SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core i9-14900KF + 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)

▼

91 Score

Top 9% Ranking

91 / 100

ULTIMATE READY

Apex Performer

Top 9% 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

97%

GPU

85%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core i9-14900KF

79,371 Benchmark Score

Top 3% 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

The Intel Core i9-14900KF paired with an Intel Arc A310 is one of the most lopsided configurations possible in a desktop build, and the benchmark data makes that immediately clear. The CPU sits in the 95th percentile of all processors, while the GPU rests in the 40th percentile of all graphics cards. No measured FPS rows exist for this exact combination in the FACT PACK — the data contains no measuredFps entries — so all frame rate discussions below are estimates derived from the synthetic benchmark scores and percentile positions, not direct gaming tests. This pairing is not a gaming rig; it is a workstation-class CPU with a display adapter attached, and every performance expectation should be calibrated to that reality.

Gaming Performance

Because the FACT PACK contains no measured FPS data for this CPU+GPU combination, all gaming performance figures here are estimates based on the GPU's benchmark scores. The Arc A310's PassMark G3D score of 5433 places it in the 40th percentile of all GPUs, which is a low-end entry-level graphics tier. The GPU's nearest rivals in the database are the AMD Radeon R7 250 (0.1% faster), the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 (0.4% faster), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (1% faster). This means the A310 performs at roughly the same level as a GTX 1650 in compute terms — a card that is generally considered a 1080p low-to-medium settings gaming solution for older titles, not a high-refresh or high-detail option.

At 1080p with ultra settings, the estimated frame rates for modern AAA titles would be low, likely struggling to maintain 30 FPS in demanding scenes. The GPU's 4 GB GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus with 124.0 GB/s bandwidth is a severe constraint for modern game assets — many titles at ultra settings exceed 4 GB of VRAM usage, causing texture streaming issues and stuttering. The 768 shading units and 2.688 TFLOPS FP32 performance are simply not enough compute throughput for high-detail rendering. At 1440p or 4K, the estimates become even less favorable, with playable frame rates only achievable in esports or older titles at reduced settings. The PassMark DirectX 11 score of 33 and DirectX 12 score of 29 suggest the GPU handles modern APIs poorly relative to its peers, further limiting gaming capability. In short, the data indicates this pairing is unsuitable for gaming beyond casual or legacy titles at low settings.

Balance and Bottleneck

The bottleneck analysis here is unambiguous: the GPU is the limiting factor in every gaming workload, while the CPU is the limiting factor in every productivity workload. The CPU's 95th percentile rank versus the GPU's 40th percentile rank creates a massive imbalance — the processor outperforms the graphics card by a margin that is practically impossible to bridge in gaming. In any game, the Arc A310 will be pegged at 100% utilization while the i9-14900KF idles, waiting for frames to render. The CPU's PassMark multithread score of 58405 and Cinebench R23 multicore score of 49370 are irrelevant to gaming when the GPU can only produce a fraction of the frames the CPU can process.

Conversely, in CPU-bound workloads like video encoding, 3D rendering, or software compilation, the GPU becomes the idle component. The i9-14900KF's 32 threads and 6.00 GHz boost clock will drive compute tasks at near-maximum efficiency while the A310's 2.688 TFLOPS FP32 throughput does nothing to assist. For non-gaming tasks, the balance is actually reasonable — the GPU handles display output and basic acceleration while the CPU does all heavy lifting. For gaming, however, the bottleneck is so severe that upgrading the GPU would yield a 10x or more improvement in frame rates, while upgrading the CPU would yield zero measurable gaming benefit. The combined percentile of 68 reflects this imbalance — it is a high-end CPU score dragged down by a bottom-tier GPU score.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: Not viable with this pairing. The GPU's 40th percentile ranking and DirectX 12 score of 29 indicate that even at 1080p, achieving 144Hz or even 60Hz in modern titles is unrealistic. Esports titles at low settings might approach playable frame rates, but the CPU's power is entirely wasted.

Streaming: The CPU excels here. The i9-14900KF's 24 cores and 32 threads provide ample headroom for encoding video via software while running a game, but the GPU will cap the game's frame rate so low that the stream quality becomes the only positive. The PassMark data encryption score of 46416 and extended instructions score of 44839 support strong software encoding performance.

Video editing: Excellent CPU-driven performance. Cinebench R23 multicore score of 49370 and Geekbench multicore score of 23789 indicate fast timeline scrubbing and export times. The GPU's 4 GB VRAM and 124.0 GB/s bandwidth will handle basic effects acceleration, but heavy GPU-accelerated effects in software like DaVinci Resolve will be slow.

