SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core i9-13900E + NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000

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

Well Balanced

CPU

79%

GPU

90%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core i9-13900E

8,676 Benchmark Score

Top 21% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000

17,789 Benchmark Score

Top 10% 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

# Intel Core i9-13900E + NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000: Desktop Workstation Analysis

This desktop pairing combines Intel's 24-core Raptor Lake processor (65W TDP, 5.20 GHz boost) with NVIDIA's Turing-architecture Quadro RTX 4000 (8 GB GDDR6, 416 GB/s bandwidth). The CPU sits in the 65th percentile of all CPUs, while the GPU holds the 61st percentile of all GPUs, and the combined system ranks in the 63rd percentile of all pairings. Benchmark data shows the CPU is nearly identical in average score to several low-power mobile chips (within 1.1% of the Intel Core i7-8565U, i5-8365U, AMD EPYC 7601, and i7-10510U), while the GPU's average score sits within 1.4% of the AMD Radeon HD 7790 and GeForce RTX 4060. No measured FPS data exists for this exact combination; all frame-rate discussions below are estimated from the benchmark scores.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: This system cannot reliably drive high-refresh monitors at maximum settings. The Quadro RTX 4000's PassMark DirectX 12 score of 52 is exceptionally low, and its DirectX 11 score of 128 is modest; the GPU's 61st percentile ranking places it mid-pack. For 1080p high-refresh (144Hz+) gaming, the RTX 4060 — which the Quadro trails by 0.9% in average score — would similarly struggle at ultra settings, so this pairing is better suited to medium or lower presets. The CPU's strong single-core Cinebench R23 score of 4834 (roughly 2.4x the multi-core-per-thread average) helps frame pacing, but the GPU is the limiting factor.

Streaming: The CPU has 24 cores and 32 threads, and its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 34244 places it well above the 65th percentile of all CPUs. This provides ample headroom for x264 encoding while gaming, but the GPU's weak DirectX 12 score of 52 suggests game capture via NVENC (which relies on dedicated hardware) would be the better route. The Quadro's 288 tensor cores and 36 RT cores enable hardware-accelerated encoding and AI-based stream effects, but the overall GPU compute score of 6176 in PassMark indicates moderate throughput that will not excel at high-bitrate, high-resolution streaming.

Video editing: The 24-core / 32-thread CPU, with Geekbench multi-core score of 8337 and Cinebench R20 multi-core score of 14382, handles timeline scrubbing and export rendering effectively. The GPU's 8 GB VRAM and 416 GB/s bandwidth support 4K timeline playback and effect-heavy projects, but the low DirectX 12 score of 52 suggests GPU-accelerated effects (e.g., Lumetri, Neat Video) will be slow. For 1080p editing, this is a capable machine; for 4K or 8K, the GPU becomes a bottleneck.

3D rendering: The CPU's multi-core muscle (Cinebench R23 34244) is excellent for CPU-based renderers like V-Ray or Arnold. The GPU's FP32 performance of 7.119 TFLOPS and FP16 of 14.24 TFLOPS (2:1) are respectable but not class-leading; the Quadro RTX 4000's OpenCL score of 74540 and Vulkan score of 78844 in Geekbench indicate it can handle GPU renderers like Octane or Redshift, but the 61st GPU percentile means it will fall behind higher-end cards. The 8 GB VRAM limits scene complexity.

Software development: The i9-13900E's 32 threads, 36 MB L3 cache, and 5.20 GHz boost clock provide strong single-threaded performance (Cinebench R20 single-core 2030) for compilation and IDE responsiveness. The UHD Graphics 770 integrated GPU offers a fallback for multi-monitor setups, and ECC memory support (true) is valuable for long-running build servers. The GPU's compute capabilities are secondary here, making this a solid developer workstation.

Student and office work: This pairing is overpowered for typical student tasks like word processing, spreadsheets, and web browsing — the CPU's 65th percentile and GPU's 61st percentile are far beyond what such workloads require. The 65W TDP (CPU) and 160W TDP (GPU) make it relatively efficient for a desktop, but the Quadro RTX 4000's single-slot design and 450W suggested PSU are more than needed for office productivity. For office use, the integrated GPU alone would suffice, making the discrete GPU unnecessary.

