SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 + NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 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+ PRO 395

80,762 Benchmark Score

Top 3% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 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+ PRO 395 paired with the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile Refresh is a laptop-class combination that mixes a very recent, high-efficiency mobile processor with an end-of-life professional GPU. The data shows an unusual asymmetry: the CPU sits in the 95th percentile against all processors, while the GPU occupies the 50th percentile, and the pairing as a whole lands at a combined percentile of 73. That gap defines everything about how this machine behaves in practice — CPU-heavy workloads run near workstation-class levels, while graphics output is squarely mid-tier. Notably, no measured FPS rows exist for this exact combination in the database; all frame-rate discussion below is estimated from the benchmark scores rather than directly measured.

Gaming Performance

To be clear up front: this database entry contains no measured FPS data for this CPU and GPU pairing. Every frame-rate statement in this section is therefore an estimate derived from the benchmark scores, not from recorded gameplay runs. The `dataIsMeasured` flag is set to false, and the `measuredFpsUltraByGame` table is empty for this combination.

With that caveat established, what can the numbers suggest? The GPU's raw specifications — 3072 shading units, a 9.400 TFLOPS FP32 throughput, 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus delivering 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth, and a 1530 MHz boost clock — describe a mid-range professional card. Its 50th percentile position against all GPUs indicates that at ultra settings it should deliver frame rates around the median of what the database tracks: playable at high resolutions in most titles, competitive at moderate settings, but not positioned for high-refresh ultra-settings gameplay in demanding modern engines.

The CPU side will not be the limiter. With a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2012.5 and a multi-core score of 35061, the Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 has more than enough thread performance to feed a 50th-percentile GPU. In CPU-bound scenarios — high frame rates at lower resolutions, simulation-heavy strategy titles — the processor's Passmark single-thread score of 4078 and Passmark multithread score of 51502 suggest the GPU will saturate long before the CPU runs out of headroom. Estimates would place the emphasis on GPU-limited play at higher settings, with the CPU comfortably absorbing whatever the game engine demands on the logic side.

Ray tracing deserves a specific note. The Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile Refresh carries 48 RT cores and 384 tensor cores, so hardware ray tracing is supported, but the small RT-core count relative to the shading array means enabled ray tracing will cost a noticeable share of the estimated frame budget. Turing's DLSS, executed on the tensor cores, remains the practical route to recovering performance when heavy effects are enabled.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: As an estimate, the 50th-percentile GPU positions this pairing for smooth play at standard resolutions rather than high-refresh ultra gaming. The CPU could drive far higher frame rates than the GPU can render, so the realistic target is high-settings play with selective ray tracing, using the tensor cores for upscaling where supported.

Streaming: The 16 cores and 32 threads of the Zen 5 chip, backed by a Passmark multithread score of 51502 and a Passmark physics score of 3189, give ample encode/transcode headroom. The Passmark data compression result of 639356 and data encryption result of 32840 indicate the CPU can absorb streaming workloads alongside gameplay without becoming the bottleneck. The GPU's 16 GB of VRAM also helps when the streaming stack and game both hold assets in video memory.

Video editing: The combination is well suited to editing. The quad-channel LPDDR5X subsystem provides 256.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth — a figure typically associated with far hungrier platforms — which benefits timeline scrubbing and codec work. The 16 GB of GDDR6 on the GPU supports GPU-accelerated effects, and the Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 35061 indicates exports on the CPU side will finish quickly for a mobile part.

3D rendering: The Passmark extended instructions score of 52067 and floating point math score of 120533 point to strong throughput in rendering engines that scale across the 32 threads. GPU rendering is more modest: 9.400 TFLOPS FP32 and 18.80 TFLOPS FP16 at a 2:1 ratio make the Quadro viable for viewport work and mid-scale GPU renders, but the CPU is the stronger renderer in this pairing.

Software development: Compilation is thread- and memory-hungry, and this configuration addresses both. The 95th-percentile CPU, 64 MB of shared L3 cache, and 256.0 GB/s of quad-channel bandwidth make long builds substantially faster than typical laptop hardware. ECC memory support adds a reliability layer that matters for long-running test and build infrastructure.

Student and office work: For everyday productivity this machine is overqualified. The Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2012.5 and Passmark single-thread score of 4078 mean snappy application responsiveness, and the processor's 55 W TDP keeps the platform efficient for all-day use.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU's benchmark sheet is dense and consistent. In Cinebench R15 it posts 5247 multi-core and 306 single-core; in Cinebench R23 those figures scale to 35061 multi-core and 2012.5 single-core. Passmark results reinforce the picture: 51502 multithread, 4078 single-thread, 190720 integer math, 120533 floating point math, 70150 random string sorting, 284 find-prime-numbers, 52067 extended instructions, 3189 physics, 639356 data compression, and 32840 data encryption. The average benchmark score across the suite is 80762, placing the chip in the 95th percentile of all CPUs in the database.

