SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core i9-13900T + Intel Arc A310

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)

▼

90 Score

Top 10% Ranking

90 / 100

ULTIMATE READY

Apex Performer

Top 10% 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

85%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core i9-13900T

61,723 Benchmark Score

Top 4% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

Intel Arc A310

7,550 Benchmark Score

Top 15% 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

# CPU Analysis — Intel Core i9-13900T

The Intel Core i9-13900T is a 24-core, 32-thread Raptor Lake-S processor built on Intel's 10 nm process node with a 257 mm² die. Its base clock sits at 1100 MHz, but the boost clock reaches 5.30 GHz — a wide frequency range that defines its dual personality. At the 35 W TDP, this chip is fundamentally a low-power variant of the flagship i9-13900K, trading sustained clocks for dramatically reduced power draw. The cache hierarchy is substantial: 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. This is a desktop part with server-grade thread counts, and the benchmark scores reflect that positioning.

Looking at Cinebench results, the multi-core picture is commanding. The R23 multi-core score of 36517 places this CPU in the top tier of desktop processors, with a 92nd percentile ranking across all CPUs. The R20 multi-core score of 15337 and R15 multi-core score of 3680 corroborate this strength. For heavily threaded workloads like 3D rendering, video encoding, or scientific simulation, the 13900T delivers performance within 0.1% of the Core i9-13900K (avg score 61766 vs 61723), meaning the power limit does not meaningfully hamper short burst multi-core throughput. The single-core scores are equally impressive: R23 single-core at 5155, R20 at 2165, and R15 at 519. These figures place it in the upper echelon for lightly threaded tasks such as gaming, spreadsheet calculations, and general desktop responsiveness.

PassMark results enrich the analysis. The multithread score of 43036 and single-thread score of 4177 confirm the dual strengths. Data compression at 538254 and integer math at 157324 indicate excellent throughput for database operations, file archiving, and financial modeling. Floating point math at 108779 and extended instructions at 29719 show strong scientific computing capability. The find prime numbers score of 175 is notably low, suggesting that while the chip excels at broad parallel workloads, it is not optimized for specific single-instruction bottlenecks. Random string sorting at 63358 and data encryption at 34415 round out a profile that favors mixed, real-world server-like tasks over synthetic extremes.

The nearest rival comparison is telling. The i9-13900T's average benchmark score of 61723 is 0.1% behind the 13900K (61766), 0.2% behind the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus (61834), and 0.2% behind the 13900KF (61841), while running 0.6% ahead of the Intel Xeon 636 (61360). This means the 13900T is effectively at parity with the best desktop processors of its generation, despite its 35 W TDP. The architectural efficiency of Raptor Lake, combined with the high boost clock, allows it to punch far above its power envelope. For workloads that fit within the boost duration, users will not notice a difference from a full-power 13900K.

# Upgrade Path and Platform

The 13900T uses Intel Socket 1700, the LGA platform that spans both 12th and 13th generation Core processors. Memory support includes both DDR4 and DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration, giving builders flexibility in choosing between cost-effective DDR4 or higher-bandwidth DDR5. ECC memory is supported, which is unusual for a consumer desktop chip and opens the door to workstation builds where data integrity is paramount. PCIe connectivity is Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes, providing ample bandwidth for the fastest NVMe SSDs and discrete GPUs available today.

The 35 W TDP is the defining feature for upgrade planning. A suggested PSU of 200 W for the GPU (Intel Arc A310) means the entire system can run on a modest power supply — this is a platform that does not require a high-wattage PSU or exotic cooling. The CPU itself, with its 35 W TDP, can be handled by a capable air cooler; no liquid cooling is necessary. This opens the door to compact builds, small form factor cases, and silent operation that would be impossible with a higher-TDP chip.

