SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 5 245 + 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 5 245

48,995 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 5 245 is a 14-thread Arrow Lake desktop CPU on Socket 1851 with a 90th-percentile standing among all CPUs, while the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 is a 16 GB Turing-generation workstation GPU at the 67th percentile. The pairing yields a combined percentile of 79. In short, this is a modern, strong CPU married to an older workstation GPU, and the benchmark data consistently shows the CPU as the system’s higher-performing half.

CPU Analysis — cores, clocks, architecture, what the benchmark scores mean for real workloads

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 belongs to Core Ultra Series 2 and uses the Arrow Lake architecture on the Arrow Lake-S desktop design. It is built at a 3 nm process by TSMC, with 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. The CPU has 14 cores and 14 threads, a 3.50 GHz base clock, and a 5.10 GHz boost clock. Cache is organized as 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. This is not an unlocked multiplier part, and its launch MSRP is $270.

The benchmark results show a processor with strong single-thread and capable multi-thread performance. In Cinebench R23, the Core Ultra 5 245 scores 32,924 points in multi-core and 4,648 points in single-core. The older Cinebench R20 run returns 13,828 multi-core and 1,952 single-core, while Cinebench R15 returns 3,318 and 468, respectively. For real workloads, that R23 multi-core score indicates a desktop CPU that can handle heavily threaded compilation, rendering, and batch processing tasks without being the limiting factor. The single-core score of 4,648 is even more notable because many everyday applications still depend on single-thread speed.

Passmark results add more detail. The CPU’s Passmark multi-thread score is 38,706, and its single-thread score is 4,394. Integer math scores 91,187, floating-point math scores 120,548, and extended instructions score 33,304. These are compute-oriented results that point to a CPU comfortable with scientific and media workloads. Data compression scores 400,942, random string sorting 49,140, and encryption 30,236, which are useful for database, archival, and security-related tasks. Physics simulation scores 2,569, while prime-number finding scores 365, showing that the CPU is strong at general arithmetic but less spectacular in a narrow prime-search benchmark.

The average benchmark score for the CPU is 48,995, placing it at the 90th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals confirm the competitive position: the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G averages 49,196 with a deltaPct of -0.4, meaning the Ultra 5 245 trails by 0.4%; the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 averages 49,228 with a deltaPct of -0.5, a 0.5% gap; the Intel Xeon Gold 5318H averages 48,698 with a deltaPct of 0.6, placing the Ultra 5 ahead by 0.6%; and the Intel Core i5-14600K averages 48,618 with a deltaPct of 0.8, placing the Ultra 5 ahead by 0.8%. For a desktop part, that is a remarkably tight cluster of performance, meaning the Core Ultra 5 245 is effectively trading blows with several high-end rivals rather than being clearly ahead or behind any of them.

Upgrade Path and Platform — socket, memory support, PCIe, PSU headroom from suggestedPsu/tdp, what a sensible next upgrade looks like

The Core Ultra 5 245 uses Intel Socket 1851, and its memory support is DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration with 102.4 GB/s of memory bandwidth. It also supports ECC memory, which is a notable feature for workstation and small-business builds where data integrity matters. The CPU provides PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU itself, offering a modern, high-bandwidth path for storage and expansion devices.

The CPU’s TDP is 65 W, which makes it a relatively efficient desktop processor. The GPU in this build, the Quadro RTX 5000, is rated at 230 W and its suggested PSU is 550 W. The PSU headroom picture is therefore governed more by the GPU than the CPU; a builder selecting a power supply for this exact combination should follow the GPU’s 550 W suggestion rather than treating the CPU’s 65 W TDP as the main load. The GPU also requires one 6-pin and one 8-pin power connector.

From an upgrade standpoint, the CPU is marked as Active production while the GPU is End-of-life, which is the most important platform fact. The CPU’s platform supports current DDR5 and PCIe Gen 5 components, so memory and storage upgrades can remain modern. The CPU’s multiplier is not unlocked, so conventional overclocking headroom is limited. The GPU’s stated successor is Workstation Ampere, which gives a clear direction for a future GPU upgrade; replacing the Turing-based Quadro with its Ampere successor would be the most direct path to newer graphics features while staying in the workstation line. Since the CPU is already at the 90th percentile, the practical next step is not the processor but the GPU.

Benchmark Performance — exact CPU and GPU scores, percentile positions, and what the combined picture is

The CPU average benchmark score is 48,995 with a 90th percentile rank. The GPU average benchmark score is 21,629 with a 67th percentile rank. The combined system percentile is 79. That spread matters: the CPU is performing near the top of the database, while the GPU sits in the upper-middle range. In workload terms, the CPU is the component carrying the performance weight.

