SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra X9 388H + Intel Arc A570M

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)

▼

95 Score

Top 5% Ranking

95 / 100

ULTIMATE READY

Apex Performer

Top 5% 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

93%

GPU

97%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra X9 388H

44,466 Benchmark Score

Top 7% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

Intel Arc A570M

58,239 Benchmark Score

Top 3% 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 Ultra X9 388H paired with the Intel Arc A570M is an all-Intel laptop combination that lands in the combined 88th percentile, an unusually strong standing for a mobile platform. The CPU is a 16-core, 16-thread Panther Lake-H design on Intel's 3 nm node, while the GPU is an Alchemist-generation Xe-HPG part built on TSMC's 6 nm process. Both components individually sit in the 88th percentile versus their respective databases, which raises an interesting question: does a balanced pairing of two strong mobile parts translate into a coherent machine, or does one side quietly limit the other? The benchmark data suggests the former, though with caveats worth investigating. One point must be stated up front: the database contains no measured FPS rows for this exact CPU+GPU pairing, so every frame-rate discussion below is an estimate extrapolated from the benchmark scores rather than from measured gameplay.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The platform story here is unusual for a laptop-class pairing. The Core Ultra X9 388H uses Intel BGA 2540, a ball-grid-array socket, which means the chip is soldered in place and offers no socket-level upgrade path whatsoever. Whatever performance this configuration delivers on day one is, broadly speaking, the ceiling for the CPU itself. The memory side is equally fixed in topology: the processor supports LPDDR5X in a dual-channel configuration with a listed memory bandwidth of 153.6 GB/s. That figure is substantial for a mobile part and matters doubly here because the same memory subsystem feeds the CPU's integrated Arc B390 graphics — though in this pairing the discrete Arc A570M carries the rendering load.

PCIe connectivity is a potential constraint. The CPU exposes PCIe Gen 5 with 4 lanes from the CPU itself, while the Arc A570M connects over PCIe 4.0 x8. A Gen 4 x8 link is narrower than the x16 interface found on many discrete graphics setups, and while this rarely throttles mid-range GPUs in typical gaming, it is a structural limit that a future GPU with heavier bandwidth demands would feel first. For a laptop buyer, the practical "upgrade path" is therefore not component swapping but external expansion and memory selection at purchase time — choosing the fastest supported LPDDR5X configuration is the one lever that touches the documented 153.6 GB/s figure.

Power headroom is defined by the numbers in the pack: the CPU carries a 25 W TDP and the GPU a 75 W TDP, for a combined 100 W across the two primary compute dies. There is no suggestedPsu field for this mobile configuration, which is consistent with laptop platforms where the chassis and its power delivery are engineered as a whole. The takeaway is that this is a thermally disciplined design; the 5.10 GHz boost clock on a 25 W part indicates aggressive clock-bursting within a tight envelope rather than sustained desktop-style power draw.

Balance and Bottleneck

The most striking feature of this pairing is symmetry. Both the CPU and the GPU sit at the 88th percentile against their respective databases, and the combined percentile is also 88. That alignment is rare — most builds show a spread where one component leads by a wide margin. Here, the data implies a deliberately balanced configuration where neither side is dramatically over- or under-provisioned relative to the other.

Within that balance, the nature of each side's strength differs. The CPU posts a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2200.5 alongside a multi-core score of 18911, and its PassMark single-thread result of 4280 is strong enough to keep game-engine and simulation logic well fed. The GPU's Geekbench OpenCL score of 58239 places it in the 88th percentile of all GPUs. In CPU-bound scenarios — low-resolution gaming, physics-heavy simulation, compilation — the processor's high single-core standing suggests it will not be the limiter. In GPU-bound scenarios at higher resolutions and settings, the question inverts: can 8 GB of GDDR6 and 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth sustain modern render targets?

