SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core i9-13900E + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM

Get a comprehensive performance analysis of your gaming rig with detailed benchmarks, bottleneck detection, and upgrade recommendations

84 / 100
HIGH-END

Power Build

Top 16% of systems. Excellent for 1440p Ultra or 4K High gaming.

1440p Ultra4K High

System Balance Analysis

CPU vs GPU performance ratio
Well Balanced
CPU
79%
VS
GPU
89%
PROCESSOR

Intel Core i9-13900E

8,676 Benchmark Score
Top 21% Market Ranking
View Full Specs →
GRAPHICS CARD

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM

15,199 Benchmark Score
Top 11% 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

The Intel Core i9-13900E paired with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM is a desktop build that presents a striking imbalance in raw compute potential versus graphical throughput. The CPU sits at the 65th percentile among all processors, while the GPU rests at the 57th percentile, and the combined system percentile is 61. This configuration is a study in contrasts: a 24-core Raptor Lake processor designed for heavy multi-threaded workloads, paired with an entry-level Ampere graphics card that is already end-of-life. The data suggests this is a workstation-oriented CPU paired with a display adapter, rather than a balanced gaming rig.

Balance and Bottleneck

The performance data reveals a clear and significant bottleneck in the graphics subsystem. The CPU’s average benchmark score is 8676, while the GPU’s average benchmark score is 15199, but these numbers are not directly comparable across different test suites. The more telling indicator is the percentile ranking: the i9-13900E outperforms 65% of all CPUs, while the RTX 3050 OEM outperforms only 57% of all GPUs. In any gaming scenario, the GPU will be the limiting factor, as it must render every frame while the CPU waits. The gap in FPS scaling will be dictated almost entirely by the GPU’s capabilities, not the CPU’s.

For productivity workloads, the bottleneck shifts. The CPU’s multi-core scores are exceptional, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 34244, placing it far ahead of typical desktop processors. The GPU, however, will lag in compute tasks that rely on CUDA cores or tensor operations. The Passmark GPU compute score of 5779 indicates moderate compute capability, but it is nowhere near the level of the CPU’s rendering prowess. In 3D rendering applications that use both CPU and GPU, the CPU will finish its portion of the work quickly, then wait for the GPU to catch up. This creates an inverted bottleneck where the processor is starved for data from the graphics card.

The FPS data is absent for this exact combination, meaning all gaming performance must be estimated from the benchmark scores. Given that the GPU is at the 57th percentile and the CPU is at the 65th, the system’s gaming performance will be capped by the RTX 3050 OEM. The CPU will rarely exceed 50% utilization in most games, while the GPU will be pegged at 100%. The 8 GB of VRAM and 128-bit memory bus will further constrain high-resolution gaming, making 1080p the only realistic target for modern titles.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU’s benchmark results are consistently strong across all tested suites. In Cinebench R15, it scores 3451 multi-core and 487 single-core. The R20 run yields 14382 multi-core and 2030 single-core. The R23 test, which is more demanding, produces 34244 multi-core and 4834 single-core. Geekbench results show 8337 multi-core and 1646 single-core. These scores place the CPU at the 65th percentile, with an average benchmark score of 8676. Its nearest rivals are all low-power mobile or older server chips: the Intel Core i7-8565U (0.1% faster), the Intel Core i5-8365U (0.4% slower), the AMD EPYC 7601 (0.7% faster), and the Intel Core i7-10510U (1.1% faster). This is a peculiar grouping, as the i9-13900E is a desktop 24-core part, yet its average score is comparable to 4-core ultrabook processors. This suggests the benchmark averaging includes the single-core tests, which drag down the overall average relative to the multi-core monster it is.