For the GPU, Geekbench OpenCL scores 78,999 and Geekbench Vulkan scores 92,309. Passmark G3D scores 15,616, Passmark G2D scores 709, and Passmark GPU compute scores 6,525. DirectX results are lower on the modern API side: Passmark DirectX 12 scores 59, DirectX 11 scores 140, DirectX 10 scores 113, and DirectX 9 scores 195. The GPU’s nearest rivals illustrate its position: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB averages 21,856 with a deltaPct of -1, so the Quadro RTX 5000 trails by 1%; the NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile averages 21,379 with a deltaPct of 1.2, making the Quadro 1.2% ahead; the AMD Radeon HD 8970M averages 21,237 with a deltaPct of 1.8; and the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL averages 21,153 with a deltaPct of 2.3.

The combined picture is a system whose CPU is near the top of the database but whose GPU is roughly comparable to a mid-range desktop card from several generations ago. For CPU-bound workloads, this machine should feel extremely responsive. For GPU-bound workloads, the 67th percentile and the close proximity to the GTX 1060 6 GB indicate that the graphics side will not match the CPU’s standing.

Who Should Build It — target users and industries tied strictly to the measured performance

This build suits users who need a very strong CPU but only moderate GPU performance. The CPU’s 90th percentile, 14-thread configuration, and high Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 32,924 make it a good fit for software developers compiling large projects, analysts running multithreaded scripts, and engineers using CPU-based simulation tools. The ECC memory support plus DDR5 and PCIe Gen 5 lanes also align with small business workstations where reliability and modern I/O are important.

Content creators who work mostly with CPU-heavy encoding, batch processing, and productivity applications will find the Core Ultra 5 245’s multi-threaded Passmark score of 38,706 useful. The GPU’s 16 GB of VRAM and 448.0 GB/s memory bandwidth can still assist with large image sequences and GPU-accelerated filters, but the GPU’s 67th percentile means it is not a top-tier renderer.

Students building a desktop for coursework will benefit from the CPU’s high single-thread score of 4,648 and its on-chip Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU, which can handle basic display and 2D tasks even without the discrete GPU. Office and small-business users get a 65 W CPU with ECC memory and an Active production status, which is useful for a dependable workstation. This is not a build for users who demand modern GPU rasterization or ray tracing; it is a build for users whose primary workload is CPU-bound, with a professional GPU present mainly for workstation features like 16 GB VRAM, RT cores, tensor cores, and Quadro-class output support.

Balance and Bottleneck — which component limits which workload, using percentiles and FPS scaling as evidence

The benchmark data shows a clear imbalance: the CPU is at the 90th percentile while the GPU is at the 67th percentile. In CPU-heavy tasks, the Core Ultra 5 245 can operate at a level near the top of the database, with Cinebench R23 multi-core at 32,924 and Passmark integer math at 91,187. In GPU-heavy tasks, the Quadro RTX 5000 is confined to the 67th percentile, and its Passmark G3D score of 15,616 is far below the CPU’s relative position.

Because the FACT PACK contains no measured FPS rows for this exact combination, FPS scaling cannot be cited as direct evidence. The dataIsMeasured flag is false, and measuredFpsUltraByGame is empty. The bottleneck analysis therefore rests on benchmark percentiles and component scores. The GPU is the likely limiting component in gaming and real-time graphics workloads, while the CPU is the stronger component in rendering, compiling, and multithreaded productivity work. In a combined workload such as gaming while streaming, the CPU should handle the streaming and encoding side without much trouble given its 14-thread and multi-thread score, while the GPU determines the game’s frame rate ceiling.

GPU Analysis — VRAM, bandwidth, clocks, RT/tensor hardware, what the benchmark scores mean for rendering

The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 is a Turing-architecture workstation GPU based on the TU104 chip. It is manufactured on a 12 nm process at TSMC with 13,600 million transistors on a 545 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 25.0M / mm². The GPU has 3,072 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs. It includes 48 RT cores and 384 tensor cores, which are meaningful for hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI inference.

Memory is one of the strongest aspects of this GPU: 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, with memory clocks of 1750 MHz and 14 Gbps effective. Memory bandwidth is 448.0 GB/s. This large frame buffer and high bandwidth make the card well-suited for workstation rendering scenes with large textures and models, even if raw compute throughput is not class-leading. The GPU’s FP32 throughput is 11.15 TFLOPS, FP16 is 22.30 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, pixel rate is 116.2 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 348.5 GTexel/s.

The board is a dual-slot card with one 6-pin and one 8-pin power connector, a suggested PSU of 550 W, and a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface. It has four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs and one USB Type-C output. API support includes DirectX 12 Ultimate with a 12_2 feature level, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The production status is End-of-life, with the successor listed as Workstation Ampere. Its launch MSRP is 2,299 USD.

Benchmark scores show a capable but aging GPU. Geekbench OpenCL is 78,999, Geekbench Vulkan is 92,309, and Passmark GPU compute is 6,525. The DirectX 12 score of 59 is much lower than the Vulkan score, which suggests that the GPU’s performance is API-dependent; Vulkan compute and graphics workloads appear to be a relative strength. For rendering, the combination of 16 GB VRAM, 384 tensor cores, and 48 RT cores means the card can still handle GPU-accelerated ray tracing and AI-based denoising, but the raw rasterization score is close enough to the GTX 1060 6 GB to show its age.