For a sensible next upgrade, the path is clear: the CPU has headroom to drive much faster GPUs than the Arc A310. Since the 13900T performs within 0.2% of the 13900K and 13900KF, users can upgrade the GPU without worrying about CPU bottlenecking. The PCIe Gen 5 lanes ensure future GPUs will not be starved for bandwidth. Alternatively, a user could step up to a 13900K or 13900KF if they need sustained multi-core performance beyond what the 35 W TDP allows — the 0.1% to 0.2% benchmark delta suggests the upgrade would yield modest gains, primarily in all-core sustained workloads. The platform itself does not need changing; the socket, memory support, and PCIe capabilities are identical.

The Arc A310's 30 W TDP and lack of power connectors mean the GPU draws entirely from the PCIe slot, simplifying cabling and further reducing system power requirements. With a 200 W suggested PSU, the combined CPU and GPU power draw is remarkably low, making this an ideal foundation for always-on workstations or energy-conscious builds. The single-slot GPU and 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs also suggest multi-display productivity setups are a primary use case.

# Benchmark Performance

The combined system percentile is 66, indicating that this pairing sits above the median but below the top third of all desktop configurations. This is a direct consequence of the GPU holding back the CPU. The CPU alone is at the 92nd percentile, while the GPU sits at the 40th percentile. The delta between these two is the story of this build: a top-tier processor paired with an entry-level graphics card.

The CPU's average benchmark score of 61723 places it at 0.1% behind the 13900K and 0.2% behind the 13900KF, as noted earlier. The GPU's average benchmark score of 7550 places it 0.1% behind the AMD Radeon R7 250 (7557), 0.4% behind the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 (7580), 1% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (7472), and 1.4% ahead of the AMD Radeon HD 8850M (7447). The GPU is thus competitive with a GTX 1650, which is a decidedly entry-level card by modern standards.

GPU benchmark details reinforce this: PassMark G3D score of 5433, G2D score of 625, and compute score of 2157. The DirectX scores are low across the board — DirectX 9 at 69, DirectX 10 at 31, DirectX 11 at 33, DirectX 12 at 29 — indicating that the Arc A310 is not built for high-end gaming. Geekbench scores of 30607 (OpenCL) and 28964 (Vulkan) show compute capability that is respectable for a 30 W card but not competitive with mainstream gaming GPUs.

The combined picture is one of extreme imbalance. The CPU is a 92nd-percentile performer that could handle any workload thrown at it, while the GPU is a 40th-percentile part suited for basic display output, light GPU-accelerated tasks, and multi-monitor productivity. In CPU-bound workloads like compilation, data processing, and office multitasking, the system will feel exceptionally fast. In GPU-bound workloads like gaming or 3D rendering, the Arc A310 becomes the limiting factor, and the CPU's power will go largely unused.

# Balance and Bottleneck

The bottleneck analysis is unambiguous: the GPU is the limiting component in graphics-intensive workloads, while the CPU is effectively never the constraint. The CPU's 92nd percentile versus the GPU's 40th percentile creates a massive gap. In gaming, this means frame rates will be determined entirely by the Arc A310's capabilities. The CPU's single-thread score of 4177 on PassMark and R23 single-core of 5155 are more than sufficient for any modern game engine; the GPU's PassMark G3D score of 5433 and DirectX 12 score of 29 are what will hold frame rates back.

For CPU-bound tasks, there is no bottleneck at all. Data compression at 538254, integer math at 157324, and multithread scores of 43036 mean the CPU can saturate multiple cores without breaking a sweat. The 36 MB of L3 cache reduces memory latency, and the 5.30 GHz boost clock ensures snappy single-threaded response. The only workload where the 35 W TDP might cause a bottleneck is sustained all-core rendering, where the chip may throttle to maintain power limits — but even then, the R23 multi-core score of 36517 shows it sustains impressive throughput.

The FPS scaling evidence — while estimated, since no measured FPS data exists for this combination — points to the GPU as the ceiling. A 40th-percentile GPU with 4 GB of VRAM will cap out at low-to-medium settings in modern titles, regardless of the CPU's 92nd-percentile power. Conversely, the CPU's headroom means upgrading the GPU later would produce near-linear FPS gains without needing a CPU change. This is a classic case of a CPU that outlives several GPU generations, making it a sound long-term investment if the GPU is upgraded.