The evidence points to a configuration best operated at mainstream resolutions where the GPU's 2048 shading units and 166.4 GTexel/s texture rate are matched to the workload. The PCIe 4.0 x8 interface is the one structural element that could bite during asset streaming, and the 128-bit memory bus means texture-heavy scenes will press against the 8 GB buffer. Neither is a defect at this tier; both define where the sensible operating point lies.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU's benchmark record is deep, spanning three Cinebench generations and a full PassMark suite. In Cinebench R15, the part scores 2955 multi-core and 309.5 single-core. Moving to R20, those figures become 13101 and 1849. In R23 — the most commonly cited modern version — the results are 18911 multi-core and 2200.5 single-core. The consistency of scaling across generations indicates a part whose multi-threaded throughput and per-thread responsiveness are both genuinely high-end for mobile silicon.

The PassMark suite adds texture: 361763 in data compression, 28490 in encryption, 29943 in extended instructions, 358 in find-prime-numbers, 112550 in floating point math, 90882 in integer math, 36811 in the multithread test, 3226 in physics, and 44010 in string sorting. The average benchmark score across the suite is 44466, which lands the CPU in the 88th percentile of all CPUs in the database.

Context comes from the nearest rivals, and the margins are razor-thin. The AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D averages 44573 — just 0.2 percent above this Intel part. The Intel Core i9-13950HX averages 44342, 0.3 percent behind; the AMD Ryzen AI Max 385 averages 44309, 0.4 percent behind; and the Intel Core i5-13600 averages 44240, 0.5 percent behind. In practical terms, this mobile processor trades blows with a field that includes a previous-generation mobile flagship and desktop-class competition, achieving that parity from a 25 W envelope. That is the single most impressive data point in the pack.

On the GPU side, the record is sparser: a single Geekbench OpenCL score of 58239, averaging to 58239 and the 88th percentile. Its rivals are similarly clustered — the AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT averages 58392 (0.3 percent ahead), the AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM averages 58085 (0.3 percent behind), the NVIDIA P102-100 averages 58528 (0.5 percent ahead), and the AMD Radeon PRO V710 averages 58657 (0.7 percent ahead). All four deltas are under one percent, meaning the A570M's compute standing is effectively identical to that cohort. The combined picture, then, is a machine whose CPU and GPU each perform like 88th-percentile hardware — a coherent, evenly matched pairing.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming. With a CPU in the 88th percentile and single-thread strength demonstrated by the 2200.5 R23 single-core score, the processor can clearly drive high frame rates when the GPU allows. The GPU's OpenCL standing suggests strong esports-class performance, though demanding AAA titles at maximum settings will press against 8 GB of VRAM. No measured FPS data exists for this pairing, so these are estimates from benchmark scores.

Streaming. Single-PC streaming requires headroom beyond the game itself. The 16 threads and the 18911-point R23 multi-core result indicate the CPU can absorb encode and compositing overhead alongside gameplay without collapsing frame pacing. The 153.6 GB/s memory bandwidth helps here too, since streaming workloads are bandwidth-hungry.

Video editing. Timeline scrubbing and export both scale with the numbers documented here: multi-core throughput near the i9-13950HX's level, plus an OpenCL-capable GPU sitting essentially level with the Radeon RX 6950 XT in compute. GPU-accelerated effects should run comfortably; 8 GB of VRAM sets a ceiling on very high-resolution timeline work.

3D rendering. Viewport work will lean on the GPU's 5.325 TFLOPS FP32 throughput, while final renders scale with the CPU's 18911 R23 multi-core score. Both are strong for mobile. The GPU's 10.65 TFLOPS FP16 capability (at a 2:1 ratio) is relevant for denoising and some render engines that use half-precision paths.

Software development. Compilation is one of the clearest wins. The PassMark multithread score of 36811 and the find-prime-numbers result of 358 reflect raw throughput, while the 4280 single-thread score keeps IDE responsiveness sharp. Developers will find this CPU trades within half a percent of desktop-class rivals.

Student and office work. For everyday productivity, this configuration is overkill in the best sense — snappy single-core response, immediate multitasking headroom, and an integrated Arc B390 as a fallback should the discrete GPU be idle. Battery-sensitive office work benefits from the 25 W CPU TDP.

