SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 TiM

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)

▼

85 Score

Top 15% Ranking

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%

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 245KF

55,093 Benchmark Score

Top 5% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 TiM

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

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 TiM form a desktop pairing that targets a specific performance tier. The CPU sits in the 91st percentile among all processors, a strong position for a 14-thread part, while the GPU lands exactly at the 50th percentile, representing a typically mid-range graphics experience. The combined percentile for this build is 71, indicating that the overall system performance is solidly above average, though the balance between the two components is markedly uneven.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF is built on the Arrow Lake architecture and belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2. It is manufactured on a 3 nm process by TSMC, which is a notable detail given that the GPU in this system uses an older 8 nm node. The CPU package contains 14 cores and 14 threads, meaning there is no hyper-threading; each core handles a single thread. This is a significant design choice that impacts how the processor handles heavily threaded workloads compared to rivals with simultaneous multithreading. The base clock is 4.20 GHz, and it boosts up to 5.20 GHz.

The cache hierarchy is substantial. Each core gets 192 KB of L1 and 3 MB of L2, while the shared L3 cache totals 24 MB. This configuration supports the benchmark results, which show strong single-threaded and multi-threaded performance. In Cinebench R23, the CPU scores 36647 points in the multi-core test and 5173 points in the single-core test. These are robust figures for a desktop chip. The single-core score of 5173 is particularly high, indicating excellent responsiveness in lightly threaded applications. In the older Cinebench R20 tests, the multi-core score is 15391, and the single-core score is 2172. The Cinebench R15 results continue the trend with 3693 multi-core and 521 single-core.

The PassMark suite provides more granular data. The multi-thread score is 43110, and the single-thread score is 4715. The integer math test shows 98854, while floating point math is higher at 131546. This suggests the architecture is well-suited for scientific and engineering calculations that rely on floating-point operations. Data compression scores are very high at 460123, indicating strong performance in archiving and file management tasks. Data encryption scores 33381, and extended instructions score 37912, showing good capability in modern vectorized workloads. The physics test scores 2998, and random string sorting scores 55206. The find prime numbers score is 416, which is a lower figure but typical for a test that is sensitive to integer throughput in a specific pattern.

Comparing to nearest rivals, the Ultra 5 245KF is remarkably close to the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D, with a negligible delta of 0.6% higher average score. It trails the Intel Core 7 253PQE by 1.5% and the Intel Core i9-14900HX by 1.6%. It leads the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K by 1.9%. This places the chip in a competitive bracket where the differences between these models are within a couple of percentage points. The average benchmark score for this CPU is 55093, which is the benchmark used for these comparisons.

For real workloads, the data shows a processor that excels in both single-threaded and multi-threaded tasks. The high Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 36647 suggests that video rendering, 3D modeling, and software compilation will be handled briskly. The single-core score of 5173 ensures that everyday desktop use, web browsing, and office applications feel snappy. The lack of hyper-threading means that the 14 threads are physical cores, which can sometimes provide more consistent performance in certain real-time applications compared to virtual threads. The 125 W TDP indicates a power draw that requires adequate cooling but is not extreme for a desktop platform.

GPU Analysis

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 TiM is an Ampere architecture part built on the GA104 chip, manufactured by Samsung on an 8 nm process. The transistor count is 17400 million on a 392 mm² die. The GPU has a base clock of 915 MHz and a boost clock of 1410 MHz. Memory operates at 1750 MHz, which translates to 14 Gbps effective. The memory configuration consists of 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 448.0 GB/s.

The compute resources are substantial. There are 5888 shading units, 184 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 96 raster operation units (ROPs). For ray tracing, there are 46 RT cores, and for AI acceleration, there are 184 tensor cores. The pixel rate is 135.4 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 259.4 GTexel/s. The FP32 performance is 16.60 TFLOPS, with FP16 also at 16.60 TFLOPS due to a 1:1 ratio.

The GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, making it fully compatible with modern game APIs and features like hardware ray tracing and variable rate shading. The board is a triple-slot design, measuring 270 mm in length, 140 mm in height, and 55 mm in width. It requires a single 8-pin power connector, and the suggested power supply is 550 W. The TDP is 220 W. Display outputs include 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a.

The benchmark data for this GPU is notably empty. There are no scores in the benchmarks array, and the average benchmark score is listed as 0. Its percentile rank among all GPUs is 50, meaning it sits exactly in the middle of the distribution. There are no nearest rivals listed for the GPU. This makes it difficult to assess performance relative to other cards with precision. However, the raw specifications provide a clear picture. The 8 GB VRAM is a limiting factor for modern high-resolution textures, but the 448 GB/s bandwidth is respectable. The FP32 compute of 16.60 TFLOPS is strong for a mid-range card, indicating it can handle heavy shading workloads.

The 46 RT cores and 184 tensor cores are the same count, which is typical for this class of Ampere GPU. This suggests that ray tracing performance will be present but not class-leading; it will allow for ray-traced effects at playable frame rates with settings adjusted. The tensor cores enable DLSS, which can help offset the load of ray tracing by rendering at a lower resolution and upscaling. The 8 GB memory is the most significant constraint for rendering and gaming at high resolutions, as textures and geometry can exceed this capacity in demanding titles.

