SYSTEM ANALYZER

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

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

81 / 100
HIGH-END

Power Build

Top 19% of systems. Excellent for 1440p Ultra or 4K High gaming.

1440p Ultra4K High

System Balance Analysis

CPU vs GPU performance ratio
Well Balanced
CPU
77%
VS
GPU
85%
PROCESSOR

Intel Core i9-13900TE

5,342 Benchmark Score
Top 23% 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

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

# CPU Analysis

The Intel Core i9-13900TE is a 24-core, 32-thread Raptor Lake-S desktop processor built on Intel's 10 nm process node. It features a base clock of 1000.00 MHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, with a 36 MB shared L3 cache and 2 MB L2 cache per core. The chip supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, and includes ECC memory support, making it suitable for reliability-focused workloads. Integrated UHD Graphics 770 is present, though the pairing with a discrete GPU makes it largely redundant for this build.

The benchmark data places this CPU at the 60th percentile among all tested processors, with an average benchmark score of 5342. In Cinebench R23, it scores 18472 points multi-core and 2607 points single-core. The multi-core figure indicates strong sustained throughput for heavily threaded workloads, while the single-core score of 2607 reflects competent per-thread performance for everyday responsiveness and lightly threaded tasks. The R20 results show 7758 multi-core and 1094 single-core, and R15 shows 1861 multi-core and 262 single-core, all following the same relative pattern.

The nearest rivals help contextualize these numbers. The Intel Core i9-10900KF scores 5316 on average, a 0.5% delta from the 13900TE. The AMD EPYC 7281 matches at 5315, also 0.5% behind. The AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920X scores 5306, 0.7% behind, and the Intel Core i9-9900X scores 5301, 0.8% behind. This clustering means the 13900TE sits in a tight performance band where the differences between these four processors are within 0.8% — statistically negligible in real workloads. The data shows that despite being a lower-power variant (35W TDP), the 13900TE delivers performance comparable to older high-end desktop parts that consumed significantly more power.

The 24-core/32-thread configuration with a 5.00 GHz boost clock suggests a hybrid approach: enough cores to handle parallel workloads like rendering or compilation, while the high boost clock keeps single-threaded applications snappy. The 80 KB L1 cache per core and 2 MB L2 per core are standard for Raptor Lake, and the 36 MB shared L3 cache provides decent capacity for frequently accessed data across all cores.

For real workloads, the multi-core scores translate to capable performance in video encoding, 3D rendering, and software compilation — tasks that scale across 24 cores. The single-core scores indicate that office productivity, web browsing, and light coding tasks will feel responsive. The 35W TDP is remarkable for a 24-core part, suggesting this is a power-constrained variant designed for compact or thermally limited systems rather than maximum performance.

# Gaming Performance

No measured FPS rows exist for this exact CPU+GPU combination — the FACT PACK contains no measured FPS data. All gaming performance figures discussed here are estimates derived from the benchmark scores of the Intel Arc A310 and the Intel Core i9-13900TE, and should be treated as approximations rather than verified results.

The Intel Arc A310 is a low-end discrete GPU with 4 GB GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, yielding 124.0 GB/s bandwidth. Its FP32 performance is 2.688 TFLOPS, and it has 768 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The GPU's PassMark G3D score is 5433, placing it at the 40th percentile among all GPUs. This is a modest score, indicating entry-level rasterization capability.

Comparing to nearest rivals, the Arc A310 sits within 1.4% of several older cards: the AMD Radeon R7 250 (7557 average, 0.1% faster), AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 (7580, 0.4% faster), NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (7472, 1% slower), and AMD Radeon HD 8850M (7447, 1.4% slower). The GTX 1650 comparison is most relevant for gaming, as that card is known for 1080p medium-settings playability. The Arc A310 being 1% faster than the GTX 1650 in average benchmark score suggests similar performance class, though the 4 GB VRAM may limit texture-heavy games at higher settings.

For gaming estimates at 1080p ultra settings, the Arc A310 would likely struggle with modern AAA titles. Its 2.688 TFLOPS FP32 throughput and 124.0 GB/s bandwidth are below what contemporary games typically demand for high fidelity. Esports titles like CS:GO, League of Legends, or Valorant could probably achieve playable frame rates at lower settings, given their low graphical requirements. More demanding titles would likely require significant settings reductions to reach 30 FPS, and even then, 4 GB VRAM could cause texture pop-in or stuttering in newer releases.

The CPU side is not the limiting factor here. The i9-13900TE's single-core score of 2607 in Cinebench R23 is strong enough to feed even high-end GPUs, so gaming frame rates will be dictated almost entirely by the Arc A310's capabilities. At 1440p or 4K, the GPU bottleneck becomes even more pronounced, and the 4 GB VRAM would be severely constrained at those resolutions.

# Benchmark Performance

The combined benchmark picture shows a system at the 50th percentile overall. The CPU sits at the 60th percentile with an average score of 5342, while the GPU sits at the 40th percentile with an average score of 7550. This 20-percentile gap indicates a significant imbalance favoring the CPU.

