SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 5 235A + NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000

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)

▼

93 Score

Top 7% Ranking

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

94%

GPU

91%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 5 235A

48,201 Benchmark Score

Top 6% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000

21,629 Benchmark Score

Top 9% 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 5 235A paired with the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 is an unusual hybrid: a current desktop CPU sitting in the 90th percentile of all processors, matched with an end-of-life professional GPU in the 67th percentile. The combined build lands at the 79th percentile, and that gap between the two components defines nearly everything about how this machine behaves. The CPU is modern Arrow Lake silicon on Socket 1851 with a clear upgrade path; the GPU is a Turing-era workstation card whose strengths lie in compute stability and professional drivers rather than raw gaming throughput. For buyers evaluating this pairing from benchmark data, the headline is simple: a strong processor carrying a mid-tier graphics solution.

An important note on methodology: no measured FPS rows exist for this exact CPU+GPU combination in the database — the FACT PACK contains no measuredFps data — so all frame-rate discussion below is estimated from the benchmark scores rather than drawn from recorded gameplay runs.

Gaming Performance

Because no measured FPS data exists for this exact pairing, gaming expectations must be inferred from the component scores, and the inference is straightforward: the Quadro RTX 5000 is the limiting factor in virtually every gaming scenario. Its average benchmark score of 21,629 places it in the 67th percentile of all GPUs, with a PassMark G3D score of 15,616 — a figure that sits alongside cards such as the GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB (average score 21,856, deltaPct -1, meaning the Quadro is roughly one percent behind it) and the RTX A4000 Mobile (21,379, deltaPct 1.2, meaning the Quadro leads it by about that margin). Gaming on this build will therefore resemble gaming on that class of hardware.

At 1080p, the estimated expectation is high-refresh play in esports and lighter titles, and playable ultra-settings frame rates in most mainstream AAA games released through the card's era. The PassMark DirectX results — 195 for DirectX 9, 140 for DirectX 11, 113 for DirectX 10, and 59 for DirectX 12 — indicate strong legacy-API performance with a pronounced drop in the modern DX12 path, which is consistent with a card whose architectural strengths are compute-oriented rather than gaming-optimized. At 1440p, ultra-settings estimates drop to moderate frame rates in demanding titles, and at 4K the card's 11.15 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput and 448 GB/s of memory bandwidth are best treated as a ceiling: expect reduced settings, not ultra, in modern AAA workloads.

The CPU side will never be the reason a game stutters. With a PassMark single-thread score of 4,557 and a physics score of 2,437, the Ultra 5 235A delivers frame-pacing headroom well beyond what the GPU can consume. In CPU-bound competitive titles at low resolution, the processor can stretch; the bottleneck simply arrives at the graphics card in nearly every realistic configuration.

FAQ

Q: Is the Intel Core Ultra 5 235A a good CPU for gaming and productivity?

A: Yes, by the numbers. It sits in the 90th percentile versus all CPUs, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 32,633 and a single-core score of 4,607 — a balanced profile that handles both lightly-threaded game logic and multi-threaded rendering workloads.

Q: Can the Quadro RTX 5000 run modern games at 4K?

A: Only with reduced settings, and that is an estimate — no measured FPS data exists for this pairing. The GPU's 67th-percentile position and G3D score of 15,616 place it in company with the GTX 1060 6 GB, which is a 1080p-to-1440p class performer rather than a 4K ultra card.

Q: How much power does this build need?

A: The CPU has a 65 W TDP and the GPU has a 230 W TDP with a suggested PSU of 550 W. A quality 550 W unit covers the pairing as specified.

Q: Is the Quadro RTX 5000 still in production?

A: No. Its production status is End-of-life. It launched at a launch MSRP of 2,299 USD, succeeded by workstation Ampere parts, so availability is secondary-market dependent.

Q: Does the Core Ultra 5 235A support overclocking?

A: No — the multiplier is locked. The base clock is 3.40 GHz with a 5.00 GHz boost, and that is the operating envelope.

Q: What memory does this platform use?

A: DDR5 on a dual-channel bus with 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth. ECC is not supported on this CPU.

Q: Can this build handle ray tracing?

A: Partially. The GPU carries 48 RT cores and 384 tensor cores, so hardware ray tracing and AI-assisted upscaling features exist, but the card's overall gaming percentile means RT effects will carry a measurable performance cost in demanding titles.

CPU Analysis

The Core Ultra 5 235A is a 14-core, 14-thread processor — no hyper-threading doubling, just 14 physical cores — built on Intel's Arrow Lake-S architecture, manufactured by TSMC on a 3 nm process node. The die measures 243 mm² and packs 17,800 million transistors. It boosts to 5.00 GHz from a 3.40 GHz base within a 65 W TDP, which is an efficient envelope for this level of performance and directly relevant to cooler and chassis selection.

