SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core i9-14900F + Intel Arc A380

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

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%
VS
GPU
86%
PROCESSOR

Intel Core i9-14900F

60,008 Benchmark Score
Top 5% Market Ranking
View Full Specs →
GRAPHICS CARD

Intel Arc A380

8,558 Benchmark Score
Top 14% 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 analysis pairs the 24-core Intel Core i9-14900F with the Intel Arc A380. The data is clear: this is a processor that belongs in a high-end workstation or enthusiast desktop, paired with a graphics card that is decidedly entry-level. The benchmark results show a massive capability gap between the two components, which defines the system's character. This combination is not about balance; it is about providing immense CPU compute power while keeping the graphics subsystem modest. The following sections detail what this pairing means for real-world performance, based strictly on the benchmark data.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core i9-14900F is a 24-core, 32-thread processor based on the Raptor Lake architecture, manufactured on Intel's 10 nm process node. It has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and can boost up to 5.80 GHz. This is a high-core-count desktop part, with a 65 W TDP that belies its performance potential. The cache hierarchy is substantial, featuring 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. This setup is designed for heavy multi-threaded workloads.

The benchmark scores confirm its position as a top-tier CPU. In Cinebench R23, it scores 39,551 points in multi-core and 5,583 in single-core. The single-core score indicates excellent responsiveness in everyday tasks and games that rely on a few fast threads. The multi-core score, however, is the headline figure. It signifies immense capability for rendering, video encoding, and software compilation. The Geekbench scores of 20,008 (multi) and 2,570 (single) corroborate this. Its Passmark multi-thread score of 46,532 and integer math score of 177,066 are very strong indicators of compute-heavy performance.

This CPU sits at the 92nd percentile of all CPUs, placing it firmly in the top tier. Compared to its nearest rivals, it is essentially matched with the AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX, which has an average score that is only 0.2% higher. It is also within 0.6% of the AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX3D. The data shows that it trades blows with these high-end AMD parts, making it a valid choice for pure compute performance. When looking at the Passmark data for specific tasks, the CPU shows its strengths: a floating-point math score of 119,550 and a data compression score of 564,207 are exceptional, pointing to its ability to handle scientific simulations, complex financial modeling, and archival tasks with ease.

The strong single-thread performance, evidenced by a Passmark single-thread score of 4,506, ensures that the CPU does not feel sluggish in lighter duties. The architecture is mature and powerful. For a builder, the takeaway is that this CPU will not be the bottleneck in any CPU-bound task. The performance headroom is vast, especially for multi-threaded applications. The boost clock of 5.80 GHz is among the highest available, giving it a significant edge in workloads that do not scale perfectly across all cores.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The Core i9-14900F uses the Intel Socket 1700 platform. This is a mature socket, and the platform supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory through a dual-channel memory bus. This gives builders flexibility, though the memory bandwidth figures are not specified in the data. The CPU also supports ECC memory, which is a feature typically associated with workstation reliability, a point in its favor for professional use. For expansion, the CPU provides PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes, ensuring that the fastest available storage and graphics cards can be used at full bandwidth.

The GPU, an Intel Arc A380, uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 bus interface. This is a standard interface and will work in any modern motherboard that supports this CPU. The suggested PSU for the GPU is 250 W, which is modest. However, the CPU’s TDP is 65 W. While this is a low number for a 24-core processor, the system's total power draw will depend heavily on the motherboard and other components. The data does not provide a combined power draw figure, but the individual component requirements are low enough that a quality 500-600 W power supply would be more than sufficient for this pairing.

The most logical upgrade path for this platform is a stronger GPU. The CPU is a top performer, at the 92nd percentile. Its potential is severely untapped by the Arc A380. The CPU can easily feed a much more powerful graphics card. The platform itself is at the end of its generation for new CPU releases, but the current CPU is so powerful that a CPU upgrade is not practical. The sensible next step is to replace the GPU with a higher-performing model to match the CPU's capabilities. The PCIe Gen 5 support ensures that future high-end GPUs will not be bottlenecked by the interface.

Gaming Performance

Note: There are no measured FPS rows for this exact combination in the data. All gaming performance discussion is estimated from the individual CPU and GPU benchmark scores and should be treated as an approximation, not a direct measurement.