# GPU Analysis

The Intel Arc A310 is built on the DG2-128 chip with Xe-HPG architecture, using TSMC's 6 nm process with 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die. It features 768 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 raster operation units. The 6 RT cores provide hardware ray tracing support, though the modest core count limits ray tracing performance. The GPU has no listed tensor cores, meaning AI-accelerated workloads will rely on the DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) feature set and Vulkan 1.4 support instead.

Memory is 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, yielding 124.0 GB/s of bandwidth. This is the most significant limitation for modern workloads. The 4 GB capacity is marginal for 1080p gaming with high-resolution textures, and the 64-bit bus restricts bandwidth for compute tasks. The memory clock runs at 1937 MHz, providing 15.5 Gbps effective speed. The base and boost clocks are both 1750 MHz, which is modest, and the FP32 performance of 2.688 TFLOPS (with FP16 at 5.376 TFLOPS via 2:1 ratio) places it in entry-level territory.

The GPU's benchmark scores confirm its position. PassMark G3D at 5433 and GPU compute at 2157 are low by modern standards. The DirectX 12 score of 29 is particularly telling — this card is not designed for modern gaming APIs. The G2D score of 625 is adequate for desktop compositing but not exceptional. Geekbench OpenCL at 30607 and Vulkan at 28964 show that compute workloads can get some acceleration, but the 40th percentile ranking across all GPUs means it will be outperformed by most discrete cards from the last several years.

For rendering, the 28.00 GPixel/s pixel rate and 56.00 GTexel/s texture rate are the hardware limits. These figures translate to acceptable performance for 2D workloads, light 3D preview, and basic video playback, but not for serious 3D rendering or GPU-accelerated effects. The 4 GB VRAM will also cause out-of-memory errors in larger scenes. The card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4, so it is feature-complete, but the execution resources are simply too limited for demanding graphics tasks.

# Who Should Build It

This system is for users who prioritize CPU performance above all else and need only basic GPU capability. The target audience includes software developers compiling large codebases — the 24 cores and 32 threads with a multithread score of 43036 will dramatically reduce build times. Data scientists and analysts working with large datasets will benefit from the data compression score of 538254 and integer math score of 157324. Students in computer science or engineering fields will find the CPU more than capable for MATLAB, Python, and simulation workloads, while the GPU handles display output and light visualization.

Small business workstations are another fit. The ECC memory support is a differentiator, making this suitable for financial modeling, database management, and other data-integrity-critical tasks. The 35 W TDP and 200 W suggested PSU mean the system runs quietly and economically, ideal for office environments. The 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs on the GPU support multi-monitor setups for trading floors, dashboards, or productivity workflows.

Content creators who work primarily with CPU-based workflows — such as audio production, photo editing (where the CPU handles most of the heavy lifting), or light video editing with CPU encoding — will find the 13900T's R23 multi-core score of 36517 more than sufficient. The GPU can handle timeline playback and basic effects, though 4 GB VRAM may limit 4K editing. Gamers are not the target; the GPU's 40th percentile ranking and DirectX scores below 70 mean this is not a gaming rig. However, a user who buys this for CPU work and later adds a faster GPU will have a formidable machine.

# Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: This is not viable. The Arc A310's PassMark G3D score of 5433 and DirectX 12 score of 29 indicate entry-level performance that will struggle to maintain 60 FPS at 1080p in modern titles, and high-refresh monitors would be wasted. The CPU is capable, but the GPU is the hard limit.

Streaming: The CPU excels here. With 24 cores and 32 threads, software x264 encoding is feasible without impacting game performance. The CPU's 36 MB L3 cache and high boost clock ensure smooth encoding. The GPU's 4 GB VRAM and low scores may limit game quality, but the streaming pipeline itself is well-supported.

Video editing: CPU-heavy workflows shine. The R23 multi-core score of 36517 handles 4K timeline scrubbing and export encoding. The GPU can accelerate some effects via DirectX 12, but 4 GB VRAM and 124.0 GB/s bandwidth may cause stuttering with heavy GPU-accelerated effects. For proxy-based editing, this is a strong system.

