated video effects, the GPU's 70th percentile and 4 GB VRAM become the ceiling. The CPU's nearest rival, the i9-12900K, is 0.4% behind in aggregate, while the GPU's nearest rival, the RX 590, is 0.4% ahead, so the CPU is competitive with desktop parts while the GPU is only mid-range mobile territory. The bottleneck is the GPU in graphics-heavy tasks, and the CPU in compute-heavy tasks. For gaming at high resolutions, the GPU will limit frame rates because 4 GB of VRAM and 112 GB/s bandwidth are insufficient for modern textures at 1440p or 4K. For productivity, the CPU is the workhorse and the GPU is a sidekick.

Gaming Performance

The database contains no measured FPS rows for the i9-12950HX + Arc A350M combination, so all FPS figures are estimates based on the component benchmark scores. The CPU's 88th percentile and single-thread score of 3,778 suggest it can push high frame rates in CPU-bound games, but the GPU's 70th percentile and 4 GB VRAM are the limiting factor. At 1080p with medium settings, the estimated frame rate would be playable, but not high-refresh, for most AAA titles. At 1440p or 4K, the 4 GB VRAM and 112 GB/s bandwidth would cause texture streaming and resolution issues, making the game unplayable or requiring significant setting reductions. For esports titles like Counter-Strike or League of Legends, the CPU's high single-thread performance and 5.00 GHz boost could deliver high frame rates, but the GPU would still need to be set to low or medium to sustain those. The overall gaming profile is: strong CPU headroom, weak GPU, so gaming is best at 1080p with conservative settings. Users should treat any FPS number as an estimate, not a measured result, because no direct gaming data exists for this exact pair.

Rate My PC: Intel Core i9-12950HX + Intel Arc A350M

Apex Performer

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core i9-12950HX

Intel Arc A350M

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

CPU Analysis

Upgrade Path and Platform

FAQ

Who Should Build It

Usage Scenarios

GPU Analysis

Benchmark Performance

Build Overview

Balance and Bottleneck

Gaming 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