SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core i9-14900 + 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

95%

GPU

85%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core i9-14900

58,115 Benchmark Score

Top 5% 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

This build pairs the highest-end mainstream Intel desktop processor, the Core i9-14900, with Intel's entry-level discrete graphics card, the Arc A310. The data shows a stark contrast in performance tiers: the CPU sits in the 92nd percentile of all processors, while the GPU rests in the 40th percentile of all graphics cards. This pairing is a study in imbalance, where the processor's immense compute potential is matched with a GPU designed for basic display output and light gaming. The following analysis interprets the benchmark results to define what this system can and cannot do, based exclusively on the provided data.

Usage Scenarios

For high-refresh gaming, this combination is fundamentally constrained by the graphics card. The Arc A310's PassMark G3D score of 5433 places it in the 40th percentile of all GPUs, alongside rivals like the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650, which has a score of 7472. The data indicates that the GPU will be the limiting factor at any resolution, making high-refresh 1080p gaming an unrealistic expectation for modern titles. The CPU's strength, such as a PassMark single-thread score of 4323, cannot compensate for the GPU's limited pixel throughput of 28.00 GPixel/s.

Streaming workloads present a mixed picture. The Core i9-14900's 24 cores and 32 threads provide ample headroom for encoding and multitasking, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 31070. However, the Arc A310 lacks dedicated tensor cores and its compute performance is modest, with a PassMark GPU compute score of 2157. The data suggests the CPU could handle software encoding, but the system's overall gaming performance would still be poor due to the GPU, making a seamless high-quality streaming experience unlikely for demanding games.

Video editing is a scenario where the CPU dominates the workload. The i9-14900's Geekbench multi-core score of 18495 and PassMark integer math score of 175010 indicate strong capability for video encoding, decoding, and effects processing. The Arc A310's 4 GB of VRAM is a severe limitation for video editing, as modern timelines with high-resolution footage and effects can easily exceed that capacity. The system would be responsive for basic editing tasks, but complex projects would likely stall or fail due to memory constraints.

3D rendering is another CPU-centric scenario. The processor's Cinebench R20 multi-core score of 15910 and PassMark floating-point math score of 120262 show high computational throughput for ray tracing and physics calculations. The GPU's rendering contribution, however, is minimal; the Arc A310's 2.688 TFLOPS FP32 performance and 6 RT cores are far below what professional rendering software expects. The data indicates this build is a capable CPU render node but a poor GPU-accelerated renderer.

Software development benefits overwhelmingly from the CPU. The i9-14900's PassMark data compression score of 550271 and random string sorting score of 61060 suggest fast compilation times and efficient handling of large codebases. The GPU plays a minimal role in development, so the Arc A310's limitations are less impactful here. The system would excel at building projects, running virtual machines, and managing multiple development environments, with the GPU only needed for basic 2D desktop rendering.

For student and office work, this build is massively overqualified on the CPU side but adequate on the GPU side. Tasks like word processing, spreadsheets, and web browsing rely on the GPU's PassMark G2D score of 625, which is sufficient for 2D workloads. The CPU's power is wasted on these tasks, but it ensures the system will never feel slow in the user interface. The data suggests this is an extremely fast office machine, though the discrete GPU provides no benefit over the integrated UHD Graphics 770 for standard productivity.

Benchmark Performance

The Core i9-14900 delivers exceptional CPU benchmark scores across the board. Its average benchmark score of 58115 places it in the 92nd percentile of all CPUs, just 0.4% behind the Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M and 0.5% behind the AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D. In Cinebench R23, it scores 31070 in multi-core and 2212 in single-core. Geekbench results show 18495 multi-core and 2488 single-core. These figures are consistent with a top-tier desktop processor that outperforms many server-class chips.