The data shows a stark contrast in gaming capability. The CPU is in the 92nd percentile, indicating it is more than capable of handling any modern game's physics and logic. However, the GPU is in the 44th percentile of all GPUs. This means the Intel Arc A380 is the definitive bottleneck in gaming scenarios. The CPU will render frames as fast as the GPU can produce them, but the GPU will limit the frame rate.

The Arc A380's Passmark G3D score is 6,252, and its DirectX 12 score is 35. These numbers indicate that it is an entry-level graphics solution. In modern AAA titles at high or ultra settings, the frame rates will be low, likely in the 30-50 FPS range at 1080p, and will struggle at higher resolutions. For esports titles like CS:GO or Valorant, which are less demanding, the card might be able to push higher frame rates, but it will still be the limiting factor. The CPU's high single-core score (5,583 in Cinebench R23) suggests that, in CPU-bound scenarios at lower resolutions, the system will still be held back by the GPU.

The 6 GB of VRAM is also a limiting factor for modern games. Many titles now require more than 6 GB for high-resolution textures at 1080p. This will cause texture pop-in or require lowering settings. In this pairing, the CPU is a supercar engine attached to a commuter car's wheels. The gaming experience will be defined by the GPU's capabilities, not the CPU's. The data suggests that for a smooth high-refresh-rate gaming experience, a more powerful GPU is mandatory.

Balance and Bottleneck

This system has a severe bottleneck, and it is the GPU. The CPU operates at the 92nd percentile, while the GPU is at the 44th percentile. This 48-point difference is massive. The CPU's average benchmark score is 60,008, while the GPU's average is 8,558. The CPU is not just a little faster; it is an order of magnitude more powerful in its respective field. The data indicates that the CPU will be idle waiting for the GPU to finish its work in any graphics-intensive task.

In gaming, the GPU will be at 100% utilization while the CPU might be at 20-30%. The FPS will be entirely dictated by the GPU's rendering speed. In productivity workloads, the opposite is true. Tasks like video editing or 3D rendering will heavily utilize the CPU, and the GPU will have a much smaller role. The GPU's compute score (2,762 in Passmark GPU Compute) is low, so it won't provide significant acceleration for rendering tasks that offload to the GPU.

The bottleneck is so one-sided that it almost functions as two separate systems. For general use, the CPU's speed ensures snappy performance. For gaming, the system will feel like an entry-level rig. The only way to balance this system is to upgrade the GPU. The CPU has enough headroom to support any GPU on the market, so the bottleneck is entirely the GPU's performance ceiling. This is a classic case of an unbalanced build where the processor is significantly more capable than the graphics card.

Usage Scenarios

High-Refresh Gaming: This is not a good fit. The Arc A380's low benchmark scores (Passmark G3D 6,252) will limit frame rates to well below what a high-refresh monitor needs in most games. The CPU is ready, but the GPU cannot deliver the frames.

Streaming: The CPU is excellent for streaming. Its high multi-core score (39,551 in Cinebench R23) means it can encode video using x264 while gaming without impacting performance. The GPU's encoder is not detailed, but the CPU can handle the heavy lifting. The overall gaming experience will still be limited by the GPU's raw rendering power.

Video Editing: This is a strong scenario. The CPU's 24 cores and high Passmark scores (multi-thread 46,532) will make timeline scrubbing, rendering, and exporting very fast. The GPU will help with effects, but its low compute score (2,762) means it will not accelerate the process as much as a higher-tier card. The CPU is the star here.

3D Rendering: Excellent. CPU-based renderers will be very fast. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 39,551 is a direct indicator of rendering performance. This CPU is ideal for this workload. The GPU is not powerful enough for GPU-accelerated rendering, but the CPU will handle it.

Software Development: Very good. The high core count and integer math score (177,066) will speed up compilation times significantly. The fast single-thread performance (Passmark 4,506) ensures a responsive IDE. The GPU is irrelevant for this task.

Student and Office Work: Overkill, but effective. The CPU's speed will make any office application, spreadsheet, or browser feel instant. The low TDP of 65 W is a positive for a workstation that runs all day. This is a very powerful, if expensive, option for basic tasks.

Who Should Build It

This build is for a user who prioritizes CPU compute power above all else, or someone who has a specific need for the CPU and is using the GPU as a placeholder. The target user is a content creator, a video editor, a 3D modeler, or a software developer who needs the multi-threaded horsepower of the i9-14900F. For these users, the Arc A380 is a basic display adapter that provides a video output, but it is not a performance asset.

