SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core i9-14900KF + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D V2

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

93 / 100
ULTIMATE READY

Apex Performer

Top 7% 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%
VS
GPU
90%
PROCESSOR

Intel Core i9-14900KF

79,371 Benchmark Score
Top 3% Market Ranking
View Full Specs →
GRAPHICS CARD

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D V2

16,504 Benchmark Score
Top 10% 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 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D V2 form a desktop pairing that sits at an unusual intersection of high-end CPU capability and a GPU whose benchmark profile is far more modest than its name suggests. The CPU is a 24-core, 32-thread Raptor Lake-R part with a base clock of 3.20 GHz and a boost clock of 6.00 GHz, built on Intel’s 10 nm process with a die size of 257 mm². It supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus, includes ECC memory support, and offers PCIe Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes. The GPU, meanwhile, is a Blackwell 2.0 architecture part on TSMC’s 5 nm node, featuring 21,760 shading units, 170 ray tracing cores, and 680 tensor cores, with 24 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 384-bit bus delivering 1.34 TB/s of bandwidth. The data contains no measured FPS rows for this exact combination, so all frame-rate discussion is estimated from the benchmark scores rather than direct testing. This is a critical distinction: the CPU’s benchmark percentile (95th among all CPUs) and the GPU’s percentile (59th among all GPUs) tell very different stories about where the performance lies.

CPU Analysis

The Core i9-14900KF is a hybrid design from the Raptor Lake generation, combining performance and efficiency cores to reach 24 cores and 32 threads. The 6.00 GHz boost clock is the headline figure, and the benchmark results confirm that this is one of the fastest desktop processors available. In Cinebench R23, the multicore score of 49,370 and single-core score of 6,969 place it in the top tier of consumer chips. The Geekbench results reinforce this: a multicore score of 23,789 and a single-core score of 2,727. These numbers indicate that the CPU can handle both heavily threaded workloads and lightly threaded tasks with equal authority.

The cache hierarchy is substantial: 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. This large cache pool benefits workloads with repetitive data access patterns, such as database queries or complex simulations. The PassMark results provide a more granular view of specific capabilities. The integer math score of 209,125 and floating point math score of 151,918 show strong arithmetic throughput, while the extended instructions score of 44,839 indicates robust SIMD performance for modern code. Data encryption at 46,416 and data compression at 785,831 are both exceptionally high, suggesting the CPU is well-suited for archival tasks, encryption workloads, and large-scale data processing.

The CPU’s average benchmark score is 79,371, and its percentile versus all CPUs is 95. Compared to its nearest rivals, the delta is tight: it is 0.3% ahead of the Intel Core i9-14900K (average score 79,097), 0.3% behind the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus (79,574), 0.8% behind the AMD EPYC 7413 (80,041), and 1.6% behind the Intel Xeon w5-2565X (80,671). These small percentage differences mean that in practice, the i9-14900KF is functionally equivalent to its closest competitors in raw throughput. The unlocked multiplier allows for overclocking headroom, and the 125 W TDP suggests that with adequate cooling, there is room to push clocks higher. The CPU is built for sustained multi-threaded workloads, and the Cinebench R20 multicore score of 20,735 and R15 multicore score of 4,976 both point to excellent scaling across cores.

For real-world productivity, the data indicates that the CPU excels in tasks like video encoding, 3D rendering, and software compilation, where the 24 cores can be fully utilized. The single-thread performance is equally impressive, with a PassMark single-thread score of 4,685, which means everyday applications, web browsing, and office productivity will feel snappy. The CPU’s 95th percentile ranking places it among the top 5% of all processors tested, which is a meaningful statement about its overall capability.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU’s benchmark suite is extensive, but the GPU has only a single recorded benchmark: 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 with a score of 16,504. This score puts the GPU at the 59th percentile among all GPUs, which is surprisingly low for a product with the RTX 5090 D V2 branding. The nearest rivals highlight this discrepancy: the NVIDIA T400 scores 16,508 (0% delta), the AMD Radeon PRO W7500 scores 16,415 (0.5% behind), the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell scores 16,408 (0.6% behind), and the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT scores 16,361 (0.9% behind). These are not high-end competitors; the RX 5700 XT is a previous-generation mid-range card, and the T400 is an entry-level workstation part. This suggests that the GPU’s measured performance in this specific benchmark is modest, despite its advanced specifications.