Usage Scenarios — grounded in the scores: high-refresh gaming, streaming, video editing, 3D rendering, software development, student and office work

High-refresh gaming: The CPU’s 5.10 GHz boost clock and single-thread score of 4,648 should keep frame pacing stable in CPU-bound scenarios, but the GPU’s 67th percentile and DirectX 12 score of 59 make high-refresh gaming a GPU-limited experience. This is not a top-tier esports GPU by the numbers.

Streaming: The Core Ultra 5 245’s Passmark multi-thread score of 38,706 and Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 32,924 provide enough CPU headroom for game capture and encoding alongside the game. The GPU’s G3D score of 15,616 remains the ceiling for in-game graphics work.

Video editing: The CPU’s integer math score of 91,187 and floating-point math score of 120,548 support timeline processing, while the GPU’s 16 GB VRAM and OpenCL score of 78,999 can accelerate effects. The result is a balanced editing machine with a strong CPU side.

3D rendering: The GPU’s FP32 throughput of 11.15 TFLOPS and FP16 throughput of 22.30 TFLOPS are backed by 16 GB of VRAM and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth, so it can handle GPU rendering of complex scenes. The CPU can additionally work as a strong host for CPU-based rendering tasks.

Software development: The 14-thread CPU with a 90th percentile rank and Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 32,924 is well suited to build servers and local compilation. ECC memory support and PCIe Gen 5 lanes are useful for development workstations handling large codebases.

Student and office work: The 65 W CPU, integrated Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU, and DDR5 support make this a credible desktop for everyday productivity. The discrete GPU is unnecessary for basic office tasks, but its presence adds workstation-class memory and display outputs for specialized work.

FAQ — 5-7 Q&A pairs answerable from FACT PACK data

Q: What socket does the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 use?

A: It uses Intel Socket 1851.

Q: Does this CPU support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the memory support is DDR5 with ECC set to true.

Q: How much VRAM does the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 have?

A: It has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, with 448.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth.

Q: How does the Core Ultra 5 245 compare to the AMD Ryzen 9 7900?

A: The Ultra 5 245 averages 48,995, while the Ryzen 9 7900 averages 49,228, with a deltaPct of -0.5, so the Ultra 5 trails by 0.5%.

Q: Is the GPU’s production status still active?

A: No, the Quadro RTX 5000 is End-of-life, and its stated successor is Workstation Ampere.

Q: Is there measured FPS data for this CPU and GPU combination?

A: No. The FACT PACK has no measured FPS rows for this combination; dataIsMeasured is false and measuredFpsUltraByGame is empty.

Q: What power supply is suggested for the GPU?

A: The suggested PSU for the Quadro RTX 5000 is 550 W.

Gaming Performance — measured FPS by game and resolution

There is no measured FPS data for this exact combination. The FACT PACK contains no measuredFps rows, and the dataIsMeasured flag is false. All frame-rate discussion here is therefore estimated from the benchmark scores, not from direct game testing.

By the numbers, the CPU is not likely to be the limiting factor in gaming. Its 5.10 GHz boost clock, 4,648 Cinebench R23 single-core score, and 4,394 Passmark single-thread score indicate strong single-thread performance. The GPU, however, sits at the 67th percentile with a Passmark G3D score of 15,616 and a DirectX 12 score of 59. That combination suggests that gaming frame rates are more likely to be constrained by the GPU than by the CPU.

The API scores are especially informative for game selection. The GPU’s Geekbench Vulkan score of 92,309 is much stronger than its DirectX 12 Passmark score of 59, so Vulkan-based games and engines may perform better relative to the GPU’s overall standing. DirectX 11 titles, with a Passmark score of 140, may also be more comfortable than DirectX 12 titles. Users should treat these statements as estimates, because no game-specific measured FPS values exist for this CPU-GPU pair.

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 5 245 + NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000

Apex Performer

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core Ultra 5 245

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

CPU Analysis — cores, clocks, architecture, what the benchmark scores mean for real workloads

Upgrade Path and Platform — socket, memory support, PCIe, PSU headroom from suggestedPsu/tdp, what a sensible next upgrade looks like

Benchmark Performance — exact CPU and GPU scores, percentile positions, and what the combined picture is

Who Should Build It — target users and industries tied strictly to the measured performance

Balance and Bottleneck — which component limits which workload, using percentiles and FPS scaling as evidence

GPU Analysis — VRAM, bandwidth, clocks, RT/tensor hardware, what the benchmark scores mean for rendering

Usage Scenarios — grounded in the scores: high-refresh gaming, streaming, video editing, 3D rendering, software development, student and office work

FAQ — 5-7 Q&A pairs answerable from FACT PACK data

Gaming Performance — measured FPS by game and resolution

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