SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 5 245K + NVIDIA RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation

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

85 / 100
HIGH-END

Power Build

Top 15% of systems. Excellent for 1440p Ultra or 4K High gaming.

1440p Ultra4K High

System Balance Analysis

CPU vs GPU performance ratio
GPU Bottleneck
CPU
95%
VS
GPU
74%

Your GPU is limiting system performance. Consider upgrading to a more powerful graphics card to better utilize your CPU.

PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 5 245K

54,053 Benchmark Score
Top 5% Market Ranking
View Full Specs →
GRAPHICS CARD

NVIDIA RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation

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

This build pairs the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K desktop processor with the NVIDIA RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation GPU, creating a desktop-class configuration where the CPU operates at the 91st percentile against all CPUs while the GPU sits at the 50th percentile against all GPUs. The combined percentile for this pairing is 71, indicating a system that is strong in processing power but more modest in graphics capability relative to the broader hardware landscape. Since no measured FPS data exists for this exact combination, all gaming performance discussion here is framed as estimates derived from the raw benchmark scores of each component.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245K is a 14-core, 14-thread desktop processor built on the Arrow Lake architecture using a 3 nm process from TSMC. It belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2 family and operates with a base clock of 4.20 GHz and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz. The chip has a 125 W TDP, uses the Intel Socket 1851, and supports dual-channel DDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s, including ECC memory support. The cache layout includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache.

Benchmark results place this CPU in a strong position. In Cinebench R23, it scores 25,066 in multi-core and 2,132 in single-core tests. The single-core score of 2,132 reflects strong per-thread performance, which matters for lightly threaded workloads like web browsing, office applications, and older games that rely on one or two threads. The multi-core score of 25,066 suggests the 14 cores handle heavily threaded tasks well, such as video encoding, 3D rendering, and compilation workloads. In Cinebench R20, the scores are 15,368 multi-core and 2,169 single-core, showing consistent scaling across benchmark versions. The Cinebench R15 results are 3,850 multi-core and 322 single-core.

PassMark results further characterize the CPU. The multi-thread score is 43,047, while the single-thread score is 4,714. Integer math scores 98,524, floating-point math scores 130,678, and extended instructions score 37,617. Data compression scores 458,817, and data encryption scores 33,286. Random string sorting scores 55,098, find prime numbers scores 414, and physics scores 3,081. These numbers indicate a balanced processor that excels at integer and floating-point operations, with particularly strong data compression performance that would benefit file archiving and database workloads.

The CPU’s average benchmark score is 54,053, placing it in the 91st percentile of all CPUs. Looking at nearest rivals, the Intel Xeon 6505P scores 53,701, just 0.7% lower, and the Intel Core i7-14700F scores 53,620, 0.8% lower. The AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D scores 54,762, which is 1.3% higher than the Ultra 5 245K. The Xeon Phi 7290 scores 53,469, 1.1% lower. This clustering shows the Ultra 5 245K sits in a competitive band where performance differences among rivals are small, but the data still places it slightly ahead of two Intel alternatives and behind one AMD option.

GPU Analysis

The NVIDIA RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation GPU uses the AD103 chip with the Ada Lovelace architecture, built on a 5 nm process from TSMC. It has 9,728 shading units, 304 TMUs, and 112 ROPs. The GPU includes 76 ray tracing cores and 304 tensor cores, which are essential for RTX workloads and AI-accelerated tasks. Memory consists of 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 576.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The base clock is 930 MHz with a boost clock of 1680 MHz, and memory runs at 2250 MHz, which translates to 18 Gbps effective.

The GPU has no benchmark scores listed in the data and holds a 50th percentile position against all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 0. This means the graphics performance cannot be directly quantified from the FACT PACK, but the hardware specifications provide context. The FP32 performance is 32.69 TFLOPS, and FP16 performance matches at 32.69 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio. Pixel rate is 188.2 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 510.7 GTexel/s. The 16 GB VRAM capacity with 576 GB/s bandwidth suggests it can handle large textures and high-resolution assets, which is relevant for rendering and professional visualization workloads.

The GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, covering modern graphics APIs. It uses a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface and has a 120 W TDP, with no power connectors listed, indicating it is designed as an integrated or embedded solution. The slot width is listed as IGP, meaning it is not a standard add-in card, and display outputs are described as portable device dependent. The GPU was released in March 2023 and is based on the Ada Lovelace architecture, with the predecessor being Ampere-MW and the successor being Blackwell-MW.

Balance and Bottleneck

The data shows a clear imbalance between the CPU and GPU in this pairing. The CPU sits at the 91st percentile, while the GPU sits at the 50th percentile, and the combined percentile is 71. This large gap suggests the CPU is significantly stronger relative to its peers than the GPU is relative to its own peers. In workloads that are primarily graphics-bound, the GPU would likely be the limiting factor, as its mid-pack standing means it cannot fully leverage the CPU’s high-end processing capability.

