SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 5 235A + NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000

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

92 / 100
ULTIMATE READY

Apex Performer

Top 8% 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
94%
VS
GPU
90%
PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 5 235A

48,201 Benchmark Score
Top 6% Market Ranking
View Full Specs →
GRAPHICS CARD

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000

17,789 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

# Intel Core Ultra 5 235A + NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000: A Desktop Pairing of Contrasting Eras

This desktop build pairs Intel's newest Arrow Lake desktop processor, the Core Ultra 5 235A, with NVIDIA's end-of-life Turing workstation card, the Quadro RTX 4000. The data reveals a CPU that sits in the 90th percentile among all processors, while the GPU lands in the 61st percentile, creating a significant performance gap that defines this combination. The Core Ultra 5 235A, released on 2025-07-28, represents a modern 3nm TSMC design with 14 cores and 14 threads, while the Quadro RTX 4000, released on 2018-11-12, is built on an older 12nm process with a 545 mm² die. This pairing is unusual — a high-end CPU matched with a workstation GPU that has been discontinued, and the benchmark data suggests the CPU will frequently wait on the GPU in graphics-bound tasks.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235A is built on the Arrow Lake-S architecture, part of the Core Ultra Series 2 family, and manufactured by Intel on a 3nm process node at TSMC. The chip packs 17,800 million transistors into a 243 mm² die, which is remarkably dense for a desktop processor. The CPU features 14 cores and 14 threads — notably, there is no hyperthreading, so each core handles one thread. The base clock runs at 3.40 GHz, with a boost clock reaching 5.00 GHz, and the TDP is rated at 65 watts. This is a power-efficient design; the modest TDP suggests the chip can sustain high clocks without requiring exotic cooling, and it should fit into standard desktop builds without difficulty.

The cache hierarchy is substantial: 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. For a 14-core chip, the per-core L2 allocation is generous, which typically benefits workloads with high data locality such as database queries or scientific simulations. The L3 cache at 24 MB is shared across all cores, providing a decent pool for inter-core communication. The CPU supports dual-channel DDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s, which is the modern standard and should feed the cores adequately for most tasks. ECC memory is not supported, which limits its appeal for certain server or mission-critical workstation use cases but is fine for consumer and prosumer workloads. The PCIe interface is Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU, enabling fast NVMe storage and high-bandwidth expansion cards. The integrated graphics is Arc Xe-LPG with 24 execution units, which provides basic display output and light GPU acceleration but is not intended for gaming.

Benchmark results show a strong all-around performer. In Cinebench R23, the CPU scores 32,633 in multi-core and 4,607 in single-core. The multi-core score is particularly telling: it indicates strong scaling across the 14 cores, which is expected given the lack of hyperthreading but the high per-core IPC from the Arrow Lake architecture. The single-core score of 4,607 is competitive with the best desktop processors, suggesting excellent responsiveness in lightly-threaded applications. In Cinebench R20, the scores are 13,705 multi-core and 1,934 single-core, while R15 shows 3,289 multi-core and 464 single-core. These consistent results across Cinebench versions reinforce the CPU's balanced performance profile.

PassMark tests add nuance. The multithread score is 38,392, with a single-thread score of 4,557. Data compression hits 393,800, which is an extremely high number and indicates the CPU excels at compression algorithms — likely due to the large L2 and L3 caches. Data encryption scores 30,136, and extended instructions (SIMD) reach 31,625. Floating-point math is strong at 118,778, while integer math is 88,626. The physics score of 2,437 is modest, suggesting the CPU may not be optimized for physics simulation in some game engines, but the find prime numbers score of 392 is low, which could indicate suboptimal performance in certain single-threaded integer workloads. The average benchmark score is 48,201, placing the CPU in the 90th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 380 (0.1% faster), Intel Core Ultra 5 245HX (0.2% faster), AMD EPYC 4345P (0.6% faster), and AMD Ryzen 9 3900 (0.6% slower). This places the 235A in a tightly contested mid-to-high tier, effectively matching several competing chips within a single percentage point.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU's average benchmark score of 48,201 places it in the 90th percentile of all CPUs, a strong showing for a desktop processor. In contrast, the GPU's average benchmark score is 17,789, which lands in the 61st percentile of all GPUs. The combined percentile for this build is 76, reflecting the GPU pulling the overall position down from the CPU's lofty perch. This is a fundamental imbalance: the processor is elite-tier, while the graphics card is mid-pack.