The GPU’s benchmarks show a different story. The Geekbench OpenCL score is 60740, and the Vulkan score is 57103. Passmark tests reveal DirectX 10 at 61, DirectX 11 at 86, DirectX 12 at 58, and DirectX 9 at 137. The Passmark G3D score is 11857, with a G2D score of 973. The average benchmark score is 15199, placing it at the 57th percentile. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon RX 7600 (0.2% faster), the AMD Radeon 680M (0.5% faster), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 (0.5% faster), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 (0.6% faster). This is a tight cluster, indicating the RTX 3050 OEM performs nearly identically to a 2010-era GTX 580 in these aggregated tests, which is a sobering comparison for a card released in 2022.

The combined picture is a system where the CPU is a top-tier performer, but the GPU drags the overall percentile down to 61. For any workload that is not GPU-bound, this system will excel. For anything that relies on the graphics card, it will perform at a level comparable to a decade-old flagship GPU.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core i9-13900E is a 24-core, 32-thread processor based on the Raptor Lake architecture, specifically the Raptor Lake-S codename. It operates on a 10 nm process node from Intel, with a die size of 257 mm². The base clock is 1800 MHz, 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 shared 36 MB of L3 cache. It supports dual-channel DDR4 and DDR5 memory, with ECC memory support enabled. The PCIe interface is Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU. It includes integrated UHD Graphics 770, and the TDP is rated at 65 watts. The processor was released on January 3, 2023, and is currently active in production. It is not multiplier-unlocked, meaning overclocking is limited.

The benchmark scores for this CPU are extraordinary for its 65-watt TDP. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 34244 is a high-end desktop result, typically seen in processors with much higher power envelopes. The single-core score of 4834 is also competitive, indicating strong per-core performance for a chip with a base clock of only 1.8 GHz. The boost clock of 5.20 GHz clearly drives this. For real workloads, this means video encoding, 3D rendering, and software compilation will be exceptionally fast. The 32 threads allow for massive parallel processing, and the 36 MB of L3 cache reduces memory latency for data-heavy tasks. The memory bandwidth, while not listed, is dual-channel, which may be a limiting factor for some server-style workloads, but for desktop applications, it is sufficient.

The CPU’s percentile of 65 is somewhat misleading. Its nearest rivals are all low-power parts, which indicates that the average benchmark score is pulled down by the single-core tests. In multi-core-heavy applications, this CPU will vastly outperform those rivals. The Geekbench multi-core score of 8337 is modest for a 24-core part, but this test may not scale perfectly with 32 threads. The real-world takeaway is that this CPU is a workstation-class part with a modest TDP, ideal for sustained multi-threaded workloads.

Who Should Build It

This system targets users who need massive CPU compute power but have modest graphics requirements. Gamers at 1080p with esports titles will find the RTX 3050 OEM sufficient, but the CPU will be overkill. For content creators who work in video editing or 3D rendering, the CPU will dramatically accelerate export and render times, while the GPU will handle effects and previews adequately. Software developers compiling large codebases will benefit from the 32 threads, and the ECC memory support makes it viable for small server or workstation builds where data integrity is critical. Students in engineering or computer science programs will appreciate the CPU power for simulations and compilation, though the GPU is not suited for machine learning training. Small business workstations that run virtual machines or database queries will find the CPU’s thread count and ECC support valuable, but the GPU is only useful for basic display output and light acceleration.

The data indicates this is not a gaming-first build. The GPU’s 57th percentile and the CPU’s 65th percentile suggest that for gaming, the system will perform at the level of the GPU, which is a mid-range card from 2022. For productivity, the system will perform at the level of the CPU, which is a high-end part. Therefore, the target user is someone who prioritizes CPU-bound tasks and only needs moderate GPU capability.