For CPU-intensive tasks like video encoding, software compilation, and scientific computing, the Ultra 5 245K would drive performance with its multi-thread scores of 25,066 in Cinebench R23 and 43,047 in PassMark multi-thread. The GPU would play a minimal role in these scenarios. For gaming at higher resolutions where the GPU becomes the primary bottleneck, the RTX 5000 Embedded Ada’s 50th percentile position would constrain frame rates, meaning the CPU’s 91st percentile would go underutilized.

The lack of measured FPS data for this combination means exact bottleneck quantification is not possible, but the percentile spread of 41 points between CPU and GPU is substantial. The CPU’s single-thread score of 4,714 in PassMark and 2,132 in Cinebench R23 suggests it can handle high-refresh gaming scenarios, but the GPU’s performance ceiling would prevent the system from achieving maximum frame rates in graphically demanding titles. The CPU has 14 threads, which is adequate for modern games, but the GPU’s 16 GB VRAM and 576 GB/s bandwidth are the more relevant factors for gaming resolution and quality settings.

Who Should Build It

This pairing targets users who prioritize processor performance over graphics capability. The CPU’s 91st percentile ranking makes it suitable for professionals and enthusiasts who run CPU-bound workloads, such as software developers compiling large codebases, researchers running simulations, or content creators doing video encoding and 3D rendering. The multi-thread scores of 25,066 in Cinebench R23 and 43,047 in PassMark support these use cases.

The GPU, while only at the 50th percentile, still offers 16 GB of VRAM and 32.69 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, which is sufficient for entry-level GPU compute tasks like machine learning inference or basic 3D modeling. However, the GPU is not positioned for high-end gaming or professional rendering workloads that demand top-tier graphics hardware. The system is better suited as a workstation for CPU-heavy tasks with occasional light to moderate graphics usage.

Students in engineering or computer science fields would benefit from the CPU’s strong single-thread and multi-thread performance for coding and simulation assignments. Small business workstations running database applications would leverage the data compression score of 458,817 and integer math score of 98,524. Gamers at 1080p resolution might find the system adequate, but the GPU’s mid-pack standing means it would not deliver high frame rates in demanding titles, making it less ideal for competitive or high-refresh gaming.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: The CPU’s single-thread score of 4,714 in PassMark indicates strong per-core performance, which is beneficial for maintaining high frame rates. However, the GPU’s 50th percentile position and lack of measured FPS data mean that 144Hz or 240Hz displays may not be fully utilized in graphically intensive games. The system could handle esports titles at high frame rates, but AAA games would likely run at lower settings to achieve competitive FPS.

Streaming: The CPU’s 14 threads and multi-thread score of 25,066 in Cinebench R23 provide enough headroom for simultaneous gaming and encoding. Software encoding using the CPU would be viable, but the GPU’s tensor cores could assist with encoding tasks if supported by software. The system would handle streaming at moderate settings without major performance drops.

Video editing: The CPU’s floating-point math score of 130,678 and multi-thread performance in PassMark at 43,047 make it suitable for video editing tasks like timeline scrubbing, effects rendering, and export encoding. The GPU’s 16 GB VRAM would handle 4K timelines with effects, but rendering times for complex projects would depend on GPU acceleration, which is limited by its 50th percentile standing.

3D rendering: The CPU’s Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 25,066 indicates solid CPU-based rendering performance, suitable for software renderers. The GPU’s 32.69 TFLOPS FP32 performance and 16 GB VRAM could accelerate GPU-based renderers, but the lack of benchmark data means its real-world rendering throughput is uncertain. This scenario would work best with CPU rendering as the primary method.

Software development: The CPU’s integer math score of 98,524 and data compression score of 458,817 support compilation, code analysis, and version control operations. The single-thread score of 4,714 ensures responsive builds for incremental compilation. The GPU is largely unnecessary for this workload, making it an acceptable but not optimized pairing.

Student and office work: The CPU’s single-thread performance and the GPU’s basic capabilities handle spreadsheets, document editing, and web browsing easily. The system is overpowered for these tasks, but the CPU’s efficiency would ensure smooth multitasking. The 16 GB VRAM is excessive for office work, but it does not negatively impact performance.

Gaming Performance

No measured FPS data exists for this exact CPU+GPU combination, so all gaming performance figures here are estimates based on the benchmark scores. The CPU’s 91st percentile ranking suggests it would not be a bottleneck in most games, while the GPU’s 50th percentile position indicates it would limit frame rates in graphics-heavy titles. At 1080p resolution, the system might achieve playable frame rates in many games, but at 1440p or 4K, the GPU would struggle to maintain high FPS in demanding titles.