Delving into the GPU benchmarks, the Quadro RTX 4000 scores 1,873 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, which is a modern test and shows the card can handle current APIs, but the score is modest. Geekbench OpenCL scores 74,540 and Vulkan scores 78,844, indicating reasonable compute capability for general-purpose GPU workloads. The PassMark suite reveals a mixed picture: DirectX 10 scores 108, DirectX 11 scores 128, DirectX 12 scores 52, and DirectX 9 scores 205. These are low numbers, suggesting the card is not optimized for legacy or even contemporary DirectX gaming performance. The G2D score of 846 and G3D score of 15,117 reflect the card's workstation heritage — 2D performance is adequate, but 3D is not stellar by modern standards. GPU compute scores 6,176, which is respectable for a Turing card with 288 tensor cores.

The GPU's nearest rivals are telling: AMD Radeon HD 7790 (0.7% faster), NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 (0.9% faster), AMD Radeon 780M (1.1% faster), and AMD Radeon Pro 560 (1.4% faster). The Quadro RTX 4000 essentially matches the RTX 4060 in average benchmark score, which is surprising given the RTX 4060 is a consumer gaming card with a much smaller die. This suggests the Quadro's drivers and architecture are tuned for professional workloads like CAD and rendering, not raw gaming throughput. The combined picture is a build where the CPU has headroom to spare, and the GPU becomes the limiting factor in most graphics-intensive scenarios.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The Core Ultra 5 235A uses the Intel Socket 1851, which is the platform for Arrow Lake desktop processors. This is a current-generation socket, so future upgrades within the same platform are plausible, though the data does not specify which other CPUs share this socket. Memory support is dual-channel DDR5, which is the standard for modern builds, and the 102.4 GB/s bandwidth is sufficient for the CPU's needs. The PCIe Gen 5 interface with 20 CPU lanes provides ample bandwidth for a high-end GPU or multiple NVMe drives. The CPU's TDP is 65 watts, which is low for a desktop processor, meaning most motherboards and coolers can handle it easily, and power supply requirements are modest.

The GPU, however, is end-of-life, with a suggested PSU of 450 watts and a TDP of 160 watts. The card uses a single 8-pin power connector and is single-slot, making it easy to install in most cases. The bus interface is PCIe 3.0 x16, which is older but fully compatible with the PCIe Gen 5 slot on a modern motherboard — the card will simply run at PCIe 3.0 speeds, which may limit bandwidth in some workloads but is unlikely to be a bottleneck for most applications. The GPU is 241 mm long and 111 mm tall, fitting into most mid-tower cases.

A sensible next upgrade would be to replace the Quadro RTX 4000 with a more modern GPU, as the CPU has significant headroom. The CPU's 90th percentile ranking means it can drive much faster graphics cards without becoming a bottleneck itself. The platform's PCIe Gen 5 support and DDR5 memory ensure that any newer GPU will be fully supported. The suggested PSU of 450 watts for the current GPU is low, so upgrading to a more powerful card would require a PSU with higher wattage, but the CPU's 65-watt TDP leaves plenty of power budget. The memory bandwidth and cache hierarchy are strong enough to support professional applications, so the CPU is unlikely to need an upgrade for several years.

Balance and Bottleneck

The data clearly indicates that the GPU is the primary bottleneck in this build. The CPU sits at the 90th percentile, while the GPU is at the 61st percentile — a 29-point gap that is substantial. In CPU-bound workloads like data compression, encryption, or multithreaded rendering, the Core Ultra 5 235A will perform exceptionally, with compression scores of 393,800 and multithread scores of 38,392. But in GPU-bound tasks like gaming or GPU-accelerated rendering, the Quadro RTX 4000 will limit frame rates and compute throughput.