GPU Analysis

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM is based on the GA106 chip, using the Ampere architecture on an 8 nm process from Samsung. It has 12,000 million transistors on a 276 mm² die, with a transistor density of 43.5 million per mm². The GPU has 2304 shading units, 72 texture mapping units, and 32 raster output units. It includes 18 RT cores and 72 tensor cores. The base clock is 1515 MHz, with a boost clock of 1755 MHz. The memory runs at 1750 MHz, effectively 14 Gbps, across a 128-bit bus, providing 8 GB of GDDR6 and a bandwidth of 224.0 GB/s. The pixel rate is 56.16 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 126.4 GTexel/s. The FP32 performance is 8.087 TFLOPS, with FP16 at the same rate (1:1). The TDP is 130 watts, and the card requires a 300-watt power supply. It uses a dual-slot design with a single 8-pin power connector. The bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x8, and it has 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The card is end-of-life, released on January 3, 2022, with the GeForce 20 series as its predecessor and GeForce 40 as its successor.

The benchmark scores reveal a card that is adequate for 1080p gaming but not much more. The Passmark DirectX 12 score of 58 is low, indicating poor performance in modern APIs. The DirectX 9 score of 137 is higher, suggesting legacy titles run better. The G3D score of 11857 is respectable, but the G2D score of 973 is mediocre. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 60740 is decent for compute, but the Vulkan score of 57103 is lower. The RT cores and tensor cores are present, but their performance is limited by the overall throughput. In rendering applications, the 8 GB of VRAM is sufficient for 1080p or light 1440p work, but the 128-bit bus will bottleneck texture streaming in high-resolution scenes. The card is comparable to the RTX 2060 in average benchmark score, but the RTX 2060 has a wider memory bus and more bandwidth, making it better for higher resolutions.

FAQ

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

A: The combined percentile is 61, placing this system in the upper-middle tier of all desktop builds.

Q: How does the CPU’s multi-core performance compare to its nearest rival?

A: The CPU’s average benchmark score is 8676, which is 0.1% slower than the Intel Core i7-8565U, but this is misleading because the i9-13900E’s Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 34244 vastly exceeds what that mobile chip can achieve.

Q: What is the GPU’s memory bandwidth and VRAM capacity?

A: The GPU has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Does this CPU support error-correcting memory?

A: Yes, the Intel Core i9-13900E supports ECC memory, which is unusual for desktop processors and beneficial for workstation stability.

Q: What is the power supply requirement for this GPU?

A: The suggested power supply is 300 watts, and the GPU has a TDP of 130 watts.

Q: What is the release date of the GPU and its current production status?

A: The GPU was released on January 3, 2022, and is currently marked as end-of-life.

Q: How does the GPU compare to the AMD Radeon RX 7600 in average benchmark score?

A: The RTX 3050 OEM is 0.2% slower than the Radeon RX 7600, making them effectively identical in aggregated performance.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The CPU uses the Intel Socket 1700, which is compatible with 12th and 13th generation Core processors. The platform supports dual-channel DDR4 and DDR5 memory, allowing for a choice between cost-effective DDR4 or faster DDR5. The CPU provides PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes, which is future-proof for high-speed NVMe SSDs and next-generation GPUs, though the current GPU only uses PCIe 4.0 x8. The 65-watt TDP of the CPU means a modest cooling solution is sufficient, leaving headroom in the power budget. The GPU’s suggested power supply is 300 watts, so a system with a 500-watt or higher PSU will have ample headroom for the entire build.

The most sensible next upgrade is the GPU. The CPU is not a bottleneck for any current workload, but the RTX 3050 OEM limits the system to 1080p gaming and light compute. Upgrading to a higher-tier GPU, such as an RTX 3060 or better, would immediately raise the system’s gaming performance and unlock higher resolutions. The CPU’s PCIe Gen 5 support ensures that a modern GPU will not be bandwidth-limited. Alternatively, adding more memory or faster DDR5 would benefit memory-intensive workloads, but the CPU’s performance is already strong. The platform has a clear path forward: keep the CPU, upgrade the GPU, and potentially move to DDR5 for better memory bandwidth.

