SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core i9-13900KS + Intel Arc A750

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

96%

GPU

91%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core i9-13900KS

64,051 Benchmark Score

Top 4% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

Intel Arc A750

20,582 Benchmark Score

Top 9% 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 is a pairing of extremes: a flagship 24-core processor designed to push every workload to its limit, paired with a mid-range graphics card that prioritizes capability per dollar. The benchmark data shows a system with exceptional compute and rendering headroom on the CPU side, while the GPU provides a solid baseline for 1080p and 1440p gaming. The results indicate a platform built for professional productivity first, with gaming as a secondary but fully viable function, provided expectations are aligned with the GPU's class.

GPU Analysis — VRAM, bandwidth, clocks, RT/tensor hardware, what the benchmark scores mean for rendering

The Intel Arc A750 is built on the Xe-HPG architecture and the DG2-512 chip, fabricated on a 6 nm process from TSMC. It carries 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, producing a memory bandwidth of 512.0 GB/s. This is a significant amount of bandwidth for a card in this segment, and it directly supports the GPU's compute throughput. The memory clock is listed at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective speed. The GPU operates at a base clock of 2050 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz, which are high frequencies that help drive the raw shader output.

The card houses 3584 shading units, 224 texture mapping units, and 112 render output units. This configuration yields a pixel rate of 268.8 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 537.6 GTexel/s. For compute, the A750 delivers 17.20 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 34.41 TFLOPS of FP16 performance at a 2:1 ratio. These numbers are substantial for a card that sits at the 66th percentile among all GPUs in the database. In practical terms, this makes the A750 a competent performer for 3D rendering and video encoding tasks, where raw shader and compute throughput matter more than advanced features.

For ray tracing and machine learning, the A750 includes 28 dedicated RT cores. It does not have a separate tensor core count listed in the data, but it supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. This means the hardware is fully capable of running modern games with ray-traced effects and using the latest graphics APIs. The benchmark scores reinforce this; the card achieves a Geekbench OpenCL score of 98554 and a Vulkan score of 85631. In the Passmark suite, the G3D score is 12534, while the GPU compute score is 5368. The lower compute score relative to G3D suggests that while the hardware is strong for graphics rasterization, its raw compute performance, while good, is not its primary strength.

The rendering analysis hinges on the 8 GB VRAM capacity. While 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth prevents memory from being a bottleneck in most scenarios, the 8 GB capacity may limit texture detail and resolution in the most demanding titles. The data shows the A750 is positioned very closely to the Intel Arc B570, with a deltaPct of 0.1, and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile, with a deltaPct of 0.2. This indicates that in raw average benchmark score, the A750 is statistically tied with these competitors, placing it in a solid mid-range tier. For rendering, this means 1080p and 1440p are the sweet spots, where the combination of bandwidth and shading power can be fully utilized without hitting the VRAM ceiling.

Benchmark Performance — exact CPU and GPU scores, percentile positions, and what the combined picture is

The combined system percentile is 80, indicating it outperforms 80% of all recorded desktop configurations in the database. This is a strong showing, but it is heavily weighted by the CPU's exceptional performance. The CPU sits at the 93rd percentile among all CPUs, while the GPU is at the 66th percentile among all GPUs. This gap is the defining characteristic of this pairing: a top-tier processor paired with a mid-tier graphics card.

The CPU's average benchmark score is 64051. Its nearest rival, the AMD EPYC 7343, scores 64202, a delta of -0.2%, meaning the i9-13900KS is effectively tied with a server-class EPYC chip. It is also 0.4% ahead of the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 390 and 0.6% behind the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F. These comparisons illustrate that the i9-13900KS's processing power is on par with modern enthusiast and enterprise offerings. In specific tests, the CPU achieves a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 51368 and a single-core score of 7252. The Geekbench multi-core score is 23607, with a single-core score of 2771. These numbers confirm its dominance in both lightly-threaded and heavily-threaded tasks.

