SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 + NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile Refresh

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)

▼

86 Score

Top 14% Ranking

86 / 100

HIGH-END

Power Build

Top 14% of systems. Excellent for 1440p Ultra or 4K High gaming.

1440p Ultra4K High

System Balance Analysis

CPU vs GPU performance ratio

GPU Bottleneck

CPU

97%

GPU

74%

Your GPU is limiting system performance. Consider upgrading to a more powerful graphics card to better utilize your CPU.

PROCESSOR

AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395

77,740 Benchmark Score

Top 3% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile Refresh

0 Benchmark Score

Top 26% 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

GPU 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

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 paired with the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile Refresh represents a peculiar hybrid: a modern, 16-core Zen 5 mobile processor from 2025 combined with a Turing-architecture professional GPU from 2019. The CPU sits in the 95th percentile of all processors, while the GPU lands exactly at the 50th percentile of all GPUs, and the combined system percentile is 73. This is a laptop configuration where the processor vastly outclasses the graphics solution, a fact that shapes every benchmark interpretation below. The data shows a system built for compute-heavy professional workloads rather than balanced gaming, though the CPU’s integrated Radeon 8060S graphics adds a second performance layer worth examining.

CPU Analysis

The AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 is a 16-core, 32-thread processor based on the Zen 5 architecture, manufactured on TSMC’s 4nm process node. Its base clock is 3.00 GHz with a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. The chip draws a 55W TDP, which is notably low for a 16-core mobile part, suggesting efficient power management. The die size is listed as 2x 70.6 mm², indicating a chiplet design, and the cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 64 MB of shared L3 cache. Memory support is LPDDR5X over a quad-channel bus, delivering 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth, with ECC support enabled. The processor uses AMD Socket FP11 and offers PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes from the CPU.

Benchmark results paint a picture of extraordinary multi-threaded capability. In Cinebench R23, the multicore score is 35314, while the single-core score is 2044. The multicore-to-single-core ratio is roughly 17.3x, which is close to the theoretical 16-core scaling limit, indicating excellent core utilization. Geekbench scores are 20992 multicore and 2464 single-core. PassMark tests show a multithread score of 54934, a single-thread score of 4147, and a physics score of 3481. More specialized workloads reveal strengths: floating-point math scores 128682, integer math scores 200665, and extended instructions score 56346. Data compression scores 690650, while data encryption scores 35455. The find prime numbers test scores 303, which is relatively low, and random string sorting scores 76177.

The average benchmark score for this CPU is 77740, placing it in the 95th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9945WX at 76513 (a 1.6% delta), the AMD EPYC Embedded 8224P at 76492 (1.6% delta), and the AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX at 76212 (2% delta). The Intel Core i9-14900K scores 79097, which is 1.7% higher. This means the Ryzen AI Max+ 395 sits within 2% of several workstation-class and flagship desktop parts, despite being a 55W mobile chip. The data indicates that for multi-threaded rendering, compilation, and scientific workloads, this CPU performs at a level comparable to high-end desktop processors, while consuming a fraction of the power.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU’s benchmark scores are exceptional across the board. Cinebench R23 multicore at 35314 places it firmly in workstation territory, outperforming the Ryzen 9 8945HX by 2% and nearly matching the i9-14900K. The Geekbench multicore score of 20992 reinforces this. For single-threaded tasks, the 2044 Cinebench R23 score and 2464 Geekbench single-core score indicate strong per-core performance, though not class-leading — the data suggests the boost clock of 5.10 GHz helps but does not overcome the architectural advantages of higher-clocked desktop parts.

The GPU, the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile Refresh, has no benchmark scores listed in the data, and its average benchmark score is 0. Its percentile rank is 50, meaning it sits at the median of all GPUs. The combined system percentile is 73. Without GPU benchmark numbers, the analysis must rely on the GPU’s specifications and the CPU’s known performance to estimate system behavior.

The combined picture is one of severe imbalance. The CPU is in the top 5% of all processors, while the GPU is in the 50th percentile. This means that in CPU-bound workloads, the system performs like a high-end workstation, but in GPU-bound tasks, it performs at mid-range levels. The data shows no measured FPS values for this combination, so all gaming and GPU-accelerated performance must be estimated from the specifications.

Balance and Bottleneck

The bottleneck analysis is straightforward: the GPU is the limiting factor in nearly all graphics-intensive workloads. The CPU’s 95th percentile rank versus the GPU’s 50th percentile rank creates a delta of 45 percentile points, which is substantial. In gaming, the Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile Refresh will cap frame rates well before the CPU can show its strength. The CPU’s integrated Radeon 8060S graphics adds a second option, but its performance is not benchmarked in the data.