Build Overview

This build is a desktop-class system that pairs a high-end 24-core Intel processor with a mid-range NVIDIA graphics card. The CPU is a 13th-generation Raptor Lake part, designed for heavy multi-threaded workloads, while the GPU is a 30-series Ampere card that is now end-of-life. The combined percentile of 61 indicates a system that is above average, but the imbalance is stark: the CPU is at the 65th percentile, while the GPU is at the 57th. This is not a balanced gaming rig; it is a workstation CPU with a basic GPU bolted on for display output and light acceleration. The system excels in CPU-bound tasks like video encoding, 3D rendering, and software compilation, but it will struggle in GPU-intensive games at high settings. The data shows a tool built for productivity, not for gaming.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: At 1080p with competitive settings, the RTX 3050 OEM can push high frame rates in esports titles, but the CPU will rarely break a sweat. The GPU’s DirectX 12 score of 58 suggests modern AAA games will run at medium settings to maintain 60 FPS, not high refresh rates. The 8 GB of VRAM is sufficient for 1080p, but the 128-bit bus will cause stuttering in texture-heavy scenes.

Streaming: The CPU has enough threads to handle encoding and gaming simultaneously. The 32 threads and 5.2 GHz boost clock will allow for software x264 encoding without impacting game performance, though the GPU’s NVENC encoder is also available for hardware encoding. The GPU’s tensor cores can handle AI-based noise reduction, but the overall quality will be limited by the GPU’s encoding capabilities.

Video editing: The CPU’s Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 34244 will make export times extremely short, and the 36 MB of L3 cache helps with timeline scrubbing. The GPU’s 8 GB of VRAM is enough for 1080p or 1440p editing with effects, but 4K timelines with heavy color grading may exceed the memory capacity. The FP32 performance of 8.087 TFLOPS provides decent acceleration for effects that use CUDA.

3D rendering: This is where the CPU shines. The 24 cores and 32 threads will render scenes in Blender or similar software much faster than most desktop processors. The GPU’s 18 RT cores can accelerate ray tracing, but the low pixel rate of 56.16 GPixel/s means final renders will be slower than a dedicated workstation GPU. The CPU will often finish its part and wait for the GPU.

Software development: Compiling large codebases will be exceptionally fast with 32 threads. The ECC memory support ensures data integrity during long builds. The integrated UHD Graphics 770 can handle display output, so the RTX 3050 OEM is only needed if the developer uses GPU-accelerated libraries, which will perform adequately but not impressively.

Student and office work: This system is overkill for document editing, spreadsheets, and web browsing. The CPU’s power is wasted on such tasks, and the GPU is unnecessary. However, for engineering students running simulations or data science students processing large datasets, the CPU will provide a significant advantage. The small form factor and dual-slot GPU make it suitable for a desk, but the 242 mm length requires a mid-tower case.

Gaming Performance

There are no measured FPS rows for this exact CPU and GPU combination in the data pack, so all gaming figures are estimates based on the benchmark scores. The GPU’s Passmark G3D score of 11857 and its 57th percentile suggest it is capable of 1080p gaming at medium to high settings in most titles. The DirectX 11 score of 86 is higher than the DirectX 12 score of 58, indicating that older games or those using DX11 will perform better. For a game like Fortnite or Valorant, which are CPU-light and GPU-moderate, the system should achieve 144+ FPS at 1080p with competitive settings. For a AAA title like Cyberpunk 2077, the GPU will likely manage 30-40 FPS at 1080p with medium settings and DLSS enabled, given the tensor cores. The 8 GB of VRAM is a hard limit for high-resolution textures, so 1440p gaming will require reduced settings. The CPU will not be a bottleneck in any scenario, as its single-core score of 4834 in Cinebench R23 is more than sufficient for game logic. The estimates indicate a system that is playable but not competitive for high-refresh or high-resolution gaming. The GPU is the limiting factor, and users should treat this as a 1080p gaming machine with a CPU that is ready for future upgrades.