GPU Analysis

The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 (Turing architecture, TU104 chip, 12nm process from TSMC) packs 13,600 million transistors on a 545 mm² die with a transistor density of 25.0M/mm². Its 8 GB GDDR6 memory runs at 1625 MHz (13 Gbps effective) across a 256-bit bus, delivering 416.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The 2304 shading units, 144 TMUs, and 64 ROPs provide a pixel rate of 98.88 GPixel/s and texture rate of 222.5 GTexel/s. Base clock is 1005 MHz with a boost of 1545 MHz.

The GPU includes 36 RT cores and 288 tensor cores, which support ray-traced rendering and AI-accelerated workflows respectively. FP32 throughput is 7.119 TFLOPS, while FP16 reaches 14.24 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio). The card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, and outputs to 3x DisplayPort 1.4a and 1x USB Type-C.

Benchmark data reveals a mixed picture. The PassMark G3D score of 15117 places it in the 61st percentile of all GPUs, and its average benchmark score of 17789 is within 1.4% of the AMD Radeon Pro 560 and within 0.9% of the GeForce RTX 4060. However, specific API performance is wildly inconsistent: the DirectX 12 score of 52 is catastrophically low (likely driver-optimization related for this workstation card), while DirectX 11 (128) and DirectX 9 (205) are more typical. The OpenCL score of 74540 and Vulkan score of 78844 in Geekbench show strong compute performance, and the PassMark GPU Compute score of 6176 indicates decent general-purpose throughput.

For rendering workloads, the 8 GB VRAM at 416 GB/s is adequate for 1080p and moderate 4K scenes, but the 256-bit bus limits memory-bound operations compared to wider-bus cards. The 36 RT cores enable hardware ray tracing, but the 7.119 TFLOPS FP32 figure suggests that complex ray-traced scenes will render slowly — this is a mid-tier workstation GPU, not a compute monster. The single-slot design and 160W TDP make it power-efficient, but the 2018 release date (November 12, 2018) means it is now end-of-life, succeeded by Workstation Ampere.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU's benchmark scores are consistently strong for multi-threaded workloads. Cinebench R15 multi-core: 3451; Cinebench R20 multi-core: 14382; Cinebench R23 multi-core: 34244. Single-core scores: Cinebench R15 487, R20 2030, R23 4834. Geekbench multi-core: 8337; single-core: 1646. The average benchmark score is 8676, placing it in the 65th percentile of all CPUs. Notably, its nearest rivals are low-power mobile and server chips: the Core i7-8565U (avg 8665, +0.1% delta), Core i5-8365U (avg 8708, -0.4%), AMD EPYC 7601 (avg 8619, +0.7%), and Core i7-10510U (avg 8580, +1.1%). This suggests the i9-13900E's average score is dragged down by its 65W TDP limit, which caps sustained multi-core performance; its peak single-core performance (Cinebench R23 4834) is far above what those rivals achieve.

The GPU's benchmarks: 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 1873; Geekbench OpenCL 74540; Geekbench Vulkan 78844; PassMark DirectX 10 108, DX11 128, DX12 52, DX9 205; PassMark G2D 846; PassMark G3D 15117; PassMark GPU Compute 6176. Average benchmark score is 17789, placing it in the 61st percentile. Its nearest rivals — AMD Radeon HD 7790 (+0.7%), GeForce RTX 4060 (+0.9%), Radeon 780M (+1.1%), and Radeon Pro 560 (+1.4%) — are a mixed bag of older, newer, and integrated GPUs, indicating the Quadro's average is competitive with mid-range consumer parts but not with high-end ones.

The combined 63rd percentile for this pairing reflects a balanced but mid-tier system: the CPU is above-average, the GPU is slightly above-average, and together they handle mainstream workloads without excelling at any extreme. The CPU's 65th percentile is meaningfully higher than the GPU's 61st, suggesting the processor has more headroom than the graphics card.

FAQ

Q: Is this system good for 4K gaming?

A: No. The GPU's PassMark DirectX 12 score of 52 is extremely low, and its 61st percentile ranking indicates mid-tier performance. For 4K, you would need well above the 61st percentile; this card is better suited for 1080p or 1440p at medium settings.

Q: How does the CPU compare to the Core i7-8565U?

A: The i9-13900E has an average benchmark score of 8676, which is 0.1% higher than the Core i7-8565U's 8665. However, the i9 has 24 cores versus the i7's 4 cores, so the i9's multi-core scores (e.g., Cinebench R23 34244) vastly exceed the i7, while the i7 likely wins in per-core efficiency.

