SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core i9-13900TE + NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation

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)

▼

88 Score

Top 12% Ranking

88 / 100

HIGH-END

Power Build

Top 12% of systems. Excellent for 1440p Ultra or 4K High gaming.

1440p Ultra4K High

System Balance Analysis

CPU vs GPU performance ratio

CPU Bottleneck

CPU

77%

GPU

99%

Your CPU is limiting system performance. Consider upgrading to a faster processor to better utilize your GPU.

PROCESSOR

Intel Core i9-13900TE

5,342 Benchmark Score

Top 23% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation

135,218 Benchmark Score

Top 1% 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.

Bottleneck Detected

CPU Bottleneck - Upgrading the weaker component will improve overall performance.

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

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

The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation is a workstation-class GPU built on the Ada Lovelace architecture, fabricated on TSMC's 5 nm process with 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die. It carries 20 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 160-bit bus, yielding 360.0 GB/s of bandwidth at 18 Gbps effective memory speed. This VRAM capacity is substantial for a single-slot card, positioning it for large datasets and high-resolution textures that would spill over on lesser cards.

Clock behavior shows a 1500 MHz base and 2175 MHz boost, with a memory clock of 2250 MHz. The compute configuration includes 6144 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operation units. Pixel rate reaches 139.2 GPixel/s, while texture rate hits 417.6 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput is 26.73 TFLOPS, with FP16 also at 26.73 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio), meaning no half-rate penalty for mixed-precision workloads.

Ray tracing and tensor hardware are present in the form of 48 RT cores and 192 tensor cores. These are not mere marketing additions; they directly accelerate the rendering workloads this card targets. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 146593 and Vulkan score of 123842 reflect raw compute ability, but the RT and tensor cores matter more for path-traced renders or AI-accelerated denoising. The GPU sits at the 95th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 135218.

Compared to its nearest rivals, the RTX 4000 Ada Generation is essentially tied with the NVIDIA A10M (0% delta), slightly behind the AMD Radeon PRO W6800 (-0.1%), and trails the Radeon Pro W6800X Duo (-0.4%) and Radeon PRO V620 (-0.9%). These deltas are tiny, indicating that in pure compute terms, the card is competitive with those workstation offerings. However, the RTX 4000 Ada Generation distinguishes itself through its 48 RT cores and 192 tensor cores, which the AMD rivals do not match in the same configuration. For rendering pipelines that leverage OptiX or DirectX Raytracing, the RT core count translates into faster BVH traversal and intersection tests, while tensor cores accelerate DLSS-based upscaling and AI denoising passes.

The 20 GB VRAM is the standout feature here. At 360.0 GB/s, bandwidth is not class-leading, but capacity is what matters for scenes that exceed 8 GB or 12 GB. The 160-bit bus width is narrow relative to the capacity, suggesting the card trades some bandwidth for density, which is acceptable for workloads that stream large textures rather than repeatedly accessing the same small buffer. The single-slot form factor, 245 mm length, and 112 mm height make it physically compact for a workstation card, but the 130 W TDP and 300 W suggested PSU keep power demands modest. Display output is four DisplayPort 1.4a connectors, sufficient for multi-monitor setups.

The benchmark scores indicate that for rendering tasks, the RTX 4000 Ada Generation delivers performance near the top of the GPU stack—95th percentile—but the real value lies in the combination of RT hardware and VRAM. A 26.73 TFLOPS FP32 figure is strong for simulation and compute, while the RT cores handle ray-traced effects that would otherwise cripple a non-RT card. The Vulkan score of 123842 suggests good driver overhead characteristics for API-heavy workloads, while OpenCL at 146593 shows solid cross-platform compute. For professional rendering in applications like Blender or Maya, the data indicates this card can handle complex scenes without swapping to system memory, assuming the software can utilize the 20 GB pool effectively.

FAQ

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

A: The RTX 4000 Ada Generation has 20 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 160-bit bus, with 360.0 GB/s bandwidth and 18 Gbps effective memory speed.

Q: How does the GPU compare to its nearest rivals in benchmark scores?

A: It is essentially tied with the NVIDIA A10M (0% delta), slightly behind the AMD Radeon PRO W6800 (-0.1%), and trails the Radeon Pro W6800X Duo (-0.4%) and Radeon PRO V620 (-0.9%). The average benchmark score is 135218.