The Arc A310's GPU benchmark scores are far less impressive. Its average benchmark score of 7550 places it in the 40th percentile of all GPUs, nearly identical to the AMD Radeon R7 250 and Radeon Pro WX 3100. The PassMark G3D score of 5433 is notable, but the DirectX scores are low: 31 for DirectX 10, 33 for DirectX 11, and 29 for DirectX 12. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 30607 and Vulkan score of 28964 are moderate, but the PassMark GPU compute score of 2157 indicates limited general-purpose compute performance.

The combined picture is one of extreme imbalance. The system's combined percentile is 66, which is dragged down significantly by the GPU. The CPU's 92nd percentile performance is neutralized in any GPU-bound scenario. The data suggests that the CPU is capable of handling any computational task thrown at it, but the GPU restricts the system to entry-level graphics duties. This pairing creates a system that excels at CPU-intensive work but fails at GPU-intensive gaming or rendering.

Gaming Performance

No measured FPS rows exist for this exact CPU+GPU combination. The data contains no measuredFpsUltraByGame entries, and the dataIsMeasured flag is false. Therefore, all FPS figures discussed here are estimates derived from the benchmark scores and should be treated as expectations, not measured results.

Based on the GPU's PassMark G3D score of 5433 and its direct comparison to the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650, which scores 7472, the Arc A310 is approximately 27% slower in raw graphics performance. This suggests that in modern games at 1080p with ultra settings, the system would likely struggle to maintain 30 FPS. The GPU's 4 GB VRAM and 64-bit memory bus with 124.0 GB/s bandwidth would also cause texture streaming issues in newer titles.

At 1440p, the estimated performance drops further. The GPU's 28.00 GPixel/s pixel rate and 56.00 GTexel/s texture rate are insufficient for high-resolution rendering. The data indicates that 1440p gaming would require significant settings reductions to achieve playable frame rates, likely falling below 20 FPS at ultra settings in demanding titles. The CPU's power cannot overcome the GPU's fill-rate limitations.

At 4K, gaming is essentially not viable. The Arc A310's memory bandwidth of 124.0 GB/s is far below what high-resolution textures require, and its 16 ROPs limit pixel output. The estimated FPS would be in the single digits for most modern games at ultra settings. The system is better suited for esports titles or older games at lower resolutions and settings, where the CPU's high single-thread performance can help maintain frame pacing.

Who Should Build It

This system is appropriate for users whose primary workload is CPU-intensive and who require only basic graphics capability. Software developers building large codebases would benefit from the i9-14900's PassMark multithread score of 44578 and data compression score of 550271, making compilation times short. The Arc A310 is sufficient for coding environments, multiple monitors, and 2D desktop acceleration.

Students and office professionals in technical fields, such as engineering or data science, would find the CPU's 24 cores and 32 threads useful for simulations and analysis. The Geekbench multi-core score of 18495 indicates strong parallel processing capability. The GPU's 4 GB VRAM is adequate for standard office applications and 2D CAD drawings, though not for 3D modeling.

Content creators who work primarily with audio or CPU-based video encoding could use this build effectively. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 31070 shows the CPU can handle complex audio processing and video transcoding. However, creators who rely on GPU acceleration for effects or rendering would be severely limited by the Arc A310's 2.688 TFLOPS FP32 performance and 6 RT cores.

Gamers at 1080p with low settings and esports titles might find this system acceptable. The PassMark single-thread score of 4323 helps with frame pacing, and the GPU can handle simple graphics loads. However, any gamer expecting to play modern AAA titles at medium or high settings would be disappointed by the estimated performance, making this build a poor choice for that audience.

Small business workstations that run heavy spreadsheet models, databases, or virtual machines would benefit from the CPU's 32 threads and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The PassMark integer math score of 175010 suggests strong database and financial calculation performance. The GPU's 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs allow for multi-monitor setups, which is useful for data analysis and trading workstations.

FAQ

Q: What is the combined performance percentile of this CPU and GPU pairing?

A: The system has a combined percentile of 66, indicating it performs better than 66% of all desktop configurations in the database, though this is heavily skewed by the CPU's 92nd percentile.

Q: How does the Intel Core i9-14900 compare to the AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D?