Q: What is the GPU's memory bandwidth?

A: The Quadro RTX 4000 has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, running at 1625 MHz (13 Gbps effective), yielding 416.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Does this CPU support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Intel Core i9-13900E supports ECC memory, which is valuable for workstation reliability in data-critical tasks.

Q: Is the Quadro RTX 4000 good for ray tracing?

A: It has 36 RT cores, but the FP32 throughput of 7.119 TFLOPS is modest. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1873 suggests ray-traced workloads will be slow compared to modern cards.

Q: How does the GPU compare to the GeForce RTX 4060?

A: The Quadro RTX 4000's average benchmark score (17789) is 0.9% higher than the RTX 4060 (17639), placing them nearly identical in overall performance, though the RTX 4060 is a newer architecture.

Q: What is the CPU's TDP?

A: 65 watts, which is low for a 24-core processor, explaining its 65th percentile ranking — it trades sustained multi-core performance for power efficiency.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core i9-13900E is a 13th-generation Raptor Lake desktop processor (codename Raptor Lake-S) with 24 cores and 32 threads. It runs at a base clock of 1800 MHz and boosts to 5.20 GHz, all within a 65W TDP. The chip is built on Intel's 10nm process (foundry: Intel) with a die size of 257 mm². Cache hierarchy: 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 36 MB shared L3. It supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, with ECC memory support, and offers PCIe Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes. The integrated UHD Graphics 770 provides display output without a discrete GPU. It uses Intel Socket 1700, is unlocked (multiplier unlocked is false), and was released on January 3, 2023.

Benchmark results show a processor that excels in single-threaded tasks relative to its average. Cinebench R23 single-core score of 4834 is strong (roughly 2.4x the per-thread average of its multi-core score divided by threads), and the Geekbench single-core score of 1646 confirms solid per-core performance. Multi-core scores are respectable: Cinebench R23 34244, R20 14382, R15 3451, and Geekbench multi-core 8337. However, the 65th percentile ranking and the close proximity of low-power mobile rivals (all within 1.1% in average score) indicate that the 65W TDP severely constrains sustained all-core loads — the chip likely boosts briefly to 5.20 GHz then settles to lower clocks under heavy multi-threaded stress.

For real workloads, this means: software compilation (heavy multi-thread) will be slower than a similarly-clocked higher-TDP chip; video rendering in Cinebench-class tools will be efficient but not class-leading; and single-threaded tasks like web browsing, office apps, and legacy code compilation will feel very fast. The 36 MB L3 cache helps keep data local, and the 2 MB L2 per core is generous. The lack of an unlocked multiplier (multiplierUnlocked: false) means no overclocking, so users must accept the 65W limit. The 10nm process and 65W TDP make it a power-efficient choice for a 24-core part, but the benchmark data suggests it underperforms its core-count potential in sustained loads.

Gaming Performance

No measured FPS data exists for this exact CPU+GPU combination; all figures below are estimated from benchmark scores and should be treated as approximations. The GPU's PassMark G3D score of 15117 (61st percentile) and the CPU's single-core strength suggest the following expectations:

1080p Ultra: The Quadro RTX 4000's DirectX 12 score of 52 is alarming, but this is likely a driver quirk for a workstation card rather than representative of real gaming. Based on its average score being 0.9% above the RTX 4060, expect roughly 60-80 FPS in modern titles at 1080p ultra — playable but not high-refresh. The low DirectX 11 score (128) suggests older DX11 games may perform poorly.
1440p Ultra: Estimated 40-60 FPS in demanding titles, given the 8 GB VRAM and 416 GB/s bandwidth. The 61st GPU percentile indicates this is a mid-range card; 1440p ultra will require settings reductions in most games.
4K Ultra: Estimated 20-35 FPS, making 4K gaming impractical without significant quality reductions. The 7.119 TFLOPS FP32 and 98.88 GPixel/s pixel rate are insufficient for 4K ultra in modern games.
Esports titles (CS:GO, Valorant, etc.): The CPU's 5.20 GHz boost and strong single-core scores (Cinebench R23 4834) will push high frame rates, but the GPU's weak API-specific scores may cap performance around 100-144 FPS at 1080p.

The CPU's 65th percentile and GPU's 61st percentile suggest a balanced pairing for 1080p gaming at medium-to-high settings. The GPU's 8 GB VRAM is adequate for 1080p but will hit limits at higher resolutions with texture-heavy games.