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 boost clock of 5.00 GHz.

Q: Does the CPU support ECC memory?

A: Yes, ECC memory support is listed as true for the Intel Core i9-13900TE.

Q: What is the GPU's TDP and suggested PSU?

A: The GPU has a 130 W TDP, and the suggested PSU is 300 W. It uses a single 16-pin power connector.

Q: What are the CPU's Cinebench R23 scores?

A: The multicore score is 18472, and the singlecore score is 2607.

Q: What is the combined percentile rank for this CPU+GPU pairing?

A: The combined percentile is 78, indicating the pairing outperforms 78% of all possible CPU+GPU combinations in the database.

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

The Intel Core i9-13900TE is a 13th-generation Raptor Lake processor, built on Intel's 10 nm process with a 257 mm² die. It features 24 cores and 32 threads, which indicates a hybrid architecture mixing performance and efficiency cores, though the FACT PACK does not specify the exact core distribution. The base clock is 1000.00 MHz, which is extremely low for a desktop part, but the boost clock reaches 5.00 GHz. This wide clock range suggests the chip is designed for power-constrained environments where idle or light-load efficiency is paramount, but it can burst to high frequencies when needed. The TDP is 35 W, which is remarkably low for a 24-core processor, reinforcing the power-sipping design intent.

Cache hierarchy shows 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The L3 figure is substantial for a 35 W part, aiding in multi-threaded workloads where shared data access patterns dominate. Memory support covers both DDR4 and DDR5 in dual-channel configuration, with ECC memory supported. The integrated graphics is UHD Graphics 770, which provides basic display output and hardware acceleration without a discrete GPU. PCIe connectivity is Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU, which is current-generation standard for desktop platforms.

Benchmark results show a Cinebench R15 multicore score of 1861, R20 multicore of 7758, and R23 multicore of 18472. Single-core scores are 262, 1094, and 2607 for R15, R20, and R23 respectively. The multicore-to-singlecore ratios are informative: R23 multicore is roughly 7.1 times the singlecore score, which is modest for a 24-core part, indicating that power or thermal constraints limit sustained all-core boost. The average benchmark score is 5342, placing the CPU at the 60th percentile among all CPUs.

Nearest rival comparisons show the i9-13900TE is nearly identical to the Intel Core i9-10900KF (0.5% delta), AMD EPYC 7281 (0.5%), AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920X (0.7%), and Intel Core i9-9900X (0.8%). These are all older, higher-TDP parts, which is telling: the 13900TE achieves comparable average scores to those chips while consuming far less power. The 60th percentile ranking means it falls below the top 40% of CPUs, which is expected given the 35 W TDP cap. For real workloads, the data suggests the i9-13900TE handles multi-threaded tasks like video encoding or compilation competently but not spectacularly, while single-threaded performance is strong due to the 5.00 GHz boost.

The 1000.00 MHz base clock is notable because it indicates the CPU spends most of its time at low frequencies, conserving power. When a burst is needed, the boost to 5.00 GHz provides responsiveness. This makes the chip suitable for always-on workstations or small form factor builds where heat and power are limited. The 36 MB L3 cache helps mitigate the low base clock by reducing memory latency for working sets that fit in cache. For software development, the 32 threads allow parallel compilation, though the 60th percentile rank suggests it will not outpace a fully unlocked desktop i9. The UHD Graphics 770 can handle basic office tasks and video playback, offloading the discrete GPU for rendering.

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

The CPU sits at the 60th percentile, while the GPU is at the 95th percentile. This 35-point gap is substantial and indicates the CPU is the limiting factor in most GPU-bound scenarios. In gaming or rendering workloads that stress the GPU, the i9-13900TE's modest multicore throughput will likely cap frame rates or render times before the RTX 4000 Ada Generation reaches its full potential. The combined percentile is 78, which is lower than the GPU's 95 but higher than the CPU's 60, reflecting that the pairing is better than the CPU alone but not fully utilizing the GPU.

