SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core i9-13900 + 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

95%

GPU

74%

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

PROCESSOR

Intel Core i9-13900

60,676 Benchmark Score

Top 5% 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

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core i9-13900 is a 24-core, 32-thread Raptor Lake-S desktop processor built on Intel's 10 nm process, with a 65 W TDP and a die size of 257 mm². It operates in the Intel Socket 1700 platform with a base clock of 2000 MHz and a boost clock of 5.60 GHz. The core configuration combines performance and efficiency cores, though the FACT PACK does not specify the exact split; the aggregate result is 24 cores and 32 threads, which is a substantial thread count for heavily parallel workloads. The cache hierarchy consists of 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache, providing ample fast memory for active threads. Memory support includes both DDR4 and DDR5 over a dual-channel bus, and ECC memory is supported, which is a notable feature for workstation-class stability. The processor also integrates UHD Graphics 770, a capable iGPU for basic display output, though it is not intended for demanding 3D workloads. PCIe Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes is available, enabling high-bandwidth connectivity for modern storage and expansion cards.

Benchmark data places this CPU in the 92nd percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 60676. In Cinebench R23, the multi-core score is 37931 and the single-core score is 5355. The multi-core result is roughly 7 times the single-core result, indicating strong scaling across the 24 cores and 32 threads, which is typical for a processor with this thread count. Cinebench R20 shows 15931 multi-core and 2249 single-core, while the older Cinebench R15 shows 3823 multi-core and 539 single-core; these scores follow a consistent pattern of diminishing returns as the benchmark workload becomes more cache- and memory-sensitive. Geekbench scores are 21164 multi-core and 2604 single-core, confirming strong per-thread performance. PassMark tests further break down the CPU's capabilities: integer math scores 176107, floating point math scores 120492, data compression scores 577285, and data encryption scores 35242. The extended instructions score is 32760, and the find prime numbers score is 186, which is a relatively weak result in a prime-number sieve workload, suggesting that the core architecture does not excel in certain integer-heavy, branch-dependent operations. Single-thread performance in PassMark is 4309, and multi-thread is 45680. The physics score of 2484 and random string sorting score of 64396 complete the picture of a CPU that excels in sustained multi-threaded throughput but shows varied results in specific algorithmic tasks.

Relative to its nearest rivals, the i9-13900 sits just 0.2% ahead of the Intel Xeon Gold 6338T (average score 60572), 1% ahead of both the AMD Ryzen 7 8745HX and AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX (average scores 60104 and 60099 respectively), and 1.1% ahead of the Intel Core i9-14900F (average score 60008). These deltas are small, meaning the i9-13900 is effectively at parity with these competitors in aggregate benchmark performance. For real workloads, this means the i9-13900 is a top-tier desktop processor that will handle heavy compile tasks, video encoding, and 3D rendering without being the limiting factor in most systems. The 92nd percentile ranking reinforces that it outperforms the vast majority of desktop CPUs currently in the market, though it is not at the absolute top tier, which would be reserved for halo parts with higher average scores.

GPU Analysis

The Intel Arc A350 is a low-power graphics card based on the Xe-HPG architecture, specifically the DG2-128 chip, fabricated on TSMC's 6 nm process with 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die. It has 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 24 ROPs, along with 6 ray tracing cores. The GPU operates at a base and boost clock of 2000 MHz, and memory runs at 1937 MHz with 15.5 Gbps effective speed. The memory subsystem is a 4 GB GDDR6 configuration on a 64-bit bus, yielding a memory bandwidth of 124.0 GB/s. This is a modest bandwidth figure, which will constrain performance in texture-heavy and high-resolution scenarios. The pixel rate is 48.00 GPixel/s and the texture rate is 96.00 GTexel/s, indicating that the GPU can handle basic rasterization but will struggle with high fill-rate demands. FP32 performance is 3.072 TFLOPS, and FP16 is 6.144 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, which is typical for graphics workloads that can leverage half-precision math. The TDP is 25 W, making it an extremely power-efficient part, and the suggested PSU is 200 W. It connects via PCIe 4.0 x8 and has no display outputs, which is unusual and suggests this is intended as a compute-only or auxiliary card, not a primary display adapter. The card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, ensuring modern API compatibility. The production status is end-of-life, with a predecessor of Xe Graphics and successor of Battlemage.