The CPU's Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 18472 is strong, placing it in the upper-midrange tier. The single-core score of 2607 is also respectable. The GPU's PassMark G3D score of 5433 is modest, and its Geekbench scores — 30607 OpenCL and 28964 Vulkan — reflect compute capability that is decent for its class but not competitive with mainstream gaming GPUs.

The GPU's PassMark DirectX scores are notably low: 31 for DX10, 33 for DX11, 29 for DX12, and 69 for DX9. These numbers are far below what any modern gaming GPU would achieve, indicating that the Arc A310 is not designed for gaming workloads. The PassMark G2D score of 625 suggests adequate 2D desktop performance, and the compute score of 2157 is modest.

The combined percentile of 50 indicates that this pairing lands exactly at the median of all tested CPU+GPU configurations. This is a somewhat misleading statistic, as the CPU is well above average while the GPU is below average — the midpoint reflects the averaging of two skewed components rather than balanced performance.

The nearest rival data for the CPU shows a tight cluster: the i9-10900KF, EPYC 7281, Threadripper 1920X, and i9-9900X all fall within 0.8% of the 13900TE's average score. This suggests that the 13900TE's performance is comparable to these older high-core-count parts, despite the 35W TDP. For the GPU, the nearest rivals are older or lower-end cards, confirming the Arc A310's position as an entry-level part.

# Balance and Bottleneck

The data clearly shows the GPU as the primary bottleneck in this pairing. The CPU's 60th percentile ranking versus the GPU's 40th percentile creates a 20-point gap that manifests in GPU-bound workloads. In gaming, the Arc A310's modest PassMark G3D score of 5433 and low DirectX 11 score of 33 will limit frame rates regardless of the CPU's capability.

The CPU's strong multi-core score of 18472 in Cinebench R23 indicates it can handle demanding compute tasks without breaking a sweat. However, the GPU's FP32 throughput of 2.688 TFLOPS and 124.0 GB/s bandwidth will constrain any graphics-related work, including gaming, 3D rendering with GPU acceleration, and video encoding that leverages the GPU.

The power draw differential is stark: the CPU has a 35W TDP, while the GPU has a 30W TDP. The suggested PSU for the GPU is 200W, which suggests the entire system can run on a modest power supply. This low power envelope means the CPU is not thermally throttled in most cases, but the GPU's performance is inherently limited by its hardware design, not power delivery.

In CPU-bound workloads like software compilation, data processing, or multitasking, the system will perform well due to the 24 cores and 32 threads. In GPU-bound workloads like gaming or GPU-accelerated rendering, the system will underperform relative to its CPU capability. This imbalance suggests the pairing is intended for productivity tasks that are CPU-heavy, with GPU acceleration as a secondary consideration.

# FAQ

Q: What is the CPU's core and thread count?

A: The Intel Core i9-13900TE has 24 cores and 32 threads, with a base clock of 1000.00 MHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The i9-13900TE's average benchmark score of 5342 is 0.5% higher than the Intel Core i9-10900KF, 0.5% higher than the AMD EPYC 7281, 0.7% higher than the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920X, and 0.8% higher than the Intel Core i9-9900X.

Q: What is the GPU's memory configuration?

A: The Intel Arc A310 has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, providing 124.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Does this system support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the CPU has ECC memory support, which is useful for error-sensitive workloads like data processing or scientific computing.

Q: What is the GPU's percentile ranking?

A: The Arc A310 is at the 40th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 7550.

Q: What DirectX versions does the GPU support?

A: The GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), along with OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What is the combined system percentile?

A: The combined CPU+GPU pairing is at the 50th percentile among all tested configurations.

# Upgrade Path and Platform

The CPU uses Intel Socket 1700, which supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration. The platform provides PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU, enabling high-bandwidth connectivity for storage or future GPU upgrades. The CPU's 35W TDP is extremely low for a 24-core part, meaning the existing cooling solution likely has significant headroom for a more power-hungry CPU — though the socket generation limits upgrades to 13th Gen or possibly 14th Gen parts.

The GPU uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface and has a 30W TDP with a suggested PSU of 200W. The power connectors are listed as "None," meaning the card draws power entirely from the PCIe slot. This low power requirement means the system's PSU has ample headroom for a GPU upgrade. The GPU is marked as end-of-life with a successor named Battlemage, so users looking for more graphics performance would need to replace it.

A sensible next upgrade would be the GPU. The CPU's 60th percentile ranking and strong multi-core scores suggest it can drive a significantly more powerful graphics card without becoming a bottleneck. The PCIe Gen 5 lanes from the CPU provide future-proofing for high-bandwidth GPUs, though current cards use PCIe 4.0. The 200W suggested PSU for the current GPU indicates the system power delivery is modest, so upgrading to a higher-end GPU would likely require a PSU upgrade as well.

The memory support for both DDR4 and DDR5 gives flexibility for upgrades, though the dual-channel configuration limits maximum bandwidth compared to quad-channel platforms. ECC memory support provides an upgrade path for reliability-critical applications.