The nearest rivals tell a precise story. The Intel Xeon 638 averages 80723 — a delta of 0 percent, effectively a dead heat. The Intel Xeon w5-2565X averages 80671, a delta of just 0.1 percent. The AMD Ryzen 9 8940HX averages 81103, 0.4 percent ahead, and the Intel Xeon w5-3535X averages 81115, also 0.4 percent ahead. In other words, this mobile 55 W part trades blows with workstation-class Xeons — a remarkable efficiency statement for a chip in this power envelope.

The GPU, by contrast, has no populated benchmark rows in this pack; its position is expressed through the percentile fields alone: 50th percentile against all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 0 recorded here. The combined percentile for the pairing is 73, which quantifies the imbalance — the CPU drags the aggregate up, the GPU pulls it back to the middle.

Balance and Bottleneck

This is a GPU-limited pairing, and the numbers make the case unambiguous. The CPU sits in the 95th percentile; the GPU sits in the 50th. That 45-point spread means the graphics subsystem is the ceiling in every workload where both components participate — gaming, GPU-accelerated rendering, viewport manipulation under load.

Evidence from the FPS scaling logic confirms it: because no measured FPS rows exist, the estimate rests on which component saturates first, and with a 35061-point Cinebench R23 multi-core score behind a 9.400 TFLOPS GPU, the answer is the GPU in essentially every rendering scenario. The quad-channel 256.0 GB/s memory bus on the CPU side further ensures the processor is never starved for data; the same cannot be said of the GPU's 448.0 GB/s, which is adequate but not exceptional against its shading throughput.

The flip side: any workload that runs primarily on the CPU — compilation, compression, encryption, physics simulation — is limited only by the processor itself, and here the chip performs at Xeon-adjacent levels. The Passmark physics score of 3189 and data compression score of 639356 illustrate where this machine's ceiling actually lies. For a laptop-class build, a 73rd combined percentile with the imbalance pointed this direction is the preferred orientation: it is far easier to live with a mid-tier GPU and an elite CPU than the reverse.

CPU Analysis

The Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 is a 16-core, 32-thread Zen 5 processor built on TSMC's 4 nm node, codenamed Strix Halo. It runs a 3.00 GHz base clock with a 5.10 GHz boost, and carries 80 KB of L1 and 1 MB of L2 cache per core alongside 64 MB of shared L3. The memory subsystem is the standout: quad-channel LPDDR5X with 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth and ECC support — a configuration rarely seen outside workstation platforms. The socket is AMD Socket FP11, the part is locked (multiplierUnlocked: false), and the integrated graphics is a Radeon 8060S.

What do the scores mean for real workloads? The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 35061 translates directly into fast multi-threaded rendering and compilation — this is Xeon-w5-2565X territory at 0.1 percent delta. The single-core score of 2012.5, alongside a 306 in R15 and a Passmark single-thread of 4078, indicates responsive per-thread behavior, which governs toolchains that don't parallelize and game engine main loops. The integer math result of 190720 and floating point result of 120533 cover the two dominant numerical workloads in server-style and scientific code. With a 55 W TDP, the chip achieves this at a power level far below the workstation rivals it matches, which matters in a laptop chassis where thermal headroom is finite.

The market segment is listed as Mobile, production status Active, and the release date is January 2025 — making it a current-generation part at the time of this pairing's documentation.

Who Should Build It

Mobile professionals who compute more than they render: engineers, data analysts, and developers who need Xeon-class throughput (80762 average benchmark score, 0 percent delta to the Intel Xeon 638) in a portable form factor. The 55 W TDP makes that feasible in a laptop chassis.

Content creators on the move: the 35061 Cinebench R23 multi-core score and 256.0 GB/s memory bandwidth support serious video and 3D work, and 16 GB of GPU VRAM accommodates professional application assets. GPU rendering throughput is the mid-tier element, so creators whose final renders stay on the CPU will benefit most.

Software developers: 32 threads, ECC memory, and quad-channel bandwidth make this an excellent compilation and container-development platform. The Passmark multithread score of 51502 backs that verdict.

Students and small-business workstation users: for CAD viewport work, office productivity, and coursework, the 95th-percentile CPU provides long-term headroom, and ECC support adds data integrity for business-critical files. Gamers should calibrate expectations: the 50th-percentile GPU targets high-settings play at standard resolutions, not ultra-settings high-refresh gaming.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The platform is defined by AMD Socket FP11 with the processor soldered into a laptop-class design — so the upgrade path runs through the system, not the socket. Memory support is LPDDR5X over a quad-channel bus; the 256.0 GB/s figure is the ceiling and the reason the CPU performs the way it does, so any successor platform should preserve that bandwidth at minimum. PCIe from the CPU is Gen 4 with 16 lanes, which is worth noting against the Quadro's PCIe 3.0 x16 bus interface: the GPU cannot use the CPU's full link generation, a minor generational mismatch that costs a little interface headroom.