A: The Core i9-14900 has an average benchmark score of 58115, which is 0.5% lower than the AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D's average score of 58386.

Q: What is the VRAM capacity and memory bandwidth of the Intel Arc A310?

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

Q: Does the Intel Core i9-14900 support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the CPU supports ECC memory, along with both DDR4 and DDR5 memory types on a dual-channel bus.

Q: What is the PassMark G3D score of the Arc A310 and how does it compare to the GTX 1650?

A: The Arc A310 scores 5433 in PassMark G3D, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7472, making the A310 approximately 27% slower.

Q: What is the process node for each component?

A: The Intel Core i9-14900 is fabricated on Intel's 10 nm process, while the Intel Arc A310 is fabricated on TSMC's 6 nm process.

Q: What is the boost clock speed of the CPU and the base clock of the GPU?

A: The CPU has a boost clock of 5.80 GHz, while the GPU has a base clock of 1750 MHz.

GPU Analysis

The Intel Arc A310 is built on the Xe-HPG architecture with the DG2-128 chip, fabricated by TSMC on a 6 nm process with 7,200 million transistors. The GPU has 768 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, along with 6 RT cores for ray tracing. Its memory subsystem consists of 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 124.0 GB/s, which is a critical limitation for modern games.

The GPU's clock speeds are locked at 1750 MHz for both base and boost, with memory running at an effective 15.5 Gbps. The pixel rate is 28.00 GPixel/s and the texture rate is 56.00 GTexel/s. The FP32 performance is 2.688 TFLOPS, with FP16 performance at 5.376 TFLOPS using a 2:1 ratio. These figures place the A310 in the entry-level segment, as confirmed by its 40th percentile ranking.

The benchmark scores reveal the GPU's strengths and weaknesses. The PassMark G3D score of 5433 is respectable for basic 3D acceleration, but the DirectX 12 score of 29 is very low, indicating poor performance in modern APIs. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 30607 and Vulkan score of 28964 show moderate compute capability, but the PassMark GPU compute score of 2157 is weak. The data suggests the GPU is suitable for 2D work and light 3D tasks, but not for serious gaming or rendering.

The lack of tensor cores is notable, meaning the A310 has no dedicated hardware for AI acceleration. The 6 RT cores provide some ray tracing capability, but with only 2.688 TFLOPS of FP32 power, the GPU would struggle with ray-traced workloads. The 4 GB VRAM is insufficient for high-resolution textures or large compute datasets, limiting the GPU's use in professional applications.

Balance and Bottleneck

The bottleneck in this system is unequivocally the GPU. The CPU's 92nd percentile performance is wasted in any workload that depends on graphics rendering. The GPU's 40th percentile ranking creates a massive imbalance, where the CPU is capable of far more than the GPU can display or process. In gaming, the Arc A310's low DirectX scores and 4 GB VRAM will cap frame rates well below what the CPU can feed.

Evidence from the FPS scaling is absent due to no measured data, but the benchmark scores provide clear evidence. The CPU's PassMark single-thread score of 4323 ensures that the processor is never the limiting factor in frame generation. The GPU's PassMark G3D score of 5433 is below the threshold for smooth 1080p gaming in modern titles, meaning the GPU will be at 100% utilization while the CPU idles.

For CPU-bound workloads like software compilation or data processing, the GPU is not a bottleneck at all. The i9-14900's Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 31070 and PassMark multithread score of 44578 indicate that the CPU will dominate these tasks, with the GPU only handling basic display output. The balance is workload-dependent: the system is well-balanced for CPU tasks but severely unbalanced for GPU tasks.

The combined percentile of 66 reflects this imbalance. A balanced system would have both components in similar percentiles, but here the CPU pulls the average up while the GPU drags it down. The data implies that upgrading the GPU would provide the most significant performance improvement for gaming and rendering, while the CPU would remain relevant for years to come.