The cache hierarchy tells the story of a chip designed for low latency: 192 KB of L1 per core, a generous 3 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. In practice, that per-core L2 allocation benefits gaming and lightly-threaded applications where data locality matters more than raw aggregate capacity.

Benchmark results indicate strong all-around capability. The Cinebench progression — R15 multi 3,289 / single 464, R20 multi 13,705 / single 1,934, R23 multi 32,633 / single 4,607 — shows consistent scaling and a single-core figure that keeps it competitive in latency-sensitive workloads. The PassMark spread reinforces versatility: 88,626 in integer math, 118,778 in floating point, 393,800 in data compression, and 30,136 in encryption. The multi-thread score of 38,392 alongside a single-thread score of 4,557 yields a threading ratio that confirms the 14 cores pull their weight — this is not a chip whose multi-core number is inflated by weak per-core throughput.

Against its nearest rivals, the 235A is in a statistical dead heat. Its average benchmark score of 48,201 sits within one percent of the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 380 (48,171, deltaPct 0.1), the Intel Core Ultra 5 245HX (48,287, deltaPct -0.2), the AMD EPYC 4345P (48,470, deltaPct -0.6), and the AMD Ryzen 9 3900 (47,918, deltaPct 0.6). In real terms: users will not perceive a difference between these chips in mixed workloads; selection between them comes down to platform, not performance.

One notable inclusion: integrated Arc Xe-LPG graphics with 24 execution units. This matters for this specific pairing — if the Quadro is ever removed or fails, the system retains display output and basic GPU capability.

Who Should Build It

The measured performance profile points to several clear audiences. First, entry-to-mid-level content creators: a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 32,633 handles 1080p and lighter 1440p video editing, photo batch processing, and 3D viewport work comfortably, while the GPU's 16 GB of VRAM accommodates larger scenes and asset libraries than consumer cards in the same performance tier typically offer.

Second, developers and students. The CPU's 90th-percentile position compiles code quickly, the 3 MB per-core L2 cache benefits build workloads, and the PassMark extended instructions score of 31,625 plus the GPU's 384 tensor cores give machine-learning coursework and inference experimentation a workable, if dated, hardware path. The Geekbench compute results — 78,999 OpenCL and 92,309 Vulkan — confirm usable GPGPU throughput for CUDA-alternative frameworks.

Third, small business and CAD workstations. This is where the Quadro lineage earns its place: professional validation, 4x DisplayPort 1.4a plus USB Type-C output for multi-monitor setups, and 16 GB of buffer memory for engineering datasets. A firm needing solid modeling, simulation pre-processing, or GPU-accelerated office workloads gets a defensible machine.

What this build is not: a high-refresh 1440p/4K gaming rig. Gamers targeting those resolutions should treat the GPU as the component to replace, not the reason to buy.

Balance and Bottleneck

The combined percentile of 79 versus the CPU's 90 and the GPU's 67 makes the imbalance explicit. This is a GPU-limited build for anything graphics-bound. In gaming, every additional frame the CPU could deliver is discarded at the Quadro: with a single-thread PassMark score of 4,557, the processor could feed a substantially faster graphics card before becoming the constraint. Estimated frame rates across resolutions will therefore scale almost entirely with GPU capability, not CPU throughput.

For compute workloads the picture inverts in places. The GPU compute score of 6,525 and the G3D score of 15,616 are respectable for the card's tier, but the CPU's multi-thread score of 38,392 means many production tasks — compression at 393,800, integer math at 88,626 — run competitively on the processor alone. Workloads that scale across both, such as GPU-accelerated rendering, will find the Quadro the slower partner; the Geekbench Vulkan score of 92,309 versus OpenCL's 78,999 suggests API choice also materially affects compute results on this card.

The memory subsystem is well-matched to the CPU: dual-channel DDR5 at 102.4 GB/s feeds the 14 cores adequately, and there is no indication of a bandwidth cliff at this core count. The genuine imbalance is purely at the PCIe layer and beyond — the CPU offers Gen 5 with 20 lanes, while the GPU connects over PCIe 3.0 x16, so the interface itself caps the data path between the two strongest and weakest components.

GPU Analysis

The Quadro RTX 5000 is a Turing-architecture professional card built on the TU104 chip, fabricated by TSMC on a 12 nm process. The die is large — 545 mm² carrying 13,600 million transistors at a density of 25.0M per mm². It clocks at 1,620 MHz base and 1,815 MHz boost, with memory running at an effective 14 Gbps.