For professional workloads, the balance shifts. The CPU’s massive multi-threading capabilities handle rendering, compilation, and data processing, while the GPU’s 5.299 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 336.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth accelerate certain tasks like 3D viewport rendering and CUDA-accelerated compute. However, the GPU’s 6 GB of VRAM is a constraint for large datasets or high-resolution textures.

The FPS scaling evidence is absent from the data, as there are no measured FPS rows for this combination. The data explicitly states that no measured FPS data exists, so all frame rate discussions are estimates based on the benchmark scores. The CPU’s single-thread performance (2044 in Cinebench R23) suggests it can feed frames to mid-range GPUs without bottlenecking, but the GPU’s 50th percentile rank means it will be the limiting factor in most games.

Who Should Build It

This configuration targets users who prioritize CPU throughput over GPU performance. The 95th percentile CPU rank makes it suitable for software developers who compile large codebases, data scientists running heavy numerical simulations, and video editors working with 4K or 8K footage where CPU encoding is involved. The 16 cores and 32 threads, combined with 64 MB of L3 cache, provide the parallel processing power needed for these tasks.

Content creators using 3D rendering software that supports CPU rendering will find the Cinebench R23 multicore score of 35314 compelling. The PassMark data compression score of 690650 indicates strong file archiving and data processing capabilities. Students in engineering or computer science fields could benefit from the CPU’s performance for simulations and coding assignments, though the GPU’s mid-range position means gaming or GPU-accelerated coursework would be limited.

Small business workstations handling financial modeling, database operations, or virtualization would see excellent CPU performance. The ECC memory support adds reliability for long-running computations. However, users who need high-end GPU performance for machine learning training, GPU rendering, or high-refresh gaming should look elsewhere, as the Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile Refresh’s 50th percentile rank will be a bottleneck.

GPU Analysis

The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile Refresh is based on the Turing architecture, manufactured on TSMC’s 12nm process. The chip, TU106, contains 10,800 million transistors on a 445 mm² die, with a transistor density of 24.3M per mm². Clock speeds are 945 MHz base and 1380 MHz boost, with memory clocked at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). The GPU has 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, yielding 336.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

Compute resources include 1920 shading units, 120 texture mapping units, and 64 raster output units. The GPU features 30 RT cores for ray tracing and 240 tensor cores for AI acceleration. Pixel rate is 88.32 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 165.6 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 5.299 TFLOPS, while FP16 performance is 10.60 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio). The TDP is 80W, and the card uses an MXM module form factor with no power connectors, drawing power from the motherboard. It interfaces via PCIe 3.0 x16 and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The lack of benchmark scores means the GPU’s real-world performance must be inferred. The 50th percentile rank suggests it sits at the median of all GPUs, which in modern terms places it at an entry-level to mid-range performance tier. The 30 RT cores provide ray tracing capability, but the 5.299 TFLOPS of FP32 performance is modest by 2025 standards. For rendering, the 6 GB VRAM is a limiting factor for large scenes or high-resolution textures, though the 336.0 GB/s bandwidth is adequate for 1080p workloads.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: Estimated performance is limited by the GPU’s 50th percentile rank. At 1080p, the Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile Refresh may achieve playable frame rates in less demanding titles, but AAA games will likely require reduced settings. The CPU’s strong single-thread performance (2044 in Cinebench R23) ensures it won’t bottleneck, but the GPU will cap FPS well below high-refresh thresholds.

Streaming: The CPU’s 16 cores and 32 threads provide ample headroom for software encoding while gaming. The PassMark multithread score of 54934 indicates the CPU can handle encoding and game logic simultaneously. The GPU’s NVENC encoder, while not benchmarked, is present on Turing architecture, which supports hardware encoding.

Video editing: The CPU excels here. Cinebench R23 multicore at 35314 handles timeline rendering and export efficiently. The GPU’s 6 GB VRAM may limit effects processing or 4K previews, but the CPU’s performance makes this a viable editing machine.

3D rendering: CPU-based renderers will perform exceptionally well, rivaling desktop workstation parts. GPU-based renderers will be constrained by the 5.299 TFLOPS FP32 performance and 6 GB VRAM. The 30 RT cores offer ray tracing acceleration, but with limited throughput.

Software development: The CPU is ideal for compilation. The PassMark integer math score of 200665 suggests strong performance in code compilation and build processes. The 64 MB L3 cache improves data locality for large projects.