The GPU has no benchmark scores in the FACT PACK, and its average benchmark score is 0, with a percentile ranking of 50 among all GPUs. This lack of data makes direct numerical comparison impossible, but the 50th percentile suggests it is exactly average in performance among all GPUs, which is surprising given its low power envelope and small memory bus. The nearestRivals list is empty, so no competitor comparison can be made. For rendering workloads, the 6 ray tracing cores provide hardware acceleration for ray-traced effects, but the limited 3.072 TFLOPS FP32 throughput and 124.0 GB/s bandwidth mean that complex scenes with high polygon counts and large textures will be severely bottlenecked. The GPU is more suited to lightweight compute tasks, basic 2D acceleration, or as a supplementary compute device rather than a primary gaming or rendering solution. The 4 GB VRAM is a hard limit for modern 3D applications, which often require 6-8 GB for high-quality textures and complex scenes. The 64-bit bus width amplifies this issue, as even the modest 124.0 GB/s bandwidth is further constrained by the narrow interface. The lack of any benchmark scores means that all performance statements must be qualitative, but the hardware specifications clearly indicate a low-end part by modern standards.

Gaming Performance

No measured FPS rows exist for this exact combination of Intel Core i9-13900 and Intel Arc A350. The FACT PACK contains no measuredFps data for this build. Therefore, all gaming FPS figures presented below are estimates derived from the CPU and GPU benchmark scores and hardware specifications, not from direct measurement.

At 1080p with ultra settings, the i9-13900's strong single-core and multi-core scores would allow it to feed frames rapidly, but the Arc A350's 3.072 TFLOPS FP32 and 124.0 GB/s bandwidth would likely cap frame rates in demanding titles. For esports and older games with light graphics loads, the CPU's 5355 Cinebench R23 single-core score suggests it could push high frame rates, potentially exceeding 100 FPS, but the GPU's 4 GB VRAM and 64-bit bus would limit texture quality and resolution scaling. In modern AAA titles, the Arc A350 would likely struggle to maintain 30 FPS at 1080p ultra, given the 50th percentile GPU ranking and the memory bandwidth constraints. The 6 ray tracing cores would enable ray-traced effects, but at very low performance levels, making ray tracing impractical for smooth gameplay. The 25 W TDP and single-slot design indicate a card designed for minimal power consumption, not high FPS output.

At 1440p, the situation worsens. The GPU's 124.0 GB/s bandwidth is insufficient for the increased memory pressure of higher resolutions, and the 4 GB VRAM would be exceeded by many modern titles at ultra settings, causing texture streaming issues or crashes. The CPU's performance headroom would be largely wasted, as the GPU would be the clear bottleneck in nearly all gaming scenarios. At 4K, the Arc A350 is not a viable option for playable frame rates in anything but the most lightweight 2D or indie titles. The pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s and texture rate of 96.00 GTexel/s are low enough that even basic fill-rate operations at 4K would be slow. Overall, this pairing is not recommended for any serious gaming beyond casual or older titles at 1080p with reduced settings. The CPU is overkill for the GPU in gaming, and the GPU is underpowered for the CPU's potential output.

Balance and Bottleneck

The balance between the Intel Core i9-13900 and Intel Arc A350 is severely skewed toward the CPU. The CPU is in the 92nd percentile among all CPUs, with an average score of 60676, while the GPU is in the 50th percentile with no benchmark score. This indicates that in any GPU-bound workload, the Arc A350 will be the limiting factor. The CPU's multi-threaded capabilities, as evidenced by the 37931 Cinebench R23 multi-core score, far exceed what the GPU can utilize in gaming or rendering. Conversely, in CPU-bound tasks such as data compression (passmark score 577285) or integer math (176107), the GPU is irrelevant, and the CPU will dominate. The FPS scaling, though unmeasured, would show a plateau: increasing CPU performance beyond a certain point yields no FPS gains because the GPU is saturated. The CPU's 32 threads are more than sufficient for any gaming workload, which rarely uses more than 8-16 threads, so the GPU's low throughput becomes the sole determinant of frame rate.