The GPU's average benchmark score is 20582. Its closest rival is the Intel Arc B570 at 20556, a delta of 0.1%, and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile at 20534, a delta of 0.2%. The A750 is also 0.4% behind the AMD Radeon R9 M390X and 0.5% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro M4000M. These are older or mobile parts, which contextualizes the A750's position. In the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, the GPU scores 2612. The Passmark G3D score is 12534. This data shows a GPU that is competitive with the previous generation's high-end mobile parts and current entry-level desktop parts.

The combined picture is one of imbalance. The CPU can feed data to the GPU far faster than the GPU can process it in gaming scenarios. However, for non-gaming workloads like video encoding, 3D scene rendering, and software compilation, the CPU's 93rd percentile performance will be the primary driver, and the GPU's 66th percentile compute will provide a capable assist. The data suggests that this is a workstation-oriented build that can double as a gaming machine, rather than a gaming-first system.

Upgrade Path and Platform — socket, memory support, PCIe, PSU headroom from suggestedPsu/tdp, what a sensible next upgrade looks like

The foundation of this build is the Intel Socket 1700 platform, using the Raptor Lake architecture on a 10 nm process. The CPU supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, with a dual-channel memory bus and a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. This flexibility allows builders to choose between cost-effective DDR4 or higher-performance DDR5. The platform also supports ECC memory, which is a feature typically found in workstation and server environments, adding to the professional appeal of this build.

The CPU provides PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only), which ensures that any modern graphics card or NVMe SSD can run at full bandwidth. The GPU itself uses a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface, which is fully compatible and does not bottleneck the A750's performance. The power situation is straightforward. The CPU has a TDP of 150 W, while the GPU has a TDP of 225 W. Intel suggests a 550 W power supply for the GPU alone. When combined, the system will require a PSU that can handle the peak draw of both components, and a quality 650 W or 750 W unit would provide comfortable headroom, though the data only specifies the 550 W suggestion for the GPU.

A sensible next upgrade path is clear. The CPU is already at the top of the stack for this socket, so further CPU upgrades are not necessary. The bottleneck is the GPU. Upgrading to a higher-tier graphics card would balance the system and unlock the CPU's full gaming potential. The data shows the CPU is capable of scores far above what the A750 can utilize in frame rate generation. Therefore, the next logical step is a GPU upgrade, which would move the system from the 80th combined percentile much higher. The platform's PCIe Gen 5 support ensures that a future GPU will not be limited by the interface.

Who Should Build It — target users and industries tied strictly to the measured performance

This build is for users who prioritize processor performance above all else. The CPU's 93rd percentile ranking and its average score of 64051, which rivals server-class EPYC processors, make it ideal for professionals who work with heavily multi-threaded applications. This includes video editors who render long timelines, 3D artists who use CPU-based rendering engines, and software developers who compile large codebases. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 51368 confirms its ability to handle these demanding tasks.

Content creators will find the combination useful. The GPU's 17.20 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth are sufficient for GPU-accelerated effects in editing software and for hardware encoding. The 8 GB VRAM is adequate for 1080p and 1440p editing timelines with moderate effects stacks. For developers, the CPU's 24 cores and 32 threads, combined with its 36 MB of shared L3 cache, will drastically reduce compile times. The Passmark data encryption score of 47772 also indicates strong performance for security-related workloads.

Students and small business workstations would also benefit, but the build is overkill for basic office tasks. The Passmark single-thread score of 4712 is excellent for general responsiveness, but the multi-thread power is wasted on spreadsheets and word processing. This is a niche build for a power user who knows they need massive CPU throughput and is willing to accept a mid-range GPU to achieve it within a specific budget. It is not a balanced gaming PC; it is a productivity monster that games on the side.