# Who Should Build It

This system targets users who need substantial CPU compute capability with modest graphics requirements. The 60th percentile CPU with 24 cores and 32 threads excels at multi-threaded workloads like software compilation, data processing, and virtualization. The 35W TDP makes it suitable for compact builds where power and thermal limits are strict.

Content creators working with CPU-based rendering — such as video encoding with x264 or x265 — would benefit from the strong multi-core Cinebench R23 score of 18472. The GPU's 4 GB VRAM and 124.0 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient for basic GPU acceleration but will not handle large 3D scenes or high-resolution video processing.

Software developers compiling large codebases will appreciate the 24 cores and 32 threads, which parallelize compilation tasks effectively. The ECC memory support adds reliability for long-running build processes. Students and small business workstations doing office productivity, web development, or data analysis would find the system responsive, though the GPU adds little beyond basic display output.

Gamers at 1080p with low settings might find the Arc A310 usable for esports titles, but the GPU's low DirectX scores and 40th percentile ranking suggest it is not designed for gaming. Users whose primary need is gaming should look elsewhere, as this system's strengths lie in CPU-bound productivity.

# Build Overview

This is a desktop-class build pairing an Intel Core i9-13900TE with an Intel Arc A310. The CPU is a 24-core, 32-thread Raptor Lake-S part with a 35W TDP, while the GPU is a 30W entry-level Arc Alchemist part with 4 GB VRAM. The combined system sits at the 50th percentile overall.

The CPU's 60th percentile ranking and average benchmark score of 5342 make it a strong performer for productivity. The GPU's 40th percentile ranking and average score of 7550 place it in the entry-level tier. This is fundamentally a CPU-centric build where the GPU provides basic graphics acceleration rather than gaming capability.

The 35W CPU TDP and 30W GPU TDP combine for a very low total system power draw, making this an energy-efficient configuration. The 200W suggested PSU confirms this is a low-power system. The CPU's performance is comparable to older high-end parts like the i9-10900KF within 0.5%, making it a compelling choice for power-constrained environments.

# Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: Unsupported by this build. The Arc A310's low PassMark G3D score of 5433 and DirectX 11 score of 33 indicate it cannot sustain high frame rates in modern titles. The CPU is capable, but the GPU will bottleneck at low settings in esports games.

Streaming: The CPU's 24 cores can handle software encoding via x264 while maintaining gameplay, but the GPU's 4 GB VRAM and modest compute performance limit game quality. The 5.376 TFLOPS FP16 performance provides some hardware encoding headroom, but the overall GPU class is limiting.

Video editing: CPU-based editing and encoding will perform well given the 18472 multi-core Cinebench R23 score. GPU-accelerated effects and rendering will be slow due to the Arc A310's 2.688 TFLOPS FP32 and 4 GB VRAM.

3D rendering: CPU rendering in Blender or similar will be strong with 24 cores. GPU rendering will be severely limited by the 768 shading units and 2.688 TFLOPS, making it unsuitable for production work.

Software development: Excellent fit. The 24 cores and 32 threads accelerate compilation, testing, and container workloads. The 60th percentile CPU ranking ensures responsiveness in IDE and build tooling.

Student and office work: Overkill for basic productivity, but the low power draw makes it practical. The CPU's single-core score of 2607 ensures snappy application performance, while the GPU handles 2D desktop workloads with a PassMark G2D score of 625.

# GPU Analysis

The Intel Arc A310 is based on the Xe-HPG architecture with the DG2-128 chip, manufactured on TSMC's 6 nm process. It contains 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, with a transistor density of 45.9M per mm². The GPU has 768 shading units, 32 TMUs, 16 ROPs, and 6 ray tracing cores, though tensor cores are not listed.

Memory consists of 4 GB GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, running at 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective), yielding 124.0 GB/s bandwidth. The base and boost clocks are both 1750 MHz. Pixel rate is 28.00 GPixel/s, texture rate is 56.00 GTexel/s, FP32 performance is 2.688 TFLOPS, and FP16 is 5.376 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio.

The GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, making it feature-complete for modern APIs. Display outputs are 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0, which is future-proof for high-resolution monitors. The bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x8, adequate for this performance class.

Benchmark scores reveal the GPU's position: PassMark G3D is 5433, placing it at the 40th percentile. Geekbench OpenCL is 30607 and Vulkan is 28964. PassMark DirectX scores are very low — 31 for DX10, 33 for DX11, 29 for DX12, and 69 for DX9 — indicating poor gaming performance. The G2D score of 625 is adequate for desktop use, and compute score of 2157 is modest.

The nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon R7 250 (7557, 0.1% faster), AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 (7580, 0.4% faster), NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (7472, 1% slower), and AMD Radeon HD 8850M (7447, 1.4% slower). The GTX 1650 comparison is most relevant: the Arc A310 is 1% faster in average score, placing it in the same performance tier as a budget gaming card from several generations ago. For rendering workloads, the FP32 throughput of 2.688 TFLOPS and 124.0 GB/s bandwidth will handle light 2D and basic 3D tasks, but the 4 GB VRAM is a hard limit for larger scenes or textures. The GPU is end-of-life with Battlemage as its successor, so driver maturity and optimization are finite for this architecture.