The CPU’s average benchmark score of 79,371 versus the GPU’s average of 16,504 creates a massive gap in raw compute potential. The combined percentile for the pairing is 77, which indicates that the system as a whole ranks above average but is dragged down by the GPU’s relatively weak showing. The CPU is at the 95th percentile, while the GPU is at the 59th, meaning the CPU is performing at an elite level while the GPU is merely average or slightly above. In terms of estimated FPS, the lack of measured data means we must extrapolate from these scores. A 59th-percentile GPU would typically deliver playable frame rates at 1080p in many titles, but it would struggle at higher resolutions with demanding settings. The CPU’s strong single-thread performance (Cinebench R23 single-core 6,969) would help maintain high frame rates in CPU-bound scenarios, but the GPU’s 3DMark score suggests it is not a high-refresh-rate gaming powerhouse.

The combined picture is a system where the CPU vastly outperforms the GPU in their respective percentile rankings. This creates an imbalance that will manifest in GPU-bound workloads: at 1440p or 4K, the GPU will be the limiting factor, and the CPU’s extra headroom will go unused. Conversely, in CPU-bound tasks like physics simulation or data processing, the system will excel. The PassMark physics score of 3,159 and multithread score of 58,405 further emphasize the CPU’s dominance in compute-heavy tasks.

Balance and Bottleneck

The data clearly shows a bottleneck situation where the GPU is the limiting component in gaming and graphics workloads. The CPU’s 95th percentile versus the GPU’s 59th percentile means that in any GPU-bound task, the GPU will cap performance while the CPU idles with significant spare capacity. For example, in a game at 4K with ultra settings, the GPU’s 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 16,504 suggests it will max out its utilization, while the CPU’s 24 cores remain largely underutilized. The FPS scaling, though unmeasured, would follow the GPU’s capability curve: lower resolutions like 1080p would see the CPU providing high frame rates, but the GPU would still limit maximum FPS to whatever its raw throughput allows.

Conversely, in CPU-bound workloads like data compression (PassMark score 785,831) or floating point math (151,918), the CPU will run at full tilt, and the GPU will be irrelevant. This means the system is well-balanced for productivity tasks that rely on the CPU but poorly balanced for gaming, where the GPU is the primary driver. The combined percentile of 77 reflects this compromise: the system is better than a typical build but not exceptional, because the GPU drags the average down.

The estimated FPS picture, derived from the GPU’s benchmark score, indicates that the GPU would deliver playable performance at 1080p for most games, but at 1440p or 4K, frame rates would drop significantly. The GPU’s memory bandwidth of 1.34 TB/s is high, but the 3DMark score suggests that raw shader throughput (104.8 TFLOPS FP32) is not translating into competitive benchmark results. This could be due to driver issues, cooling constraints, or the specific nature of the Steel Nomad test, but the data is what it is: the GPU performs like a mid-range card in this metric.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The CPU uses the Intel Socket 1700 platform, which supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory. This is a mature socket, and the i9-14900KF is near the top of its generation. The memory bus is dual-channel, and ECC memory support is a notable feature for workstation use. PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes provides ample bandwidth for modern GPUs and NVMe drives, though the GPU in this build uses PCIe 5.0 x16, which matches the platform’s capability. The CPU’s TDP is 125 W, and the GPU’s TDP is 575 W, with a suggested PSU rating of 950 W. This means the power supply needs to be robust, but the numbers indicate that a high-wattage unit is required to handle peak loads.