The 65 W TDP of the CPU and 25 W TDP of the GPU create a power imbalance that is unusual for a desktop build, but it means the system draws very little power overall. However, this also means the GPU is not designed to sustain heavy loads. The PCIe 4.0 x8 interface provides adequate bandwidth for the GPU's needs, but the lack of display outputs on the GPU means the system must use the CPU's integrated UHD Graphics 770 for display, which further separates the gaming and compute roles. In practice, the CPU will bottleneck the GPU in any task that requires both, such as gaming with a physics simulation, but the GPU will bottleneck the CPU in any graphics-intensive task. The combined percentile of 71 reflects this mixed performance, indicating that the system is above average overall but not because of the GPU. For a balanced build, one would expect the CPU and GPU percentiles to be closer; here, the 42-percentage-point gap is a clear sign of imbalance.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: The i9-13900's single-core score of 5355 in Cinebench R23 can drive high frame rates in CPU-light games, but the Arc A350's 3.072 TFLOPS and 124.0 GB/s bandwidth will limit 1080p ultra to approximately 30-60 FPS in most modern titles, making 144Hz or 240Hz displays unattainable. This is not a viable high-refresh gaming platform.

Streaming: The CPU's 32 threads and 37931 multi-core score allow for efficient software encoding via x264 or x265, which is a major advantage. The GPU's lack of display outputs and low encoding capabilities (if any, as not specified) mean that streaming would rely on the CPU, which is more than capable of handling both game encoding and system tasks. However, the GPU's gaming performance is too low for most streaming scenarios.

Video editing: The CPU's 120492 floating point math score and 577285 data compression score indicate strong performance in video codec operations. DaVinci Resolve or Premiere Pro timelines would benefit from the 32 threads, especially in export and rendering phases. The GPU would provide minimal acceleration for effects or color grading, but the CPU can handle the workload alone. This build is viable for 1080p editing, but 4K multi-layer timelines would be slow on the GPU side.

3D rendering: The CPU's 37931 Cinebench R23 multi-core score is excellent for CPU-based rendering engines like Blender Cycles or V-Ray. The GPU's 6 ray tracing cores and 3.072 TFLOPS would offer some acceleration in GPU-accelerated renderers, but the 4 GB VRAM and 64-bit bus would cause out-of-memory errors on complex scenes. CPU rendering is the primary path, and it will be fast, but GPU rendering is limited.

Software development: The CPU's 32760 extended instructions score and 176107 integer math score support fast compilation of large codebases. The 32 threads and 36 MB L3 cache help with parallel builds and linker tasks. The GPU is irrelevant for development, but the CPU's 92nd percentile ranking makes this an excellent developer machine for compiling, testing, and running virtual machines.

Student and office work: The CPU's 2604 Geekbench single-core score provides responsive performance for office applications, web browsing, and productivity suites. The 65 W TDP and low power draw make this an efficient system for daily use. However, the GPU is unnecessary for this workload, and the integrated UHD Graphics 770 would suffice, making the Arc A350 a wasted addition.

FAQ

Q: Is the Intel Core i9-13900 a good processor for multi-threaded workloads?

A: Yes, the Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 37931 and PassMark multi-thread score of 45680 indicate excellent parallel performance, placing the CPU in the 92nd percentile among all CPUs.

Q: Does the Intel Arc A350 support ray tracing?

A: Yes, it has 6 dedicated ray tracing cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), but the low FP32 throughput of 3.072 TFLOPS means ray-traced effects will run at very low performance levels.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of the Intel Arc A350?

A: The memory bandwidth is 124.0 GB/s, derived from 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus running at 15.5 Gbps effective speed.

Q: Can the Intel Core i9-13900 use both DDR4 and DDR5 memory?

A: Yes, the CPU supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus, and it also supports ECC memory.

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

A: The combined percentile is 71, which is above average but significantly lower than the CPU's individual 92nd percentile due to the GPU's 50th percentile ranking.

Q: Are there measured FPS data for gaming performance in this build?