The specification sheet reads as a mid-tier professional part: 3,072 shading units, 192 texture units mapped to a texture rate of 348.5 GTexel/s, 64 ROPs delivering 116.2 GPixel/s, and — critically for its class — 48 RT cores and 384 tensor cores. FP32 throughput is 11.15 TFLOPS, doubling to 22.30 TFLOPS FP16 at a 2:1 ratio, which is the pathway tensor-assisted workloads exploit. The 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus provides 448 GB/s of bandwidth, and that VRAM capacity remains the card's most enduring asset: it exceeds what many gaming cards in the same performance bracket offer and directly benefits rendering, simulation, and large-texture workloads.

What the benchmark scores mean for rendering: the PassMark G3D score of 15,616 positions the card at the 67th percentile overall, in a cluster with the GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB (-1 percent), the RTX A4000 Mobile (+1.2 percent), the Radeon HD 8970M (+1.8 percent), and the Radeon RX Vega M GL (+2.3 percent). For viewport rendering and GPU compute, expect consistent mid-tier throughput — capable, validated, and stable, but not fast by current standards. The DirectX 12 score of 59 versus DirectX 11's 140 is the clearest signal: modern rendering paths extract proportionally less from this architecture than legacy ones.

Benchmark Performance

The full numerical picture, condensed. CPU: Cinebench R15 multi 3,289 / single 464; R20 multi 13,705 / single 1,934; R23 multi 32,633 / single 4,607; PassMark multi-thread 38,392, single-thread 4,557, physics 2,437, plus the utility scores listed above. Average benchmark score: 48,201, at the 90th percentile versus all CPUs, statistically tied with its four nearest rivals.

GPU: PassMark G3D 15,616, GPU compute 6,525, Geekbench OpenCL 78,999 and Vulkan 92,309, average score 21,629 at the 67th percentile versus all GPUs, bracketed by the GTX 1060 6 GB and RTX A4000 Mobile.

Combined, the build sits at the 79th percentile. Interpretation: the CPU contributes elite-tier responsiveness and multi-core throughput; the GPU contributes mid-tier graphics and upper-mid VRAM capacity. The combined figure lands closer to the CPU's percentile than the GPU's because the processor dominates the aggregate — but for any graphics-bound task, the experience tracks the GPU's 67th, not the build's 79th.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The platform fundamentals are current and expansive. Socket 1851 supports this Arrow Lake-S part; DDR5 dual-channel memory with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth; and the CPU provides PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the processor alone. That lane count and generation matter for the future: a next-generation graphics card and a Gen 5 NVMe drive can both run at full capability, unthrottled by the platform.

The GPU, meanwhile, connects over PCIe 3.0 x16 — the card's own interface limit, not the platform's. This makes the graphics card the obvious and sensible next upgrade: any modern replacement would use more of the available bandwidth, eliminate the end-of-life status of the current part, and directly attack the build's weakest percentile. The integrated Arc Xe-LPG graphics also provide a transition path — the system remains functional between GPU swaps.

Power headroom is defined by the numbers: 65 W CPU TDP plus 230 W GPU TDP, with a suggested PSU of 550 W for the Quadro. A sensible build uses a unit at or above that suggestion, which also leaves margin for a more powerful future GPU within reason. The card itself is a dual-slot design, 267 mm long and 111 mm tall, powered by one 6-pin and one 8-pin connector — dimensions and connectors worth confirming against any case and PSU before the upgrade.

Build Overview

This is a desktop build pairing a 2025-era, 90th-percentile desktop CPU with a 2018-era professional GPU in the 67th percentile. The Core Ultra 5 235A (launch MSRP $269) brings 14 cores, 5.00 GHz boost, a 65 W envelope, and a modern Socket 1851 platform with Gen 5 connectivity. The Quadro RTX 5000 (launch MSRP 2,299 USD, now end-of-life) brings 16 GB of VRAM, validated professional drivers, and Turing-era ray tracing and tensor hardware.

The overall tier, per the combined 79th percentile, is upper-mid-range — but with a clear internal split. As a workstation for creators, developers, and small-business users who need VRAM capacity and professional graphics support, the data supports the pairing. As a gaming machine, it is CPU-overbuilt and GPU-limited, and the correct long-term move is a GPU upgrade on an otherwise excellent platform. The processor and platform are the investment here; the graphics card is the placeholder with a professional pedigree.

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 5 235A + NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000

Apex Performer

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core Ultra 5 235A

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000

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

Gaming Performance

FAQ

CPU Analysis

Who Should Build It

Balance and Bottleneck

GPU Analysis

Benchmark Performance

Upgrade Path and Platform

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