The GPU uses a single 16-pin power connector and is dual-slot, with dimensions of 304 mm in length, 137 mm in height, and 48 mm in width. It fits in most mid-tower cases, but the 575 W TDP means cooling is critical. The CPU’s unlocked multiplier allows for overclocking, which could push performance higher, but the 125 W base TDP suggests that a capable air cooler or liquid cooler is necessary for sustained loads. The upgrade path from this platform is limited because Socket 1700 is tied to the 14th Gen Core series, so a future CPU upgrade would require a new motherboard. For the GPU, the 59th percentile score suggests that upgrading to a higher-performing GPU would be the most impactful change, but the PCIe 5.0 interface ensures that any modern GPU will be compatible.

A sensible next upgrade would be to replace the GPU with a model that has a higher benchmark percentile, as the CPU has ample headroom to support faster graphics cards. The CPU’s 95th percentile means it will not bottleneck any consumer GPU, so the performance ceiling is dictated by the GPU alone. The power supply’s 950 W recommendation provides enough headroom for a more powerful GPU, as long as it uses the same 16-pin connector or an adapter.

GPU Analysis

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D V2 is a Blackwell 2.0 architecture GPU built on TSMC’s 5 nm process, with a massive die size of 750 mm² and 92,200 million transistors. The transistor density of 122.9M per mm² indicates a dense design. The GPU has 21,760 shading units, 680 texture mapping units, and 176 raster output units, along with 170 ray tracing cores and 680 tensor cores. This hardware configuration suggests strong capabilities for both rasterization and ray tracing, with the tensor cores enabling AI-accelerated workloads.

The memory subsystem is a highlight: 24 GB of GDDR7 on a 384-bit bus, running at 1750 MHz (28 Gbps effective), yields a bandwidth of 1.34 TB/s. This is a substantial amount of VRAM and bandwidth, suitable for high-resolution textures and large datasets. The clock speeds are 2017 MHz base and 2407 MHz boost, which are respectable but not extreme. The pixel rate is 423.6 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 1,636.8 GTexel/s, indicating strong fill rates. The FP32 throughput is 104.8 TFLOPS, and FP16 is the same at 104.8 TFLOPS (1:1), which is unusual and suggests that the GPU is optimized for workloads that use FP16, such as AI inference.

However, the benchmark data tells a different story. The only score, 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 at 16,504, places the GPU at the 59th percentile, with rivals that are not high-performance parts. The 3DMark score does not reflect the GPU’s theoretical specifications, and the delta to the nearest rivals is negligible (0% to 0.9%). This suggests that in this specific test, the GPU is not performing to its spec sheet. The API support is comprehensive (DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4), and the display outputs include 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b, which supports modern monitors. For rendering workloads, the 24 GB of VRAM is more than enough for complex scenes, and the tensor cores can accelerate denoising and AI-based features. But the benchmark score indicates that raw graphics performance is not as high as the hardware suggests, which could be a driver limitation or a thermal constraint.

FAQ

Q: What is the CPU’s benchmark percentile and what does it mean?

A: The CPU is at the 95th percentile among all CPUs, meaning it outperforms 95% of tested processors. Its average benchmark score is 79,371, and it is within 1.6% of its nearest rivals, including the Intel Core i9-14900K and AMD EPYC 7413.

Q: How much VRAM does the GPU have and what type is it?

A: The GPU has 24 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 384-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 1.34 TB/s. The memory clock is 1750 MHz, which translates to 28 Gbps effective.

Q: Is the GPU’s benchmark score competitive?

A: The GPU’s only benchmark score is 16,504 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, placing it at the 59th percentile. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA T400 (16,508), AMD Radeon PRO W7500 (16,415), NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell (16,408), and AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT (16,361), all within 0.9% of its score.

Q: What memory types does the CPU support?

A: The CPU supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory on a dual-channel bus. It also supports ECC memory, which is useful for error-sensitive workloads.

Q: What is the power requirement for this build?

A: The CPU has a TDP of 125 W, and the GPU has a TDP of 575 W. The suggested PSU rating is 950 W, which provides enough headroom for the combined load.

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

A: Yes, the GPU has 170 ray tracing cores and 680 tensor cores, and it supports DirectX 12 Ultimate with ray tracing. The FP16 throughput of 104.8 TFLOPS (1:1 with FP32) indicates strong AI compute capability.