Evidence from benchmark scores supports this: the CPU's R23 multicore score of 18472 is mid-pack, while the GPU's OpenCL score of 146593 is near the top. For workloads that are heavily parallel on the GPU, such as ray tracing or AI inference, the GPU will be starved for data if the CPU cannot feed it quickly enough. The low base clock of 1000.00 MHz on the CPU exacerbates this in scenarios where the CPU must prepare frames or geometry before dispatching to the GPU. The boost clock of 5.00 GHz helps for single-threaded tasks, but sustained all-core loads will drop to lower frequencies due to the 35 W TDP.

Conversely, in CPU-limited workloads like software compilation or spreadsheet calculations, the GPU is idle and the CPU's 60th percentile rank is the sole determinant of performance. The 24 cores and 32 threads provide headroom for multi-threaded CPU tasks, but the R23 multicore score of 18472 indicates the 35 W power envelope restricts sustained throughput. For memory-intensive workloads, the dual-channel DDR4/DDR5 support provides adequate bandwidth, but the narrow 160-bit bus on the GPU (360.0 GB/s) could become the bottleneck in data-streaming scenarios where both CPU and GPU are moving large buffers.

FPS scaling, while not measured for this exact combination, can be inferred from the percentile gap. At 1080p or 1440p, the CPU is more likely to bottleneck because frame preparation times are shorter relative to GPU render times. At 4K, the GPU becomes the bottleneck more often, but the RTX 4000 Ada Generation's 95th percentile rank means it will still outpace the CPU. The data shows no measured FPS rows, so all frame rate estimates are qualitative. The practical implication is that for high-refresh gaming at lower resolutions, the CPU will limit FPS to its single-thread capability, while at higher resolutions, the GPU's raw power will dominate but the CPU may still cause stutters during physics or AI updates.

Usage Scenarios — grounded in the scores: high-refresh gaming, streaming, video editing, 3D rendering, software development, student and office work. One short paragraph per scenario, citing the numbers that support the verdict

High-refresh gaming: The RTX 4000 Ada Generation at the 95th percentile can drive high frame rates, but the i9-13900TE's 60th percentile CPU rank and 5.00 GHz boost clock will limit FPS in CPU-bound games. The GPU's 26.73 TFLOPS FP32 and 48 RT cores support high settings, but expect the CPU to bottleneck at 1080p, where frame preparation is more frequent.

Streaming: The GPU's 192 tensor cores and 48 RT cores can handle encoding and AI-enhanced streaming effects, while the CPU's 32 threads manage simultaneous game and stream workloads. The 20 GB VRAM allows for high-bitrate encoding buffers without hitting memory limits, and the 35 W CPU TDP keeps overall system heat manageable during long streams.

Video editing: The CPU's R23 multicore score of 18472 provides adequate timeline performance, but the GPU's OpenCL score of 146593 accelerates effects and color grading. The 20 GB VRAM can hold large 4K or 8K preview buffers, while the 360.0 GB/s bandwidth moves frames quickly. The 60th percentile CPU rank means export times will be moderate, not class-leading.

3D rendering: This is where the GPU shines. The 48 RT cores accelerate ray-traced renderers, and the 26.73 TFLOPS FP32 handles compute-heavy passes. The 20 GB VRAM accommodates complex scenes, and the Vulkan score of 123842 indicates good API efficiency. The CPU's 24 cores and 32 threads assist with scene preparation, but the 35 W TDP caps its contribution.

Software development: The 32 threads on the CPU support parallel compilation, and the 36 MB L3 cache reduces recompilation latency. The 60th percentile CPU rank suggests build times are acceptable but not top-tier. The GPU can be used for CUDA-based testing or local AI model inference, leveraging the 192 tensor cores, but is overkill for pure coding tasks.

Student and office work: The CPU's low 35 W TDP and 1000.00 MHz base clock make it power-efficient for everyday tasks, while the UHD Graphics 770 handles basic display output. The GPU is massively overpowered for this scenario, but its 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs support multi-monitor productivity setups. The 60th percentile CPU rank is sufficient for document editing and web browsing, though the 24-core count is excessive for these workloads.

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

This build targets professionals who need GPU compute power but operate in power-constrained environments. The 95th percentile GPU is the primary draw, making it suitable for industries like architectural visualization, product design, and scientific computing where rendering or simulation is daily work. The 20 GB VRAM and 48 RT cores are specifically useful for ray-traced renders and AI-accelerated workflows, so content creators doing 3D animation or visual effects will benefit most. The 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs suit multi-display trading floors or video wall setups.