3D rendering: The CPU is a rendering powerhouse. The Cinebench R20 multicore score of 20735 and R15 multicore of 4976 demonstrate strong multi-threaded performance for CPU-based renderers. GPU rendering with the A310 is impractical — its 2.688 TFLOPS FP32 and 16 ROPs are far too weak for any serious GPU-accelerated render engine.

Software development: The CPU makes this an ideal developer machine. The PassMark integer math score of 209125, floating point math of 151918, and random string sorting of 86564 indicate rapid code compilation, test execution, and data processing. The GPU is sufficient for multiple monitors and basic UI rendering.

Student and office work: Overkill on the CPU side, adequate on the GPU side. The CPU's single-thread score of 4685 ensures snappy application response, while the GPU's 625 PassMark G2D score handles 2D desktop composition and 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs for multi-monitor productivity setups.

Who Should Build It

This pairing targets a very specific and narrow user: professionals who need extreme multi-threaded CPU performance for computation-heavy work but have minimal or no GPU acceleration requirements. The i9-14900KF's 95th percentile CPU rank serves software developers compiling large codebases, researchers running data analysis with the PassMark data compression score of 785831, and engineers running simulation software that is CPU-bound. The GPU is essentially a display adapter for these users — its 4 GB VRAM and 64-bit bus are irrelevant when the workload is purely computational.

Gamers should avoid this build entirely. At 1080p, the GPU's estimated performance is below acceptable thresholds for modern gaming, and at 1440p or 4K, it is non-functional for anything beyond simple 2D titles. Content creators who work primarily in CPU-based rendering tools (like Blender's Cycles CPU mode) might find this acceptable, but any GPU-accelerated workflow would be severely hampered. Small businesses running office productivity suites, database applications, or web servers would benefit from the CPU's multithreaded might, but the GPU provides no value beyond basic desktop output. The build is best described as a "headless compute node with a display" — a system for users who prioritize integer and floating point throughput above all else.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core i9-14900KF is a 24-core, 32-thread processor based on the Raptor Lake architecture, fabricated on Intel's 10 nm process with a die size of 257 mm². The base clock is 3.20 GHz with a boost clock of 6.00 GHz, and the TDP is rated at 125 W. It supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in dual-channel configuration, with ECC memory support, and connects via Intel Socket 1700 with PCIe Gen 5 (16 lanes from the CPU). The cache hierarchy includes 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 36 MB shared L3. The multiplier is unlocked, making it a K-series overclocking part.

The benchmark data shows a processor that dominates in every multi-threaded test. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 49370 places it within 0.3% of the Core i9-14900K and 1.6% of the Intel Xeon w5-2565X, while slightly trailing the Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus by 0.3%. The Geekbench multicore score of 23789 reinforces this position. Single-thread performance is equally strong — the Cinebench R23 single-core score of 6969 and Geekbench single-core of 2727 indicate excellent responsiveness for lightly-threaded tasks like web browsing, office applications, and code editing. The PassMark suite shows balanced strengths: integer math at 209125, floating point at 151918, and extended instructions at 44839 all point to a CPU that handles scientific computing, financial modeling, and encryption workloads with ease. The data encryption score of 46416 and data compression of 785831 further confirm its suitability for database and archival tasks. The 95th percentile ranking across all CPUs means this is top-tier silicon by any measure.

FAQ

Q: Is the Intel Core i9-14900KF good for gaming?

A: The CPU itself is excellent for gaming, but in this specific pairing, the GPU becomes the bottleneck. The i9-14900KF ranks in the 95th percentile of all CPUs, which is more than enough for any game, but the Arc A310's 40th percentile ranking and PassMark G3D score of 5433 will severely limit frame rates.

Q: How much VRAM does the Arc A310 have and is it enough?

A: The GPU has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus with 124.0 GB/s bandwidth. This is insufficient for modern games at high settings, which often require more than 4 GB, but it is adequate for basic desktop use and legacy titles.

Q: Can this build handle 4K video playback?

A: The GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate and has video decode capabilities typical of the Xe-HPG architecture, but the PassMark G2D score of 625 and low overall compute performance suggest that 4K video playback is possible for standard codecs, though the CPU would handle most of the decoding work.

Q: What is the CPU's boost clock and how does it affect performance?

A: The boost clock is 6.00 GHz, which is reflected in the strong single-thread scores (Cinebench R23 single-core of 6969, Geekbench single-core of 2727). This high clock speed benefits tasks that rely on single-thread performance like web browsing and spreadsheet work.