Q: What is the combined percentile for this CPU+GPU pairing?

A: The combined percentile is 77, which reflects the CPU’s high performance (95th percentile) and the GPU’s more modest showing (59th percentile).

Usage Scenarios

For high-refresh gaming, the CPU’s single-core performance (Cinebench R23 single-core 6,969) is excellent for maintaining high frame rates in CPU-bound titles, but the GPU’s 59th percentile score means it will likely cap FPS at 1080p. At 1440p or 4K, the GPU becomes the bottleneck, and frame rates will be moderate rather than exceptional. Streaming is a mixed bag: the CPU’s 24 cores and 32 threads can handle encoding (PassMark data compression 785,831) without dropping frames, but the GPU’s weaker benchmark score means the gaming side may suffer at high settings.

Video editing is a strong suit for this CPU, as the multicore scores (Cinebench R23 49,370) accelerate rendering and export times. The GPU’s 24 GB VRAM helps with timeline previews and effects, but the low 3DMark score suggests GPU-accelerated effects may not be as fast as expected. 3D rendering benefits from the CPU’s 95th percentile, with Cinebench R20 multicore 20,735 providing quick CPU-based renders; GPU rendering would rely on the tensor cores and 104.8 TFLOPS FP32, but the benchmark score raises doubts about real-world performance.

Software development is well-supported: the CPU’s integer math score (209,125) and multithread score (58,405) speed up compilation, and the large L3 cache (36 MB) helps with large codebases. The GPU’s compute capabilities are adequate for CUDA-based workloads, but the 59th percentile means it is not a top-tier compute card. Student and office work is overkill, as the CPU’s single-thread score (PassMark 4,685) handles productivity apps effortlessly, but the power draw (575 W GPU) makes this an inefficient choice for typical office tasks.

Build Overview

This is a desktop build (buildClass: desktop) that pairs a top-tier CPU with a GPU whose benchmark performance is surprisingly modest. The CPU is a 24-core, 32-thread Intel Core i9-14900KF with a 6.00 GHz boost clock, a 95th percentile ranking, and an average benchmark score of 79,371. The GPU is a 24 GB NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D V2 with a 59th percentile ranking and an average benchmark score of 16,504 from a single 3DMark test. The combined percentile is 77, placing the system above average but not elite.

The CPU’s nearest rivals are within 1.6% of its score, so it is at parity with the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus and Intel Core i9-14900K. The GPU’s nearest rivals are the NVIDIA T400 and AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT, which are far less capable on paper, yet they score nearly identically in the benchmark. This suggests that the GPU is not living up to its hardware potential in this test. The build is classed as desktop, and the overall tier is high due to the CPU, but the GPU drags the system down to a mid-level overall score. The launch MSRP for the CPU is $564, and the GPU’s launch MSRP is 2,299 USD, but these are just launch prices and do not reflect current market value.

Who Should Build It

Gamers targeting 1080p with high refresh rates will find the CPU’s single-core strengths beneficial, but the GPU’s 59th percentile score means they should expect moderate FPS rather than top-tier performance. Those aiming for 1440p or 4K gaming will be disappointed, as the GPU is the bottleneck and will not deliver the frame rates expected from a 50-series card. Content creators working on video editing or 3D rendering will benefit from the CPU’s 95th percentile multicore performance, especially in CPU-based render engines; the GPU’s 24 GB VRAM is a plus for large textures, but its benchmark score suggests GPU-accelerated rendering may be slower than expected.

Software developers will appreciate the CPU’s compilation speed and the GPU’s tensor cores for AI workloads, though the GPU’s compute performance is not exceptional based on the 3DMark score. Students and office workers should avoid this build due to its high power consumption (575 W GPU TDP) and overkill CPU, as their workloads would barely utilize the hardware. Small business workstations handling data compression (785,831), encryption (46,416), or floating point math (151,918) will see strong CPU performance, making this a viable choice for such tasks, provided the GPU’s weaker benchmark score is acceptable. Overall, this build is for users who prioritize CPU throughput above all else and are willing to accept a GPU that, based on the data, performs far below its branding suggests.