CPU Analysis — cores, clocks, architecture, what the benchmark scores mean for real workloads

The Intel Core i9-13900KS is a 24-core, 32-thread processor based on the Raptor Lake architecture, specifically Raptor Lake-S, fabricated on Intel's 10 nm process. It has a base clock of 3.20 GHz and a boost clock of 6.00 GHz, which is the highest boost clock listed in the data. This combination of high core count and extreme boost frequency is the reason for its 93rd percentile ranking. The cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and a massive 36 MB of shared L3 cache, which helps keep data flowing to the cores.

The benchmark scores paint a clear picture of its capabilities. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 51368 is exceptional, indicating that it can sustain heavy all-core loads for extended periods, which is critical for video rendering and scientific simulations. The single-core score of 7252 is equally impressive, showing that it excels in tasks like gaming physics, spreadsheet recalculation, and general system responsiveness. The Geekbench multi-core score of 23607 and single-core score of 2771 corroborate these findings.

In real workloads, the Passmark tests provide specific insights. The floating-point math score is 154805, and the integer math score is 211027, both of which are enormous numbers that indicate raw arithmetic processing power. The data compression score is 814838, and the random string sorting score is 90257, which are relevant for database operations and file archiving. The extended instructions score of 48217 shows strong SIMD performance, which is useful for scientific computing and multimedia processing. The CPU's TDP of 150 W is the rated power draw, but the boost behavior will pull more, requiring a robust cooling solution. The 6.00 GHz boost clock is a marketing and performance highlight, but sustaining that requires excellent thermal headroom.

Gaming Performance — measured FPS by game and resolution from measuredFpsUltraByGame (or estimates)

The FACT PACK contains no measured FPS data for this specific CPU and GPU combination. The `measuredFpsUltraByGame` field is empty, and `dataIsMeasured` is false. Therefore, all frame rate expectations are estimates based on the benchmark scores and the relative performance of the components.

Based on the GPU's benchmark position, which is statistically tied with the Intel Arc B570 and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile, the gaming performance is expected to be solid for 1080p and 1440p gaming at high settings. The GPU's 17.20 TFLOPS and 512.0 GB/s bandwidth suggest it can handle most modern titles at 1080p with maximum settings and achieve 60+ FPS. At 1440p, it will likely require some settings reductions to maintain high frame rates, especially in graphically intense games.

The CPU's gaming performance is less of a concern. Its 6.00 GHz boost clock and strong single-thread score of 7252 in Cinebench R23 mean it will not bottleneck any game. The bottleneck will be entirely the GPU. Expect the system to deliver frame rates consistent with a mid-range GPU, meaning high-refresh-rate gaming (144Hz+) is possible in less demanding esports titles at 1080p, but AAA games will be limited to 60-100 FPS depending on the title and settings. It is important to note that these are estimates, and the actual performance will vary by game and driver optimization.

Balance and Bottleneck — which component limits which workload, using percentiles and FPS scaling as evidence

The system has a clear bottleneck: the GPU. The CPU is at the 93rd percentile, and the GPU is at the 66th percentile. This 27-point gap is the primary indicator of imbalance. In gaming, the CPU can render frames in milliseconds, but the GPU takes longer to generate the image, so the frame rate is capped by the GPU's output. Upgrading the CPU would yield zero gaming performance gains; upgrading the GPU would yield significant gains.

This is evidenced by the FPS scaling expectations. Since the CPU is more than capable of feeding the GPU, the frame rates will scale directly with the GPU's capabilities. A stronger GPU would produce higher FPS. Conversely, in CPU-bound workloads like video encoding, 3D rendering, and software compilation, the CPU is the primary driver, and the GPU plays a supporting role. In these scenarios, the CPU's 93rd percentile performance will be fully utilized, and the system will perform exceptionally.

The 3DMark 16-thread score of 11616 and max-thread score of 16243 show that the CPU's performance scales well with thread count, making it ideal for multi-threaded rendering. The GPU's Passmark G3D score of 12534 is good, but it is not in the same league as the CPU's relative performance. The verdict is that this is a CPU-first build. The GPU is a placeholder for a future upgrade that would balance the system. For professional workloads, the balance is acceptable, as the CPU does the heavy lifting. For gaming, the GPU is the limiting factor.