GPU Analysis

The Arc A570M is an Alchemist-family part on the DG2-256 chip, manufactured by TSMC on a 6 nm process. The die measures 269 mm² and packs 11,500 million transistors, a density of 42.8 million transistors per square millimetre. The hardware inventory: 2048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, 64 render output units, and 16 RT cores. Tensor cores are not listed for this part, which is worth noting for anyone evaluating AI-accelerated workloads — the GPU may not offer dedicated tensor hardware, and the CPU side would need to carry such workloads instead.

Clocks run from a 900 MHz base to a 1300 MHz boost, with memory clocked at 1750 MHz — 14 Gbps effective — across a 128-bit bus. That yields 224.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth serving 8 GB of GDDR6. Derived throughput figures are 83.20 GPixel/s of pixel fill and 166.4 GTexel/s of texture fill, with FP32 compute at 5.325 TFLOPS and FP16 at 10.65 TFLOPS.

What does this mean for rendering? The 16 RT cores provide hardware ray-tracing capability, and the API support — DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), Vulkan 1.4, and OpenGL 4.6 — is fully modern. The OpenCL score of 58239, sitting within one percent of everything from the RX 6950 XT to the Radeon PRO V710, indicates strong general compute. The structural limits are the 128-bit bus and the 8 GB buffer, which together define the practical resolution ceiling. The PCIe 4.0 x8 interface completes the picture: adequate at this tier, but a known constraint if bandwidth demands grow. TDP is 75 W, classifying it firmly as an efficient mobile discrete GPU.

Gaming Performance

The database contains no measuredFps rows for this exact CPU+GPU combination — dataIsMeasured is false — so all frame-rate discussion below is estimated from benchmark scores rather than observed gameplay, and should be treated as such.

Working from the numbers: the GPU's 88th-percentile standing and its virtual tie with the RX 6950 XT in compute suggest comfortable performance in esports titles at high refresh rates, where the CPU's 2200.5 R23 single-core score and 4280 PassMark single-thread result would keep frame delivery well above any GPU-imposed ceiling at reduced settings. At 1080p in mainstream titles, the combination of 2048 shading units and 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth points toward smooth play at high settings, though the newest texture-heavy releases will test the 8 GB framebuffer at ultra presets. At 1440p and above, the estimate becomes more conservative: the 128-bit bus and finite VRAM are the limiting factors, and ultra-settings ray tracing — supported by the 16 RT cores but demanding on this class of hardware — would likely require reconstruction techniques to hold frame rates.

The CPU will almost never be the gaming bottleneck here. The question for prospective buyers is purely about resolution and settings targets, and the honest answer from the data is that this is a mainstream-resolution machine with headroom for high refresh, not an ultra-settings, high-resolution flagship.

Who Should Build It

Because buildClass is laptop, "building" here means selecting a notebook configured with this pairing. The data maps cleanly onto several user groups. Gamers targeting high-refresh play at mainstream resolutions get a CPU that never flinches and a GPU with 88th-percentile compute standing. Content creators — video editors and 3D artists — benefit from a multi-core score that trades within half a percent of an i9-13950HX, plus OpenCL GPU acceleration effectively level with a Radeon RX 6950 XT. Software developers and students get 16 threads, elite single-thread responsiveness, and a 25 W envelope that favors sustained portable use. Small businesses considering it as a workstation should note the lack of ECC support, which rules out error-corrected deployments, but the PassMark encryption score of 28490 and compression score of 361763 indicate strong general-purpose throughput for office and light server-adjacent tasks. The platform's fixed nature — BGA socket, LPDDR5X, PCIe 4.0 x8 for the GPU — suits buyers who want a complete, balanced machine rather than something to evolve over time.

FAQ

Q: Can the CPU be upgraded later?

A: No. The Core Ultra X9 388H uses Intel BGA 2540, a soldered ball-grid-array interface with no socket-level replacement path. Configuration at purchase is final.

Q: How does this CPU compare to the Intel Core i9-13950HX?