Student and office work: Overkill for basic tasks, but the CPU’s efficiency (55W TDP) means long battery life potential. The integrated Radeon 8060S graphics provides a fallback for light GPU tasks, though its performance is unmeasured.

FAQ

Q: What is the CPU’s strongest benchmark result?

A: The PassMark data compression score of 690650 is the highest absolute number, but the Cinebench R23 multicore score of 35314 is more representative of general multi-threaded performance.

Q: How does the CPU compare to the Intel Core i9-14900K?

A: The Ryzen AI Max+ 395 scores 1.7% lower on average benchmark scores (77740 vs 79097), putting it in the same performance tier.

Q: What is the GPU’s memory bandwidth?

A: The Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile Refresh has 336.0 GB/s of bandwidth from 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus.

Q: Does the system support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the CPU supports ECC memory, which is a key feature for workstation reliability.

Q: What is the GPU’s ray tracing capability?

A: The GPU has 30 RT cores, providing hardware ray tracing support, though performance is limited by the 5.299 TFLOPS FP32 rate.

Q: What is the combined performance percentile?

A: The system ranks in the 73rd percentile overall, reflecting the strong CPU but mid-range GPU.

Q: Are there measured FPS figures for gaming?

A: No, the data contains no measured FPS rows for this combination. All gaming performance is estimated from benchmark scores.

Build Overview

This is a laptop-class build, as indicated by the buildClass field. The pairing of a 2025-era 16-core Zen 5 processor with a 2019-era Turing professional GPU creates an unusual profile. The CPU’s 95th percentile rank makes it a top-tier mobile processor, while the GPU’s 50th percentile rank places it at the median of all GPUs. The combined percentile of 73 reflects this imbalance — the system is better than most laptops overall, but its GPU performance will disappoint in graphics-heavy tasks.

The CPU’s integrated Radeon 8060S graphics adds a second GPU option, though its performance is not benchmarked. The system is best described as a mobile workstation with a professional-grade CPU and a mid-range professional GPU, suitable for CPU-intensive professional work but not for high-end gaming or GPU compute.

Gaming Performance

The data contains no measured FPS rows for this exact CPU-GPU combination, so all frame rate figures are estimates based on the benchmark scores. The GPU’s 50th percentile rank suggests it performs at the median of all GPUs, which in practical terms means 1080p gaming at medium to high settings in older or less demanding titles. The 6 GB VRAM will limit texture quality in modern games, and the 5.299 TFLOPS FP32 performance is modest.

The CPU’s single-thread score of 2044 in Cinebench R23 indicates it can drive high frame rates in CPU-bound scenarios, but the GPU will be the limiting factor. For esports titles like CS:GO or Valorant, the system might achieve 60-100 FPS at 1080p, but AAA games will likely run at 30-60 FPS with reduced settings. Ray tracing, despite the 30 RT cores, will be limited by the GPU’s overall throughput. The integrated Radeon 8060S graphics, while unbenchmarked, could provide a lower-power option for less demanding games, but its performance is unknown.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The CPU uses AMD Socket FP11, which is a mobile socket, so upgrading the processor is not practical — it is likely soldered to the motherboard. The memory support is LPDDR5X over a quad-channel interface, delivering 256.0 GB/s, and ECC is supported. Memory is likely soldered as well, given the LPDDR5X type. The PCIe interface is Gen 4 with 16 lanes from the CPU, which is sufficient for the GPU’s PCIe 3.0 x16 interface.

The GPU is an MXM module, which theoretically allows replacement, but the data shows it is end-of-life and its successor is Ampere-MW. The GPU’s TDP is 80W, and the CPU’s TDP is 55W, giving a combined 135W, though the suggested PSU is not listed. In a laptop, the power delivery system is fixed, limiting upgrade options. The GPU’s power connectors are listed as “None,” meaning it draws power from the MXM slot.

A sensible next upgrade would be to replace the GPU with a newer MXM module, if the laptop’s chassis and power delivery support it. However, the Turing architecture is two generations old, so any modern MXM GPU would likely be a substantial improvement. The CPU, being a 2025 part, is already at the top of its class, so no CPU upgrade is sensible. The system’s primary limitation is the GPU, and any future upgrade should focus there. The PCIe Gen 4 CPU interface ensures compatibility with newer GPUs, though the laptop form factor limits physical upgrade options.

Rate My PC: AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395 + NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile Refresh

Power Build

System Balance Analysis

AMD Ryzen AI Max+ 395

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile Refresh

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

CPU Analysis

Benchmark Performance

Balance and Bottleneck

Who Should Build It

GPU Analysis

Usage Scenarios

FAQ

Build Overview

Gaming Performance

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