FAQ

Q: What is the processor architecture and process node?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF uses the Arrow Lake architecture (Arrow Lake-S codename) and is manufactured on a 3 nm process by TSMC.

Q: How much L3 cache does the CPU have?

A: The CPU has 24 MB of shared L3 cache, with 192 KB of L1 and 3 MB of L2 per core.

Q: What is the GPU memory bandwidth and size?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 TiM has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 448.0 GB/s.

Q: Does the CPU support ECC memory?

A: No, ECC memory is not supported by the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF.

Q: What PCIe version does the CPU support?

A: The CPU supports PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only).

Q: What is the suggested power supply for the GPU?

A: The suggested PSU for the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 TiM is 550 W.

Q: How does the CPU compare to the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF has an average benchmark score of 55093, which is 0.6% higher than the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D score of 54762.

Balance and Bottleneck

The data shows a significant imbalance between the CPU and GPU performance tiers. The CPU is in the 91st percentile of all CPUs, while the GPU is in the 50th percentile of all GPUs. This gap suggests that in many workloads, the GPU will be the limiting factor. The combined percentile of 71 reflects this split, indicating the system overall is above average but not exceptional in any single area.

For gaming, the CPU’s high single-core score of 5173 in Cinebench R23 will rarely be the bottleneck in modern titles. The GPU, with its 50th percentile rank, will more likely cap frame rates. In CPU-intensive games like strategy titles or simulations, the CPU’s strength will be more apparent, potentially allowing the GPU to operate at its maximum output. However, in GPU-bound scenarios at higher resolutions, the RTX 3070 TiM will be the constraint. The 8 GB VRAM is a potential bottleneck for high-resolution textures, which can cause stuttering or force lower settings regardless of compute power.

The FP32 performance of 16.60 TFLOPS on the GPU is reasonable, but it is outclassed by the CPU’s compute capabilities in many synthetic tests. The CPU’s PassMark multi-thread score of 43110 and FPU score of 131546 indicate that for non-graphics compute, the CPU is the dominant component. Conversely, the GPU’s 50th percentile rank shows it is average, so workloads that rely on GPU compute, such as rendering in Blender or video encoding via NVENC, will be limited by the graphics card.

The FPS scaling in games will depend heavily on the title and resolution. At 1080p, the CPU’s strength can push the GPU to its limits, but the GPU will still cap performance. At 1440p or 4K, the GPU becomes the clear bottleneck, and the CPU’s high percentile will not translate to higher frame rates because the GPU cannot keep up. For productivity, the CPU will dominate most tasks, and the GPU will only be relevant for CUDA-accelerated effects or ray-traced previews.

Who Should Build It

This build is suitable for users who prioritize CPU performance and do not require top-tier graphics power. The target user is a content creator who works with video editing, 3D modeling, or software development where the CPU’s 14 cores and high single-thread speed are beneficial. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 36647 indicates that rendering times will be short, and the single-core score of 5173 ensures smooth operation in applications that rely on a single main thread.

Gamers at 1080p resolution will find this setup adequate, as the CPU can feed the GPU sufficiently, and the GPU’s 50th percentile rank will deliver playable frame rates in most titles. However, gamers targeting 1440p or 4K with high refresh rates will find the GPU lacking. The 8 GB VRAM is a concern for future titles at 1440p with high texture quality.

For developers, the CPU’s strong integer and floating-point performance (98854 and 131546 in PassMark, respectively) is ideal for compiling code, running virtual machines, and handling multi-threaded build processes. Students and small business workstations that run office suites, databases, and data analysis software will benefit from the CPU’s responsiveness and multi-threaded capabilities, while the GPU provides basic acceleration where needed.

The GPU’s ray tracing cores and tensor cores make it viable for light AI workloads or real-time ray-traced previews in design software. Users who need CUDA acceleration for research or rendering will find the 16.60 TFLOPS FP32 performance useful, but they must be mindful of the 8 GB memory limit when working with large datasets.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF uses the Intel Socket 1851, which is specific to the Core Ultra Series 2 desktop processors. The platform supports DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, with a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. The CPU provides 20 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, allowing for high-speed NVMe storage and next-generation GPUs. The multiplier is unlocked, enabling overclocking for users who want to extract more performance.

The GPU uses a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface and is an end-of-life product. Its successor is the GeForce 40 series, which would offer a significant upgrade path. The GPU’s TDP is 220 W, and the suggested PSU is 550 W. When upgrading the GPU, users must ensure the power supply has sufficient headroom. The triple-slot design of the current card means physical space is a consideration for any future card.

A sensible next upgrade would be to replace the GPU. The CPU has the headroom to support a much faster graphics card, given its high percentile rank. The CPU’s 20 PCIe Gen 5 lanes mean that a newer GPU using Gen 5 will be fully supported, though the current card is Gen 4. The memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s for the CPU is a platform limit, but it is not a bottleneck for most applications. The lack of ECC memory support is a minor consideration for workstation users who require error correction.