Power is bounded by two figures: the CPU's 55 W TDP and the GPU's 110 W TDP. The Quadro requires no external power connectors (powerConnectors: None, slotWidth: IGP — it is integrated into the portable platform), and no suggested PSU is listed, consistent with a laptop build where the chassis power delivery is fixed. The sensible next upgrade is architectural, not incremental: the GPU is production-status End-of-life with a listed successor, Ampere-MW, so a platform refresh targeting that successor line plus a current Socket FP11-generation CPU would lift the GPU-side 50th percentile while retaining the CPU-side performance this pairing already delivers. The Quadro's DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), Vulkan 1.4, and OpenGL 4.6 API support remains current, which softens the urgency but not the direction.

FAQ

Q: Are the frame rates in this article measured?

A: No. The database contains no measured FPS rows for this exact CPU and GPU combination, and `dataIsMeasured` is false. All frame-rate discussion is estimated from the benchmark scores and percentile positions.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals?

A: Its average benchmark score of 80762 is a 0 percent delta to the Intel Xeon 638, 0.1 percent ahead of the Intel Xeon w5-2565X, and 0.4 percent behind both the AMD Ryzen 9 8940HX and the Intel Xeon w5-3535X — effectively a four-way tie.

Q: Which component limits gaming performance?

A: The GPU. The CPU sits in the 95th percentile against all CPUs while the GPU sits in the 50th percentile against all GPUs, so graphics workloads saturate the GPU first.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does the system have?

A: The CPU accesses quad-channel LPDDR5X at 256.0 GB/s with ECC support; the GPU has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus delivering 448.0 GB/s.

Q: Does the GPU support ray tracing and AI upscaling?

A: Yes. It has 48 RT cores for hardware ray tracing and 384 tensor cores for AI workloads including upscaling, consistent with its Turing architecture.

Q: Is the CPU overclockable?

A: No. The multiplier is locked, so performance is limited to the 3.00 GHz base and 5.10 GHz boost clocks.

Q: What generation of PCIe does each side support?

A: The CPU provides PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes; the Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile Refresh connects over PCIe 3.0 x16, so the GPU runs a generation behind the host platform.

GPU Analysis

The Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile Refresh is a Turing-generation professional GPU on the TU104B chip, built by TSMC on a 12 nm process. The die measures 545 mm² and packs 13,600 million transistors at a density of 25.0M per mm² — a large, mature die by any standard. The rendering array comprises 3072 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, producing a pixel rate of 97.92 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 293.8 GTexel/s. Clocks run from a 1035 MHz base to a 1530 MHz boost, with memory at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective).

The 16 GB of GDDR6 across a 256-bit bus gives 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth — a professional-appropriate capacity that matters for large scene assets, and the strongest argument for this card in a work context. Compute output is 9.400 TFLOPS FP32 and 18.80 TFLOPS FP16 at a 2:1 ratio, supported by 48 RT cores and 384 tensor cores. For rendering, that means credible viewport performance and hardware-accelerated ray tracing, with tensor cores available for denoising and AI-assisted features, but final-frame GPU rendering throughput sits at the database median — the 50th percentile figure is the honest summary.

The card's lineage places it between a Quadro Pascal-M predecessor and an Ampere-MW successor, and its production status is End-of-life, with a release date in June 2020. In this pairing it is functionally a capable-but-aged professional accelerator: its API support (DirectX 12 Ultimate 12_2, Vulkan 1.4, OpenGL 4.6) keeps it software-compatible, while its percentile position keeps it mid-pack in performance.

Build Overview

This is a laptop-class build — `buildClass` confirms it — pairing a January 2025 mobile flagship processor with a 2020-era professional mobile GPU. The overall tier is a combined percentile of 73: an elite, efficiency-focused Zen 5 CPU in the 95th percentile joined to a median-tier GPU in the 50th percentile. The result is a compute-forward portable workstation. CPU-parallel workloads — compilation at 51502 Passmark multithread, compression at 639356, encryption at 32840 — run at levels that rival workstation Xeons, while graphics output defines the ceiling for gaming and GPU rendering. For users whose heavy workloads live on the processor and who need professional GPU features more than raw GPU speed, the data describes a coherent, well-balanced machine with a clearly identified upgrade direction on the graphics side.

Rate My PC: AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 + NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile Refresh

Power Build

System Balance Analysis

AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 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

Gaming Performance

Usage Scenarios

Benchmark Performance

Balance and Bottleneck

CPU Analysis

Who Should Build It

Upgrade Path and Platform

FAQ

GPU 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