FAQ

Q: Is the Intel Arc A750 a good match for the Intel Core i9-13900KS?

A: The data suggests it is not a balanced match. The CPU is at the 93rd percentile, while the GPU is at the 66th percentile. The CPU will greatly outperform the GPU in most tasks, creating a bottleneck in gaming where the GPU limits frame rates.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between the i9-13900KS and its closest rival?

A: The i9-13900KS has an average benchmark score of 64051. Its closest rival, the AMD EPYC 7343, has a score of 64202, which is a delta of -0.2%, meaning the i9-13900KS is slightly behind that specific rival but statistically tied.

Q: Does the Intel Arc A750 support hardware ray tracing?

A: Yes, the Intel Arc A750 includes 28 dedicated RT cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), which includes ray tracing capabilities.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of the Intel Arc A750?

A: The Intel Arc A750 has a 256-bit memory bus with 8 GB of GDDR6 memory, producing a bandwidth of 512.0 GB/s.

Q: What is the maximum boost clock of the Intel Core i9-13900KS?

A: The Intel Core i9-13900KS has a boost clock of 6.00 GHz, which is one of the highest in the database.

Q: Does the CPU support both DDR4 and DDR5 memory?

A: Yes, the Intel Core i9-13900KS supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, with a dual-channel memory bus and a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s.

Q: What is the combined percentile rank of this system?

A: The combined system percentile is 80, meaning it outperforms 80% of all recorded desktop configurations.

Usage Scenarios — grounded in the scores

High-Refresh Gaming: The CPU's single-thread score of 7252 in Cinebench R23 ensures it will not be a limiting factor. The GPU, however, will cap frame rates. Expect 1080p esports titles to reach high refresh rates, but AAA games will be limited by the GPU's 66th percentile performance.

Streaming: The CPU's 24 cores and 32 threads provide ample headroom for encoding and streaming simultaneously. The Passmark multi-thread score of 60644 indicates that the CPU can handle the encoding workload without impacting game performance, though the GPU will still be the gaming bottleneck.

Video Editing: This is a strong scenario. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 51368 will accelerate export times and timeline rendering. The GPU's 17.20 TFLOPS and 512.0 GB/s bandwidth will assist with effects and previews, though the 8 GB VRAM may limit very complex 4K timelines.

3D Rendering: The CPU is a rendering powerhouse. Its 93rd percentile ranking and scores rivaling server-class CPUs like the AMD EPYC 7343 make it ideal for CPU-based renderers. The GPU can also be used for GPU-accelerated rendering, but it is not the primary strength of this build.

Software Development: Compilation times will be exceptionally low. The high integer math score of 211027 and data compression score of 814838 indicate rapid code compilation and file processing. The high core count will also allow for fast parallel builds.

Student and Office Work: This build is overkill. The Passmark single-thread score of 4712 is great for responsiveness, but the massive multi-thread power is wasted on word processing, spreadsheets, and web browsing. This is a professional tool, not an office productivity machine.

Rate My PC: Intel Core i9-13900KS + Intel Arc A750

Apex Performer

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core i9-13900KS

Intel Arc A750

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

GPU Analysis — VRAM, bandwidth, clocks, RT/tensor hardware, what the benchmark scores mean for rendering

Benchmark Performance — exact CPU and GPU scores, percentile positions, and what the combined picture is

Upgrade Path and Platform — socket, memory support, PCIe, PSU headroom from suggestedPsu/tdp, what a sensible next upgrade looks like

Who Should Build It — target users and industries tied strictly to the measured performance

CPU Analysis — cores, clocks, architecture, what the benchmark scores mean for real workloads

Gaming Performance — measured FPS by game and resolution from measuredFpsUltraByGame (or estimates)

Balance and Bottleneck — which component limits which workload, using percentiles and FPS scaling as evidence

FAQ

Usage Scenarios — grounded in the scores

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