The platform itself is active in production, meaning the CPU is readily available. The socket 1851 is likely to support future generations, though the data does not specify compatibility beyond the current series. For users building new, the CPU’s 125 W TDP means a capable air cooler or a modest liquid cooler is sufficient, but the GPU’s 220 W TDP and triple-slot design require a case with good airflow and enough space.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU’s benchmark results are comprehensive. In Cinebench R23, the multi-core score is 36647, and the single-core score is 5173. The Cinebench R20 scores are 15391 multi-core and 2172 single-core. Cinebench R15 yields 3693 multi-core and 521 single-core. PassMark tests show a multi-thread score of 43110 and a single-thread score of 4715. Specific PassMark subtests include data compression at 460123, data encryption at 33381, extended instructions at 37912, find prime numbers at 416, floating point math at 131546, integer math at 98854, physics at 2998, and random string sorting at 55206.

The average benchmark score for the CPU is 55093, placing it in the 91st percentile of all CPUs. Compared to nearest rivals, it is 0.6% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D (score 54762), 1.5% behind the Intel Core 7 253PQE (score 55919), 1.6% behind the Intel Core i9-14900HX (score 56004), and 1.9% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K (score 54053).

The GPU has no benchmark scores listed, and its average benchmark score is 0. Its percentile rank is 50, indicating it is exactly average. There are no nearest rivals for the GPU, so no delta comparisons can be made. The combined percentile for the build is 71, which is the only aggregate metric available.

The combined picture shows a system where the CPU is a top-tier performer, while the GPU is mid-pack. The CPU’s high scores in both single and multi-threaded tests make it a powerhouse for compute tasks. The GPU’s average rank means it will deliver standard performance for its class, but it will not stand out. The combined percentile of 71 suggests that overall system performance is above the median, driven largely by the CPU.

Build Overview

This build pairs the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 TiM in a desktop configuration. The CPU is a 14-core, 14-thread part from the Core Ultra Series 2, based on the Arrow Lake architecture. The GPU is an Ampere-based card from the GeForce 30-series, using the GA104 chip. The CPU is in the 91st percentile of all CPUs, while the GPU is in the 50th percentile. The combined percentile is 71.

The class is desktop, meaning this is a stationary system designed for performance over portability. The overall tier, based on the percentiles, is that of a high-end CPU paired with a mid-range GPU. This is an unusual combination that prioritizes processor-heavy tasks over graphics-heavy tasks. The CPU’s launch MSRP is $294, which positions it as a mid-to-high-end processor, though pricing is not discussed further here.

The CPU’s production status is active, while the GPU is end-of-life. This means the GPU is a legacy part, and its availability may dwindle. The CPU, in contrast, is current. The build is best described as a workstation-oriented system with gaming capability, rather than a dedicated gaming rig.

Gaming Performance

No measured FPS rows exist for this exact combination of the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 TiM. The data set contains no measuredFpsUltraByGame values, and the dataIsMeasured flag is false. Therefore, all frame rate discussions are estimates based on the benchmark scores and component specifications.

The CPU’s high single-core score of 5173 in Cinebench R23 suggests that it will not bottleneck the GPU in most games. The GPU’s 50th percentile rank and 16.60 TFLOPS FP32 performance indicate it is a solid 1080p card. In esports titles like Counter-Strike or Valorant, the CPU’s strength will push frame rates very high, likely exceeding 144 FPS at 1080p with the GPU being the limiting factor. In AAA games at 1080p with ultra settings, the GPU should deliver 60-100 FPS depending on the title, with the 8 GB VRAM being adequate for current games at that resolution.

At 1440p, the GPU will struggle more. The 8 GB memory becomes a constraint for high-quality textures, and the FP32 performance is not sufficient for high refresh rates. Expect 40-70 FPS in demanding titles at 1440p ultra. At 4K, the GPU is not recommended, as the 50th percentile rank and 8 GB VRAM will lead to low frame rates and potential texture pop-in. The CPU will be underutilized at this resolution, as the GPU will be fully saturated.

Ray tracing performance will be modest. The 46 RT cores allow for ray-traced effects, but the GPU’s tier means it is not a ray tracing powerhouse. Using DLSS via the 184 tensor cores can help recover performance, allowing for higher frame rates at lower internal resolutions. Overall, this build is best for 1080p gaming or 1440p with adjusted settings, where the CPU ensures smooth frame pacing and the GPU provides a playable experience.

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 TiM

Power Build

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 TiM

Market Position

Game Performance Benchmarks

Cyberpunk 2077

Red Dead Redemption 2

Microsoft Flight Simulator

Control

Call of Duty: Warzone

Fortnite

Performance Insights

Strong Performance

Bottleneck Detected

Performance Tiers Explained

Ultimate

High-End

Mid-Range

Entry Level

Legacy

CPU Analysis

GPU Analysis

FAQ

Balance and Bottleneck

Who Should Build It

Upgrade Path and Platform

Benchmark Performance

Build Overview

Gaming Performance

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