SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus + 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

96%

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 250KF Plus

66,159 Benchmark Score

Top 4% 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 250KF Plus and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 TiM form an unusual pairing: a current, actively produced Arrow Lake Refresh desktop processor sitting in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, matched with an end-of-life Ampere graphics card in the 50th percentile of all GPUs. The combination lands at a combined 72nd percentile, which immediately tells you where the balance lies — this is a CPU-forward build whose graphics subsystem will set the ceiling in GPU-bound workloads. Note upfront: no measured FPS rows exist for this exact combination in the database, so all frame-rate discussion below is estimated from the benchmark scores rather than drawn from recorded game runs.

CPU Analysis

The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus is an 18-core, 18-thread part — no hyperthreading-style doubling, just 18 physical cores each running a single thread. That symmetry matters for interpretation: multi-core scores here reflect genuine parallel throughput rather than SMT-assisted scheduling. Base clock sits at 4.20 GHz with boosts to 5.30 GHz, and the multiplier is unlocked, so the boost figure is not a hard ceiling for builders willing to tune.

The cache hierarchy is generous for the segment. Each core carries 192 KB of L1 and 3 MB of L2, with a shared 30 MB slab of L3 — a per-core L2 allocation that benefits latency-sensitive workloads like compilation and game logic, while the shared L3 serves throughput tasks such as rendering and compression. Manufactured by TSMC on a 3 nm node, the chip packs 17,800 million transistors onto a 243 mm² die. TDP is rated at 125 W, and the memory subsystem supports dual-channel DDR5 with 115.2 GB/s of bandwidth and ECC capability — a feature more commonly associated with workstation platforms and one that adds a reliability argument for always-on systems.

Benchmark scores confirm upper-tier performance. Cinebench R23 multi-core lands at 42,718 with a single-core score of 6,030; R20 posts 17,941 multi and 2,532 single; R15 records 4,305 multi and 607 single. The single-core figures are the story here: 6,030 in R23 single-core is flagship-adjacent responsiveness, meaning lightly threaded applications — most games, most office software, most DAW plugins — run at full speed regardless of how well they scale. On the PassMark side, single-thread reads 4,698, multi-thread 50,146, physics 3,183, integer math 123,030, floating point 159,824, data compression 553,155, encryption 41,292, extended instructions 42,880, prime finding 452, and string sorting 67,209.

Contextualizing against nearest rivals: the average benchmark score of 66,159 places this CPU within 0.1% of the Intel Core 9 273PQE (66,099), 0.4% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D (65,914), 1% behind the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus (66,855), and 1.1% behind the AMD EPYC 4465P (66,925). Trading blows with a Ryzen 9 7950X3D and an EPYC-branded part tells you the multi-core throughput is genuinely high-end, not merely mid-range with a favorable price. The 93rd percentile versus all CPUs formalizes that: fewer than one in ten CPUs in the database outranks it.

For real workloads, the data indicates: rendering and code compilation scale across all 18 cores and will complete quickly; compression-heavy tasks such as archive creation benefit from the 553,155 PassMark compression result; encryption workloads run at the 41,292 level; and game engines that lean on one or two fast threads get a 5.30 GHz boost clock with 6,030 R23 single-core behind it.

FAQ

Q: How does the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus compare to the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D in benchmark terms?

A: The average benchmark score of 66,159 is 0.4% ahead of the Ryzen 9 7950X3D's 65,914 — effectively a dead heat in aggregate performance across the tested suite.

Q: Does this CPU have integrated graphics?

A: No. Integrated graphics are listed as N/A on the 250KF Plus, so the RTX 3070 TiM is required for any display output — there is no fallback if the GPU fails.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does the platform provide, and does it support ECC?

A: Dual-channel DDR5 delivers 115.2 GB/s, and ECC memory is supported — an unusual combination for a desktop part that suits long-running, stability-critical work.

Q: Is the graphics card still in production?

A: No. The RTX 3070 TiM is listed as end-of-life, meaning new units will increasingly come from remaining channel stock. The CPU, by contrast, is in active production.

Q: Is the CPU overclockable?

A: Yes. The multiplier is unlocked, and the 5.30 GHz boost clock is the stock ceiling, not a locked limit.