The GPU's PassMark DirectX scores are particularly weak — DirectX 12 scores 52, which is a fraction of what modern gaming GPUs achieve. This means in DirectX 12 titles, the GPU will struggle to maintain high frame rates, even at lower resolutions. The 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1,873 is also low, confirming the GPU is not suited for modern gaming. The CPU's high single-thread score of 4,607 in Cinebench R23 means it can feed the GPU quickly, but the GPU cannot render frames fast enough to take advantage of the CPU's speed. This is a classic bottleneck scenario: the CPU is ready, but the GPU is the limiting factor.

Interestingly, the GPU's compute scores are more respectable — Geekbench OpenCL at 74,540 and Vulkan at 78,844 suggest the card is better suited for compute tasks like machine learning inference or video encoding, where the tensor cores can be utilized. The FP32 performance of 7.119 TFLOPS and FP16 of 14.24 TFLOPS (2:1) are adequate for professional workloads. So the bottleneck is workload-dependent: in gaming, the GPU holds the build back severely; in compute, the GPU is more capable, though still behind modern cards. The CPU's 14 cores and high cache will keep up with the GPU's compute demands, but the GPU's 8 GB of VRAM and 416.0 GB/s bandwidth may limit large datasets.

FAQ

Q: Is the Intel Core Ultra 5 235A a good processor for multi-threaded workloads?

A: Yes, the Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 32,633 and PassMark multithread score of 38,392 place it in the 90th percentile of all CPUs, indicating strong performance in tasks that use all 14 cores.

Q: How does the Quadro RTX 4000 compare to modern consumer GPUs?

A: The Quadro RTX 4000 has an average benchmark score of 17,789, which is 0.9% slower than the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 and 1.1% faster than the AMD Radeon 780M, placing it in the same performance tier as these mid-range cards.

Q: What is the memory configuration of this build?

A: The CPU supports dual-channel DDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s, and the GPU has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory with a 256-bit bus and 416.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Can this build handle DirectX 12 gaming?

A: The GPU's PassMark DirectX 12 score is 52, which is very low, indicating poor gaming performance in DirectX 12 titles, so the build is not recommended for modern gaming.

Q: What is the power requirement for this system?

A: The CPU has a TDP of 65 watts, and the GPU has a TDP of 160 watts with a suggested PSU of 450 watts, so a 450-watt power supply is the minimum recommended.

Q: Is the CPU overclockable?

A: No, the multiplier is not unlocked, meaning the Core Ultra 5 235A cannot be overclocked by adjusting the multiplier.

Q: Does the GPU support real-time ray tracing?

A: Yes, the Quadro RTX 4000 has 36 RT cores and 288 tensor cores, supporting real-time ray tracing, though the DirectX 12 score of 52 suggests performance will be limited in ray-traced games.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: This build is not suited for high-refresh gaming. The GPU's PassMark DirectX 12 score of 52 and 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1,873 indicate it will struggle to produce high frame rates at any resolution, and the CPU's strong single-thread performance cannot compensate for the GPU's limitations.

Streaming: The CPU's 14 cores and high multithread score of 38,392 can handle encoding and streaming workloads, but the GPU's weak DirectX performance means game capture will be limited to lower settings. The GPU's tensor cores could assist with AI-based encoding, but the overall gaming experience will be poor.

Video editing: The CPU's Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 32,633 and PassMark floating-point score of 118,778 make it excellent for video rendering and effects. The GPU's compute scores (Geekbench OpenCL 74,540) can accelerate certain effects, but the 8 GB VRAM may limit working with large 4K timelines.

3D rendering: This is a strong scenario for the CPU, with high multithread and cache performance. GPU-accelerated rendering will be slower due to the Quadro's mid-range compute scores, but the 288 tensor cores can assist with AI denoising in supported renderers.

Software development: The CPU's high single-thread score of 4,607 in Cinebench R23 and data compression score of 393,800 make it excellent for compilation, code analysis, and database work. The GPU is irrelevant for most development tasks, so this build is well-suited for developers.

Student and office work: The CPU's 90th percentile ranking ensures snappy performance in office applications, web browsing, and productivity suites. The GPU's G2D score of 846 is adequate for 2D desktop workloads, and the low TDP of both components means the system will run quiet and cool.