The GPU’s 16 GB VRAM is sufficient for high-resolution textures, but its 576 GB/s bandwidth and 32.69 TFLOPS FP32 performance are mid-range figures. The CPU’s single-thread score of 2,132 in Cinebench R23 suggests it can feed the GPU adequately, but the GPU’s own limits would cap performance. Esports titles like competitive shooters or MOBAs could run at high frame rates due to lower graphical demands, while open-world games or ray-traced titles would require reduced settings. These are estimates, not measured results, so actual performance could vary.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU’s benchmark scores are comprehensive and place it in the 91st percentile of all CPUs. The average benchmark score is 54,053, with nearest rivals showing close competition: the Xeon 6505P at 53,701 (0.7% lower), the Core i7-14700F at 53,620 (0.8% lower), the Xeon Phi 7290 at 53,469 (1.1% lower), and the Ryzen 9 9900X3D at 54,762 (1.3% higher). The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 25,066 and single-core score of 2,132 are strong, while PassMark multi-thread at 43,047 and single-thread at 4,714 reinforce this position.

The GPU has no benchmark scores and a 50th percentile position, with an average benchmark score of 0. This means its performance cannot be compared to rivals, and the combined picture is one of a very strong CPU paired with an unquantified, mid-tier GPU. The combined percentile of 71 reflects the CPU’s strength pulling the system up, but the GPU’s lack of data makes the overall performance assessment incomplete. The CPU’s 91st percentile is the dominant factor in this build’s benchmark profile.

FAQ

Q: What is the CPU’s position relative to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245K has an average benchmark score of 54,053, which is 0.7% higher than the Intel Xeon 6505P, 0.8% higher than the Intel Core i7-14700F, and 1.1% higher than the Intel Xeon Phi 7290. It is 1.3% lower than the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D.

Q: How much VRAM does the GPU have, and what memory type is used?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, with 576.0 GB/s of bandwidth and memory running at 2250 MHz, which is 18 Gbps effective.

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

A: The combined percentile is 71, with the CPU at the 91st percentile and the GPU at the 50th percentile.

Q: Does this system support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K supports ECC memory, and it uses dual-channel DDR5 with a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s.

Q: What is the GPU’s FP32 performance in TFLOPS?

A: The GPU delivers 32.69 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, and FP16 performance is also 32.69 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio.

Q: What is the CPU’s process node and transistor count?

A: The CPU is built on a 3 nm process from TSMC, with 17,800 million transistors and a die size of 243 mm².

Q: What is the GPU’s ray tracing and tensor core count?

A: The GPU has 76 ray tracing cores and 304 tensor cores, which support RTX and AI-accelerated workloads.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The CPU uses the Intel Socket 1851, which is specific to the Core Ultra Series 2 platform. It supports dual-channel DDR5 memory with ECC capability, and the memory bandwidth is 102.4 GB/s. The CPU provides PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes, which is suitable for high-bandwidth devices like NVMe SSDs or future GPUs. The GPU uses PCIe 4.0 x16, which is backward compatible with the CPU’s PCIe 5.0 slots.

The CPU has a 125 W TDP, and the GPU has a 120 W TDP, so the total power draw is modest, but no suggested PSU is listed. The GPU has no power connectors and is described as an IGP slot width, meaning it is embedded rather than a standard add-in card, so upgrading the GPU may require a different board or form factor. The CPU has an unlocked multiplier, allowing overclocking, and the production status is active for both components.

A sensible next upgrade would be to focus on the GPU, as the CPU is already at the 91st percentile. Replacing the embedded GPU with a higher-performing discrete card would improve graphics-bound workloads, but the embedded nature of the current GPU may complicate this. Alternatively, adding more memory or faster storage would complement the CPU’s strong performance, but the DDR5 memory support is already dual-channel, and the PCIe 5.0 lanes provide ample bandwidth for storage.

Build Overview

This is a desktop-class build featuring the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K, a 14-core desktop processor from the Core Ultra Series 2 family, paired with the NVIDIA RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation GPU. The CPU is a high performer at the 91st percentile, while the GPU is mid-tier at the 50th percentile, resulting in a combined percentile of 71. The system is unbalanced, with the CPU far outclassing the GPU in relative performance.

The CPU’s architecture is Arrow Lake on a 3 nm process, with 14 cores and 14 threads, while the GPU uses the Ada Lovelace architecture with 9,728 shading units and 16 GB of GDDR6 memory. The build targets users who need strong CPU performance for tasks like software development, data processing, and content creation, but it does not prioritize gaming or GPU-accelerated workloads. The lack of measured FPS data means gaming performance is uncertain, but the GPU’s 50th percentile position suggests it is not a high-end gaming solution. Overall, this pairing is a CPU-centric desktop workstation with adequate but not exceptional graphics capability.