Q: Is the Arc A310 comparable to any well-known GPU?

A: According to the nearest rivals data, the Arc A310 performs within 1% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 and within 0.4% of the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100, with an average score of 7550 versus the GTX 1650's 7472.

Q: Does the CPU support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the i9-14900KF supports ECC memory, which is unusual for a consumer K-series part and makes it attractive for workstation use where data integrity is critical.

Q: What is the combined performance percentile of this build?

A: The combined percentile is 68, which reflects the extreme disparity — the CPU's 95th percentile is dragged down by the GPU's 40th percentile, resulting in a system that is neither a top-tier gaming nor a balanced workstation.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU's average benchmark score is 79371, placing it in the 95th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals are tightly clustered: the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus scores 79574 (0.3% higher), the Intel Core i9-14900K scores 79097 (0.3% lower), the AMD EPYC 7413 scores 80041 (0.8% higher), and the Intel Xeon w5-2565X scores 80671 (1.6% higher). This shows the i9-14900KF is essentially at parity with the best consumer and entry-level workstation chips available. Key CPU benchmarks include Cinebench R23 multicore at 49370, Geekbench multicore at 23789, PassMark multithread at 58405, and PassMark single-thread at 4685.

The GPU's average benchmark score is 7550, placing it in the 40th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon R7 250 (7557, 0.1% higher), AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 (7580, 0.4% higher), and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (7472, 1% lower). Key GPU benchmarks include PassMark G3D at 5433, Geekbench OpenCL at 30607, Geekbench Vulkan at 28964, and PassMark GPU Compute at 2157. The combined picture is one of extreme imbalance: the CPU outperforms 95% of all processors, while the GPU outperforms only 40% of all graphics cards. The combined percentile of 68 accurately reflects that this system is a high-end CPU with a low-end GPU, and the total system performance is limited by the weakest link.

Build Overview

This is a desktop-class build pairing the Intel Core i9-14900KF with the Intel Arc A310. The CPU is a 24-core, 32-thread Raptor Lake part with a 6.00 GHz boost clock, 125 W TDP, and an unlocked multiplier, targeting the high-end enthusiast and workstation segment. The GPU is a 30 W, single-slot, passively-cooled Arc A310 with 4 GB GDDR6 memory, based on the Xe-HPG architecture, and is end-of-life as a production part. The overall tier, based on the combined percentile of 68, is mid-range — but this is misleading. The CPU alone sits at the 95th percentile, indicating top-tier performance for compute workloads, while the GPU sits at the 40th percentile, indicating entry-level graphics capability. The pairing makes sense only for users who need massive CPU compute power and minimal GPU acceleration; for any graphics-intensive task, the GPU is a severe liability.

GPU Analysis

The Intel Arc A310 is based on the DG2-128 chip using the Xe-HPG architecture, fabricated on TSMC's 6 nm process with 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die. The GPU has 768 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, 16 ROPs, and 6 ray tracing cores. Base and boost clocks are both 1750 MHz, with memory running at 1937 MHz (15.5 Gbps effective) on a 64-bit bus, yielding 124.0 GB/s bandwidth. The 4 GB GDDR6 frame buffer is the most limiting factor for modern workloads. The GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, and outputs via 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.0. It requires no external power connectors and has a suggested PSU of 200 W.

The benchmark scores paint a clear picture of its capabilities. The PassMark G3D score of 5433 and 40th percentile rank place it in the entry-level segment, with nearest rivals including the GTX 1650 (1% faster) and Radeon R7 250 (0.1% slower). The PassMark DirectX 11 score of 33 and DirectX 12 score of 29 are exceptionally low, indicating poor execution on modern graphics APIs. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 30607 and Vulkan score of 28964 show that compute workloads are similarly limited. The FP32 throughput of 2.688 TFLOPS and pixel rate of 28.00 GPixel/s are far below what is needed for 1080p gaming at medium settings, let alone higher resolutions. The 6 RT cores are present but effectively useless for ray-traced gaming given the low shading throughput. For rendering, the 2.688 TFLOPS FP32 and 5.376 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1) performance is insufficient for any serious GPU-accelerated renderer. In practical terms, this GPU is best suited for 2D desktop work, video playback, and basic compute acceleration — any task requiring 3D rendering or gaming will be severely constrained by the 64-bit memory bus and 4 GB VRAM.

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

Apex Performer

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core i9-14900KF

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

Gaming Performance

Balance and Bottleneck

Usage Scenarios

Who Should Build It

CPU Analysis

FAQ

Benchmark Performance

Build Overview

GPU Analysis

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