3D rendering: CPU rendering is excellent. The multithread score of 43036 and FP32 compute capabilities make Blender (CPU mode) or similar renderers fast. GPU rendering is not viable — the Arc A310's 2.688 TFLOPS FP32 and 4 GB VRAM will limit scene complexity and render speed.

Software development: This is a primary use case. Compilation is heavily multi-threaded, and the CPU's 24 cores with a multithread score of 43036 will dramatically speed up builds. Data encryption score of 34415 helps with secure development workflows. The ECC memory support adds reliability for long-running test suites.

Student and office work: The system is overkill but efficient. The 35 W TDP means low power draw, and the CPU's single-thread score of 4177 ensures snappy application launches. The GPU's 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs support multi-monitor productivity. Office suites, web browsing, and spreadsheet work will be instantaneous.

# FAQ

Q: How does the Core i9-13900T compare to the 13900K in performance?

A: The 13900T's average benchmark score of 61723 is 0.1% behind the 13900K's 61766. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the 13900T scores 36517, showing near-identical performance despite its 35 W TDP.

Q: Can the Intel Arc A310 handle modern games?

A: No. The Arc A310 has a PassMark G3D score of 5433 and DirectX 12 score of 29, placing it at the 40th percentile of all GPUs. It is competitive with a GTX 1650 (1% ahead) but is entry-level and will struggle with modern titles.

Q: What is the maximum memory capacity and speed supported?

A: The exact capacity is not specified, but the CPU supports DDR4 and DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration with ECC memory support. The GPU has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 124.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Is this system good for software development?

A: Yes, the 24-core, 32-thread CPU with a multithread score of 43036 and data compression score of 538254 is excellent for compiling code and running test suites. The ECC memory support adds reliability.

Q: What power supply is recommended?

A: The GPU has a suggested PSU of 200 W. The CPU's TDP is 35 W, so the total system power draw is very low, allowing for a compact, efficient power supply.

Q: Can I upgrade the GPU later without changing the CPU?

A: Absolutely. The CPU is at the 92nd percentile with PCIe Gen 5 support (20 lanes), so it will not bottleneck any GPU upgrade. The CPU's performance is within 0.2% of the 13900K and 13900KF, ensuring longevity.

Q: Does the GPU support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the Arc A310 has 6 RT cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). However, the low core count and 2.688 TFLOPS FP32 performance mean ray tracing will be very slow in practice.

# Gaming Performance

No measured FPS data exists for the Intel Core i9-13900T paired with the Intel Arc A310. The FACT PACK contains no measuredFps rows for this combination, so all frame rate figures here are estimates derived from the benchmark scores and should be treated as approximations rather than exact measurements.

Given the Arc A310's 40th percentile ranking, PassMark G3D score of 5433, and DirectX 12 score of 29, expected gaming performance is at entry-level 1080p. The 4 GB VRAM and 64-bit bus (124.0 GB/s bandwidth) will limit texture quality and resolution. In esports titles like Counter-Strike 2 or League of Legends, the GPU's 2.688 TFLOPS FP32 may achieve 60-100 FPS at 1080p low-to-medium settings, as these games are not graphically demanding. In AAA titles of recent years, expect 30-50 FPS at 1080p low settings, with significant dips in scenes with heavy effects.

The CPU will not be a factor in any of these estimates. Its R23 single-core score of 5155 and PassMark single-thread score of 4177 are more than adequate for any game engine. The bottleneck is entirely the GPU, and its DirectX 9 score of 69 versus DirectX 12 score of 29 suggests that older titles (which use DirectX 9 or 11) may actually perform relatively better than modern ones. The DirectX 11 score of 33 and DirectX 10 score of 31 are also low, so even slightly older games will not see high frame rates. For gaming, this system should be considered a productivity machine with light gaming capability, not a gaming rig. Users who prioritize gaming should plan to replace the Arc A310 with a higher-performance GPU.

Rate My PC: Intel Core i9-13900T + Intel Arc A310

Apex Performer

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core i9-13900T

Intel Arc A310

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

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