Who Should Build It

This build targets professionals and prosumers who need strong CPU performance for compute-heavy tasks but do not prioritize gaming. The Core Ultra 5 235A's 90th percentile ranking makes it an excellent choice for content creators working with video editing, 3D rendering, or software development, where the 14 cores and high cache will accelerate workflows. The Quadro RTX 4000, with its 8 GB VRAM and 416.0 GB/s bandwidth, is suitable for entry-level workstation tasks like CAD, simulation, and AI inference, but it is not a gaming card. Small business workstations that run CPU-intensive applications like financial modeling, data analysis, or scientific computing will benefit from the CPU's performance. Students in engineering or computer science fields will appreciate the CPU's speed for compilation and simulation, though the GPU is overkill for most academic work. Gamers should look elsewhere — the GPU's DirectX 12 score of 52 clearly indicates this is not a gaming build.

Build Overview

This is a desktop build combining the Intel Core Ultra 5 235A, a modern Arrow Lake processor on Socket 1851, with the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000, a Turing-architecture workstation GPU that is now end-of-life. The CPU, released in July 2025, represents the latest generation of Intel desktop processors, built on a 3nm TSMC process with 14 cores and a 5.00 GHz boost clock. The GPU, released in November 2018, is a professional workstation card with 8 GB of GDDR6 memory and 36 RT cores, but it is no longer in production. The combined percentile for this build is 76, meaning it outperforms 76% of all configurations in the database. The CPU's 90th percentile and GPU's 61st percentile create an unbalanced system where the CPU is far more capable than the GPU. This is a build for compute-heavy workloads that do not depend heavily on graphics performance, and the data suggests the GPU is the component most likely to be upgraded first.

GPU Analysis

The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 is a Turing-architecture GPU built on a 12nm process at TSMC, with 13,600 million transistors on a 545 mm² die. The chip, codenamed TU104, features 2,304 shading units, 144 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operation units. It includes 36 RT cores and 288 tensor cores, making it capable of real-time ray tracing and AI-accelerated workloads. The base clock runs at 1005 MHz, with a boost clock of 1545 MHz, and the memory operates at 1625 MHz, or 13 Gbps effective. The memory configuration is 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 416.0 GB/s. This bandwidth is adequate for professional workloads but may be limiting for large textures or datasets. The pixel rate is 98.88 GPixel/s and the texture rate is 222.5 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 7.119 TFLOPS, while FP16 reaches 14.24 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio.

The GPU's benchmark scores reveal its workstation focus. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1,873 is low for gaming, confirming the card is not optimized for modern game engines. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 74,540 and Vulkan score of 78,844 indicate solid compute capabilities, which is where this card excels. The PassMark G3D score of 15,117 and G2D score of 846 show modest 3D and 2D performance. The GPU compute score of 6,176 is respectable, reflecting the tensor cores' ability to handle AI and machine learning tasks. The DirectX scores are poor across the board — 108 for DX10, 128 for DX11, 52 for DX12, and 205 for DX9 — suggesting driver optimizations are geared toward professional APIs like OpenGL and Vulkan rather than DirectX gaming. The 61st percentile ranking places it just above the RTX 4060 by 0.9%, which is surprising given the Quadro's age, but the average benchmark score of 17,789 shows it remains competitive with mid-range consumer cards in compute.

Gaming Performance

No measured FPS data exists for this exact CPU+GPU combination, so all frame rate figures are estimates based on the benchmark scores. The GPU's PassMark DirectX 12 score of 52 is exceptionally low, indicating this card will deliver poor gaming performance in modern DirectX 12 titles. The 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1,873 further confirms that the GPU is not suited for gaming. Based on the GPU's 61st percentile ranking and its similarity to the RTX 4060 (0.9% slower), one might expect playable frame rates at 1080p in older or less demanding games, but the DirectX scores suggest severe limitations. The CPU's strong single-thread score of 4,607 in Cinebench R23 means it will not bottleneck the GPU in gaming, but the GPU simply cannot keep up with the CPU's feeding rate. For esports titles or older games that rely on DirectX 11, the card's score of 128 in that benchmark suggests it may handle them at moderate settings, but for modern AAA games, the build will likely struggle to maintain 30 FPS at 1080p with low settings. The 8 GB of VRAM is sufficient for 1080p gaming, but the raw compute power is not there. Users seeking a gaming build should look at the GPU's low DirectX performance as a clear warning.