The CPU's 35 W TDP and 60th percentile rank make this build appropriate for small form factor or fanless workstations where heat and noise are concerns. Industries that run always-on servers or edge devices with GPU acceleration—such as medical imaging or industrial inspection—would find the low power draw advantageous. Software developers who use CUDA for machine learning inference can leverage the 192 tensor cores, though the CPU's 60th percentile rank means training on CPU-heavy frameworks will be slower.

Gamers at 1440p or 4K who prioritize GPU performance over CPU headroom could use this build, but the 60th percentile CPU will limit high-refresh 1080p gaming. Students or office workers should not build this for daily tasks—the GPU is overkill, and the CPU's 24 cores are unnecessary for document editing. Small business workstations that run rendering farms or batch processing jobs would find the combination efficient, as the 35 W CPU TDP reduces electricity costs over time, while the GPU provides professional-grade compute. The 78th combined percentile indicates this is a top-quartile pairing, so it is not for budget-conscious builders but for those who need GPU-specific features at moderate power.

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

The CPU's average benchmark score is 5342, placing it at the 60th percentile among all CPUs. Specific Cinebench scores are: R15 multicore 1861, R15 singlecore 262, R20 multicore 7758, R20 singlecore 1094, R23 multicore 18472, and R23 singlecore 2607. These scores show a multicore advantage of roughly 7x over singlecore, which is typical for a 24-core part but constrained by the 35 W TDP. Nearest rivals are within 1%: the Intel Core i9-10900KF (0.5% delta), AMD EPYC 7281 (0.5%), AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1920X (0.7%), and Intel Core i9-9900X (0.8%).

The GPU's average benchmark score is 135218, at the 95th percentile. Geekbench OpenCL is 146593 and Vulkan is 123842. Nearest rivals include the NVIDIA A10M (0% delta), AMD Radeon PRO W6800 (-0.1%), AMD Radeon Pro W6800X Duo (-0.4%), and AMD Radeon PRO V620 (-0.9%). These deltas are negligible, indicating the GPU is at parity with its direct competitors in synthetic benchmarks.

The combined percentile is 78, meaning this pairing outperforms 78% of all CPU+GPU combinations in the database. This is lower than the GPU's 95th percentile but higher than the CPU's 60th, reflecting the imbalance. The combined picture is a high-end GPU paired with a mid-tier CPU. In synthetic benchmarks, the GPU dominates scores, while the CPU is merely average. For workloads that rely on GPU compute, this pairing will perform near the top of the stack; for CPU-bound tasks, it will be unremarkable. The data shows no measured FPS rows for this exact combination, so all gaming performance is estimated from these benchmark scores.

Build Overview — what this CPU+GPU pairing is, its class (desktop/laptop), and overall tier from the percentiles

This is a desktop-class build consisting of the Intel Core i9-13900TE and NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation. The CPU is a 24-core, 32-thread Raptor Lake-S part with a 35 W TDP, while the GPU is a single-slot workstation card with 130 W TDP and 20 GB VRAM. The pairing is unusual: a low-power CPU with a high-performance GPU, suggesting a focus on GPU-accelerated workloads in a thermally constrained chassis.

The build class is desktop, meaning it is intended for stationary use with the Intel Socket 1700 platform. The overall tier is strong: the GPU is in the 95th percentile, placing it among the top 5% of GPUs, while the CPU is in the 60th percentile, solidly mid-range. The combined percentile of 78 indicates the pairing is in the top quartile of all builds, but the CPU drags the overall ranking down from what the GPU alone would achieve.

This is not a gaming-first build, as the CPU would bottleneck at high refresh rates, but rather a workstation-oriented configuration. The 35 W CPU TDP and 130 W GPU TDP together require only a 300 W PSU, making it efficient for a desktop. The single-slot GPU and compact dimensions (245 mm length) allow for smaller cases. The combination is best described as a "GPU-centric professional desktop" where the CPU is a supporting actor. The 78th combined percentile places it above three-quarters of all systems, but users should expect CPU-bound tasks to feel less impressive than GPU-bound ones.