A: No, the FACT PACK contains no measuredFps data for this combination, so all gaming performance statements are estimates based on benchmark scores and hardware specifications.

Q: What is the process node for the Intel Arc A350?

A: The GPU is fabricated on TSMC's 6 nm process, with 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU's average benchmark score is 60676, placing it in the 92nd percentile among all CPUs. Its nearest rivals are the Intel Xeon Gold 6338T (60572, 0.2% behind), AMD Ryzen 7 8745HX (60104, 1% behind), AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX (60099, 1% behind), and Intel Core i9-14900F (60008, 1.1% behind). The CPU leads all of these by a small margin, confirming its top-tier status. The key benchmark scores include Cinebench R23 multi-core at 37931, single-core at 5355; Cinebench R20 multi-core at 15931, single-core at 2249; Geekbench multi-core at 21164, single-core at 2604; and PassMark multi-thread at 45680, single-thread at 4309. The GPU has no benchmark scores, with an average benchmark score of 0 and a 50th percentile ranking. The combined percentile for the build is 71, which reflects the strong CPU pulling the average up while the GPU sits at the median. The combined picture is a system that excels in CPU-bound tasks, such as compilation, video encoding, and scientific computing, but is notably weak in GPU-bound tasks, such as gaming, 3D rendering with GPU acceleration, and machine learning inference. The CPU's 1% lead over the AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX is marginal, meaning that in real-world applications, the two are effectively interchangeable, and the choice comes down to platform features rather than raw performance.

Build Overview

This is a desktop build (buildClass: desktop) pairing the Intel Core i9-13900 with the Intel Arc A350. The CPU is a 24-core, 32-thread Raptor Lake-S processor with a 65 W TDP, while the GPU is a 25 W low-power card with 4 GB VRAM and no display outputs. The combined percentile of 71 places this system in the upper-midrange tier overall, but the component imbalance is stark: the CPU is in the 92nd percentile, while the GPU is in the 50th percentile. This is a build where the CPU is the clear centerpiece, and the GPU is an afterthought. The CPU's launch MSRP is $549. The system is not a balanced gaming or rendering machine; rather, it is a powerful compute platform with a minimal graphics solution. The CPU's 32 threads, 36 MB L3 cache, and high multi-core scores make it suitable for demanding productivity tasks, but the GPU's limited bandwidth and VRAM restrict it to basic 2D acceleration or light compute duties. The build class is desktop, meaning it is intended for stationary use, and the single-slot GPU and 200 W suggested PSU indicate a compact, low-power configuration.

Who Should Build It

This build is for users who prioritize CPU performance above all else and have minimal or no need for dedicated graphics acceleration. The target audience includes software developers who will benefit from the i9-13900's 176107 integer math score and 32760 extended instructions score for faster compilation and code analysis. It is also suitable for data analysts and scientists running multi-threaded batch jobs, where the 37931 Cinebench R23 multi-core score and 577285 data compression score will significantly reduce processing times. Video editors working with 1080p footage will find the CPU's 120492 floating point math score adequate for encoding and export, though they should not rely on the GPU for effects. Students and office workers will appreciate the 2604 Geekbench single-core score for responsive daily tasks, and the low power draw of both components makes for an efficient system. Small business workstations that run accounting software, databases, or virtualization can leverage the 32 threads and ECC memory support for stability. However, gamers at any resolution should avoid this build, as the Arc A350's 124.0 GB/s bandwidth and 4 GB VRAM will not provide a playable experience in modern titles at 1080p ultra, and the GPU's 50th percentile ranking confirms its mediocrity. Content creators who rely on GPU-accelerated rendering in Blender or After Effects will be disappointed, as the 3.072 TFLOPS FP32 and 6 ray tracing cores are insufficient for complex scenes. This build is a one-trick pony optimized for CPU throughput, and it should only be chosen by users who know they will never need significant GPU power.

Rate My PC: Intel Core i9-13900 + Intel Arc A350

Power Build

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core i9-13900

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

CPU Analysis

GPU Analysis

Gaming Performance

Balance and Bottleneck

Usage Scenarios

FAQ

Benchmark Performance

Build Overview

Who Should Build It

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