A: By average benchmark score, the 388H posts 44466 versus 44342 for the i9-13950HX — a 0.3 percent advantage — while drawing a 25 W TDP. The two parts are effectively equivalent in aggregate performance.

Q: Is 8 GB of VRAM enough for modern games?

A: The data suggests it is workable at mainstream resolutions and settings. The 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus delivers 224.0 GB/s, and the GPU's compute percentile indicates strong performance within that envelope, but texture-heavy titles at ultra settings will press the buffer. No measured FPS data exists for this pairing to confirm real-world limits.

Q: Does this GPU support ray tracing?

A: Yes. The Arc A570M includes 16 RT cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4. Tensor cores are not listed for this part.

Q: What memory does this system use?

A: The CPU supports LPDDR5X in a dual-channel configuration with 153.6 GB/s of listed bandwidth. ECC memory is not supported.

Q: Are the published frame rates for this laptop measured?

A: No. The database contains no measured FPS rows for this exact CPU+GPU combination; dataIsMeasured is false and all frame-rate expectations discussed here are estimates derived from benchmark scores.

Q: How power-hungry is the combination?

A: The CPU carries a 25 W TDP and the GPU 75 W, for 100 W combined across the two primary compute components — a disciplined mobile-class envelope consistent with a laptop platform.

CPU Analysis

The Core Ultra X9 388H is a Panther Lake-H design manufactured on Intel's own 3 nm process — a notable point, since the GPU in this pairing comes from TSMC. It carries 16 cores and 16 threads operating from a 2.10 GHz base to a 5.10 GHz boost. The cache hierarchy is generous: 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and an 18 MB shared L3. Per-core L2 of that size suggests fast access to working sets without contending for shared cache, which helps explain the strong single-thread results. The multiplier is locked, so no overclocking; the integrated graphics are Intel Arc B390, which serves as the fallback display path. The part number is SA4QWQ9EK, market segment is Mobile, and production status is Active, with the release date recorded as January 4, 2026.

What do the scores mean for real workloads? The Cinebench progression — 309.5/2200.5 single-core and 2955/18911 multi-core from R15 to R23 — shows a part whose per-thread output is high enough that lightly threaded applications feel fast while heavily threaded ones get genuine throughput. The PassMark physics score of 3226 and floating-point result of 112550 translate directly to simulation and scientific workloads; the integer score of 90882 and string-sorting result of 44010 matter for scripting, parsing, and database-adjacent tasks; the 28490 encryption score covers secure workflows. The average of 44466, ranked 88th percentile against all CPUs, places this mobile part in territory contested by desktop hardware — and it achieves that from a 25 W envelope on a 3 nm node. The locked multiplier and BGA packaging are the costs of that efficiency; the raw output is the payoff.

Build Overview

This is a laptop-class, all-Intel pairing: a Panther Lake-H CPU on a 3 nm Intel process mated to an Alchemist-generation Arc 5 Mobile GPU on TSMC's 6 nm node. The combined percentile is 88, matching each component's individual standing, which frames the essential character of the machine — balanced, coherent, and without an obvious weak link between CPU and GPU.

By tier, the data places it near the top of the mobile hierarchy and competitive with desktop parts on both sides. The CPU trades within half a percent of the Ryzen 5 7500X3D, i9-13950HX, Ryzen AI Max 385, and i5-13600. The GPU trades within one percent of the RX 6950 XT, RX 5600 OEM, P102-100, and Radeon PRO V710. Neither side wins by a margin a user would notice; neither side loses one either. The practical reading is straightforward: a high-refresh, mainstream-resolution gaming and creation laptop with genuinely strong compute credentials, a fixed and unupgradeable platform, and frame-rate expectations that remain estimates until measured data for this exact pairing enters the database.

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra X9 388H + Intel Arc A570M

Apex Performer

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core Ultra X9 388H

Intel Arc A570M

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

Upgrade Path and Platform

Balance and Bottleneck

Benchmark Performance

Usage Scenarios

GPU Analysis

Gaming Performance

Who Should Build It

FAQ

CPU Analysis

Build Overview

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