For gamers, this is not a target build. The data clearly shows that the GPU is the limiting factor. A gamer would be much better served by a less expensive CPU and a more powerful GPU. The system is also suitable for a small business workstation that needs to run complex financial models or large databases, where the CPU's Passmark data encryption score of 34,644 and data compression score of 564,207 would be highly beneficial. The ECC memory support on the CPU is also a point for such a workstation. This is a professional's CPU with an entry-level GPU attached, and it should be built with that understanding.

GPU Analysis

The Intel Arc A380 is an entry-level graphics card based on the Xe-HPG architecture, built on TSMC's 6 nm process. It is a small chip with 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die. It has 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 96-bit bus, providing 186.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The card has 1,024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. It also includes 8 dedicated ray tracing cores. Its base clock is 2000 MHz with a boost of 2050 MHz. The FP32 performance is 4.198 TFLOPS, which is modest.

Its benchmark scores paint a clear picture. The Passmark G3D score is 6,252, and its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is a low 808. The Geekbench OpenCL score is 38,224, and Vulkan is 36,736. These numbers place it in the 44th percentile of all GPUs, making it a bottom-half performer. The nearest rivals are the AMD FirePro W5170M and the NVIDIA GeForce MX330, which are both older, mobile-class or low-end desktop parts. The performance delta is minimal, with the Arc A380 being only 1.1% faster than the HD 8870M.

The card has 8 RT cores, but its low overall compute power (4.198 TFLOPS) means ray tracing performance will be poor. The 6 GB VRAM is a limiting factor for modern titles. The card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. It requires a 250 W PSU and a single 8-pin power connector. This is a card for light gaming at 1080p with reduced settings or for office use. It is not a card for high-performance rendering or gaming. Its 186.0 GB/s bandwidth is low, and its 65.60 GPixel/s pixel rate is also low, indicating it will struggle with high resolutions.

FAQ

Q: Is the Intel Core i9-14900F a good choice for gaming?

A: The CPU itself is excellent for gaming, with a single-core score of 5,583 in Cinebench R23 and a 92nd percentile ranking. However, in this specific build, the Intel Arc A380 GPU will severely limit gaming performance.

Q: What is the performance difference between the CPU and GPU in this build?

A: The CPU's average benchmark score is 60,008, while the GPU's is 8,558. The CPU sits at the 92nd percentile, while the GPU is at the 44th percentile, creating a massive bottleneck.

Q: What type of memory does this system support?

A: According to the data, the CPU supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory. The memory bus is dual-channel.

Q: Does the Intel Arc A380 support hardware ray tracing?

A: Yes, the GPU has 8 dedicated ray tracing cores. However, its low FP32 performance of 4.198 TFLOPS means that ray tracing performance will be very limited.

Q: What is the suggested power supply for the GPU?

A: The suggested PSU for the Intel Arc A380 is 250 W. The CPU has a TDP of 65 W.

Q: How does the i9-14900F compare to its closest rivals?

A: It is essentially tied with the AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX, which is only 0.2% faster. It is also 0.6% faster than the AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX3D.

Q: Is the Arc A380 a suitable card for 3D rendering?

A: No, its Passmark GPU compute score is only 2,762, which is low. The CPU's Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 39,551 makes it much more suitable for CPU-based rendering.

Benchmark Performance

The combined picture is one of extreme asymmetry. The Core i9-14900F is a top-tier performer. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 39,551 and single-core score of 5,583 place it at the 92nd percentile of all CPUs. Its average benchmark score is 60,008, and it is within 0.2% of the AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX, its closest rival. This is a CPU that excels in every compute task, from the Passmark data encryption score of 34,644 to the floating-point math score of 119,550.

The Intel Arc A380, in contrast, is a low-end performer. Its Passmark G3D score of 6,252 and 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 808 put it at the 44th percentile of all GPUs. Its average benchmark score is 8,558, and its nearest rival is the AMD FirePro W5170M, which is a mobile workstation part from a previous generation. The combined percentile for this system is 68, which is dragged down entirely by the GPU.

The data shows a system with exceptional CPU power and minimal GPU capability. The CPU will breeze through demanding multi-threaded workloads, while the GPU will struggle with any graphically intensive task. There is no measured FPS data for this pairing, but the CPU and GPU scores suggest that the system is a workstation first and a gaming machine a distant second. The benchmark results indicate that this is a build for heavy compute, not for gaming or GPU-accelerated rendering.