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

The CPU uses the Intel Socket 1700, which is compatible with 12th and 13th-generation Core processors. Memory support includes DDR4 and DDR5 in dual-channel configuration, with ECC capability. The platform provides PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the GPU uses PCIe 4.0 x16, so the GPU will not saturate the CPU's PCIe lanes. The CPU's integrated UHD Graphics 770 offers a fallback if the discrete GPU is removed or fails.

The suggested PSU is 300 W, which provides headroom beyond the combined 35 W CPU TDP and 130 W GPU TDP. This means the system is not power-constrained, and users could add more storage or peripherals without upgrading the PSU. However, the 300 W figure is a minimum suggestion; if users add multiple drives or other expansion cards, they may need a larger PSU, but the FACT PACK does not provide wattage figures for those additions.

A sensible next upgrade path would be to replace the CPU with a higher-TDP 13th-generation Core i9 or K-series part on the same socket, which would boost the CPU's 60th percentile rank closer to the GPU's 95th. This would require a better cooler and possibly a larger PSU, but the socket and memory support would remain valid. Alternatively, users could add more RAM to take advantage of the dual-channel memory bus, though the FACT PACK does not specify maximum capacity. The GPU has no upgrade path on this platform beyond replacing it with a newer card, but the 300 W PSU would likely need upgrading for a higher-power successor. The PCIe Gen 5 lanes on the CPU mean future GPUs with Gen 5 interfaces would be supported, though the current GPU is Gen 4.

Gaming Performance — measured FPS by game and resolution from measuredFpsUltraByGame (or, if dataIsMeasured is false, frame expectations qualitatively from the benchmark scores and say the figures are estimates)

No measured FPS rows exist for this exact combination — the FACT PACK contains no measuredFps data. All frame rate discussion is therefore estimated from the benchmark scores and should be treated as estimates, not measured results.

The GPU's 95th percentile rank and 26.73 TFLOPS FP32 indicate it can handle modern games at ultra settings, but the CPU's 60th percentile rank and 5.00 GHz boost clock will be the limiting factor. At 1080p ultra, the CPU is likely to bottleneck, producing frame rates that are above average but not matching the GPU's potential. Expect typical AAA titles to run in the range of 60-100 FPS at 1080p ultra, with esports titles exceeding 144 FPS where the single-thread boost clock matters.

At 1440p ultra, the GPU becomes more relevant, and frame rates may improve to 80-120 FPS in AAA titles, as the CPU has more time to prepare frames. The 20 GB VRAM prevents texture streaming issues at this resolution, and the 360.0 GB/s bandwidth is sufficient for high-res textures. At 4K ultra, the GPU's 95th percentile rank will dominate, delivering 60-90 FPS in most titles, but the CPU may still cause drops in CPU-intensive scenes with many NPCs or physics calculations.

Ray tracing performance is a strength due to the 48 RT cores, so games with heavy RT effects will see less of a penalty than non-RT GPUs. DLSS, leveraging the 192 tensor cores, can boost frame rates further, but the CPU bottleneck remains. The Vulkan score of 123842 suggests good performance in Vulkan-based titles, while the OpenCL score of 146593 indicates compute-heavy game effects run well. Overall, this build is viable for high-refresh gaming at 1440p or smooth 4K, but not for 1080p competitive gaming where the CPU limits maximum FPS.

Rate My PC: Intel Core i9-13900TE + NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation

Power Build

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core i9-13900TE

NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation

Market Position

Game Performance Benchmarks

Cyberpunk 2077

Red Dead Redemption 2

Microsoft Flight Simulator

Control

Call of Duty: Warzone

Fortnite

Performance Insights

Strong Performance

Bottleneck Detected

Performance Tiers Explained

Ultimate

High-End

Mid-Range

Entry Level

Legacy

FAQ

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

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

Usage Scenarios — grounded in the scores: high-refresh gaming, streaming, video editing, 3D rendering, software development, student and office work. One short paragraph per scenario, citing the numbers that support the verdict

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

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

Build Overview — what this CPU+GPU pairing is, its class (desktop/laptop), and overall tier from the percentiles

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

Gaming Performance — measured FPS by game and resolution from measuredFpsUltraByGame (or, if dataIsMeasured is false, frame expectations qualitatively from the benchmark scores and say the figures are estimates)

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