Balance and Bottleneck

The data indicates a mild CPU-favored imbalance. The processor's 65th percentile is higher than the GPU's 61st percentile, meaning the CPU can push more frames than the GPU can render in most gaming scenarios. In CPU-bound games (esports, strategy), the i9-13900E's 5.20 GHz boost will keep frame rates high, but the Quadro's 61st percentile will cap overall FPS. In GPU-bound workloads (4K gaming, rendering), the GPU becomes the clear bottleneck — its 7.119 TFLOPS FP32 and 416 GB/s bandwidth are mid-tier, while the CPU's multi-core scores (Cinebench R23 34244) are ample for rendering.

The PassMark DirectX 12 score of 52 versus the CPU's strong multi-core scores highlights a specific bottleneck: if a game uses DX12 heavily, the GPU will severely limit performance despite the CPU's capability. Conversely, the Geekbench OpenCL score of 74540 shows the GPU can handle compute tasks, so for non-gaming GPU workloads (e.g., OpenCL-based rendering), the balance is more even. The CPU's 65W TDP is also a bottleneck — it prevents the 24 cores from sustaining maximum clocks, meaning in all-core workloads, the CPU may not fully feed the GPU. Overall, this is a system where the GPU is the limiting factor in graphics-intensive tasks, while the CPU's power limit is the limiting factor in sustained compute tasks.

Build Overview

This is a desktop-class build (buildClass: "desktop") combining an Intel Core i9-13900E (Raptor Lake, 24 cores, 32 threads, 65W TDP, Socket 1700) with an NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 (Turing, 8 GB GDDR6, 160W TDP, single-slot, PCIe 3.0 x16). The CPU is a 13th-gen part released January 3, 2023, while the GPU is a 2018-era workstation card now end-of-life. The combined percentile is 63rd, placing this system in the upper-mid tier of all desktop pairings.

The CPU's 65th percentile (average score 8676) is competitive with mobile and server chips like the Core i7-8565U and AMD EPYC 7601, reflecting its power-efficient design. The GPU's 61st percentile (average score 17789) matches the GeForce RTX 4060 and AMD Radeon HD 7790, indicating it is a capable but not high-end graphics solution. The overall 63rd percentile suggests this is a solid workstation for professional tasks (rendering, development, productivity) but not a gaming powerhouse or a top-tier compute node.

The pairing's class is desktop, and its tier is upper-mid: it will handle most professional workloads with ease, but won't compete with high-end consumer or enterprise hardware. The CPU's ECC memory support and 32 threads make it workstation-oriented, while the Quadro's driver certification and 8 GB VRAM target professional applications. This is a machine for productivity, not extreme gaming or massive parallel compute.

Who Should Build It

Professional content creators will benefit most: the 24-core CPU with Cinebench R23 multi-core 34244 handles video exports and 3D scene rendering, while the Quadro's 8 GB VRAM and 416 GB/s bandwidth support 4K timelines and moderate GPU rendering. The 288 tensor cores enable AI-accelerated effects in creative software.

Software developers building large codebases will appreciate the 32 threads and 36 MB L3 cache, with ECC memory support ensuring data integrity. The 5.20 GHz boost clock accelerates compilation of single-threaded build steps, and the integrated UHD Graphics 770 provides a backup display output.

Students and office workers in engineering or data science fields can run MATLAB, simulation tools, and heavy spreadsheets without issue — the CPU's 65th percentile and the GPU's 61st percentile are far beyond office needs, and the 65W CPU TDP keeps power costs low.

Gamers should skip this build unless they play at 1080p medium settings; the GPU's 61st percentile and low DirectX 12 score of 52 make high-refresh or high-resolution gaming impractical.

Small business workstations requiring ECC memory, professional driver support, and multi-threaded performance for databases or financial modeling will find this pairing capable, with the Quadro's single-slot design fitting compact cases.

In summary: target users are professionals needing a balanced CPU+GPU workstation for rendering, development, and compute-heavy office tasks, not gamers or those needing top-tier GPU performance.

Rate My PC: Intel Core i9-13900E + NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000

Power Build

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core i9-13900E

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000

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

Usage Scenarios

GPU Analysis

Benchmark Performance

FAQ

CPU Analysis

Gaming Performance

Balance and Bottleneck

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