Build Overview

This is a desktop build class system that combines a 14th Gen Intel Core i9 processor with an entry-level Arc 3 series GPU. The Core i9-14900 is a 24-core, 32-thread processor based on the Raptor Lake architecture, with a boost clock of 5.80 GHz. The Arc A310 is an Alchemist generation GPU with 4 GB of GDDR6 memory and a 64-bit memory interface.

The overall tier of this system, based on the combined percentile of 66, places it in the mid-range of all desktop builds. However, this classification is misleading due to the extreme variance between components. The CPU is in the top 8% of all processors, while the GPU is in the bottom 60% of all graphics cards. The system's tier is defined by its weakest link, which is the GPU.

The CPU's production status is Active, while the GPU is marked as End-of-life, with a release date of 2022-10-11. The CPU was released on 2024-01-07 and has a launch MSRP of $549. The GPU has no launch MSRP listed. This pairing of a new high-end CPU with an older, entry-level GPU suggests a transitional or budget-oriented build, despite the CPU's premium positioning.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core i9-14900 is a 24-core processor with 32 threads, based on the Raptor Lake architecture on a 10 nm process node. It has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.80 GHz, with a TDP of 65 W. The CPU supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory on a dual-channel bus, and includes UHD Graphics 770 integrated graphics. The L3 cache is 36 MB shared, with 2 MB of L2 cache per core and 80 KB of L1 cache per core.

The benchmark scores confirm the CPU's high-end positioning. The Cinebench R15 scores are 4793 multi-core and 315 single-core. The Cinebench R20 scores are 15910 multi-core and 2245 single-core. The Cinebench R23 scores are 31070 multi-core and 2212 single-core. Geekbench scores are 18495 multi-core and 2488 single-core. These results place the CPU in the 92nd percentile of all processors.

The PassMark scores provide insight into specific workloads. The data compression score of 550271 and random string sorting score of 61060 indicate strong performance in file compression and database operations. The integer math score of 175010 and floating-point math score of 120262 show excellent computational throughput. The extended instructions score of 30624 and data encryption score of 33540 round out the CPU's capabilities.

The CPU's nearest rivals in average benchmark score are the Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M, AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D, and Intel Xeon w5-2545, all within 0.7% of the i9-14900's score of 58115. The AMD EPYC 9015 is 1% faster. This places the i9-14900 in the same performance class as server and workstation processors, confirming its suitability for heavy compute workloads.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The CPU uses Intel Socket 1700, which supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory on a dual-channel bus. The platform supports PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU, allowing for high-bandwidth storage and graphics cards. The CPU's TDP is 65 W, but the system's suggested PSU is 200 W, providing significant headroom for component upgrades.

The Arc A310 has a TDP of 30 W and requires no power connectors, drawing all power from the PCIe slot. The GPU uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, which is compatible with the CPU's PCIe Gen 5 slots. The suggested PSU of 200 W is more than sufficient for the current configuration, but it would need to be upgraded if a more powerful GPU is installed.

A sensible next upgrade would be to replace the Arc A310 with a more capable GPU. The CPU's 92nd percentile performance and PCIe Gen 5 support mean it can handle any modern graphics card without bottlenecking. The 4 GB VRAM of the current GPU is the primary limitation, and upgrading to a GPU with more VRAM and higher compute performance would unlock the system's gaming potential.

The memory support for both DDR4 and DDR5 provides flexibility for upgrades. Users can choose to keep existing DDR4 memory or move to faster DDR5. The ECC memory support is a unique feature that appeals to workstation users, though it requires compatible motherboards and memory modules. The platform's longevity is ensured by the CPU's Active production status, though the GPU's End-of-life status suggests it should be replaced soon.

Rate My PC: Intel Core i9-14900 + Intel Arc A310

Apex Performer

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core i9-14900

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

Usage Scenarios

Benchmark Performance

Gaming Performance

Who Should Build It

FAQ

GPU Analysis

Balance and Bottleneck

Build Overview

CPU Analysis

Upgrade Path and Platform

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