Q: What percentile does this CPU+GPU combination achieve overall?

A: The combined percentile is 72 — the strong CPU (93rd percentile) lifts a mid-tier GPU (50th percentile) into a solidly above-average overall placement.

Q: Are there measured game frame rates for this pairing?

A: No. The database contains no measured FPS data for this exact combination, so all frame-rate statements are estimates derived from the benchmark scores.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU side is thoroughly documented. The headline aggregate is an average benchmark score of 66,159 at the 93rd percentile of all CPUs. The Cinebench ladder — 4,305 / 607 (R15), 17,941 / 2,532 (R20), 42,718 / 6,030 (R23) in multi/single configurations — shows consistent scaling across benchmark generations, with no anomalous jumps that would suggest test variance.

PassMark results fill in the workload-specific picture: 50,146 multithread against 4,698 single-thread implies roughly ten-plus effective cores of sustained parallel scaling on mixed workloads — strong for a part without SMT. Physics at 3,183 and extended instructions at 42,880 round out a profile that is uniformly high rather than spiky.

The GPU side is thinner: the RTX 3070 TiM carries no benchmark entries and an average score of 0 in this dataset, sitting at the 50th percentile of all GPUs with no nearest-rival list populated. Everything said about its performance must therefore be inferred from specifications and that percentile placement rather than from recorded scores.

The combined picture is a 72nd-percentile desktop. In practice that means the system's measured strength lives in the processor: CPU-bound benchmarks will compete with parts a class above, while GPU-bound results will sit at the median of the graphics database. Any workload that can shift load onto the 18 cores — video encoding, streaming with CPU-side compression, simulation — will extract more from this build than pure rasterization will.

Who Should Build It

High-refresh gamers at 1080p and 1440p. With a 50th-percentile GPU and a 93rd-percentile CPU, the sensible gaming targets are 1080p at high frame rates and 1440p at moderate-to-high rates, both estimated — the CPU will rarely be the limiter at these resolutions, and the GPU's 8 GB of VRAM argues against 4K texture-heavy settings.

Content creators and video editors. The 42,718 Cinebench R23 multi-core score and 553,155 compression result indicate fast export and archive times; the 8 GB of GPU VRAM limits the size of GPU-accelerated effects timelines that can be comfortably handled.

3D artists and renderers. CPU rendering is a clear strength given the multi-core percentile; GPU-path rendering in engines that use VRAM heavily will encounter the 8 GB ceiling sooner on complex scenes.

Software developers. The 6,030 R23 single-core score, 5.30 GHz boost, and 3 MB per-core L2 make compilation and IDE workloads snappy, and ECC support is a genuine differentiator for long test-running machines.

Students and small-business workstation users. The platform's DDR5/ECC combination, 125 W CPU TDP, and 550 W suggested PSU make for a manageable, stability-oriented office or study system where the GPU handles display duties and light acceleration.

Balance and Bottleneck

The bottleneck analysis is unambiguous from the percentiles: CPU at 93, GPU at 50. In any workload where the GPU does the heavy lifting — gaming at raised resolutions, GPU rendering, machine-learning inference on the 184 tensor cores — the RTX 3070 TiM sets the pace, and the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus will sit with headroom to spare.

In CPU-bound scenarios the reverse holds. Compilation, simulation, compression, and single-threaded application logic run at a level within 0.4% of a Ryzen 9 7950X3D, and no graphics card in this pairing's class could starve a 6,030-point R23 single-core chip at 1080p. Because no measured FPS rows exist for this combination, FPS scaling cannot be cited directly; however, the percentile gap predicts that upgrading the GPU would yield the largest frame-rate gains at any resolution, while upgrading the CPU would change almost nothing until the GPU is well above the 50th percentile.

The 8 GB VRAM buffer is the second structural constraint: at 256-bit bus width and 448 GB/s of bandwidth, the card moves data quickly but holds a modest total, so texture-heavy scenarios will pressure capacity before they pressure throughput.

Gaming Performance

No measured FPS rows exist for this exact combination — the database contains no measuredFps data for this pairing, and dataIsMeasured is false. All figures in this section are therefore estimates framed from the benchmark scores, not recorded results.

Qualitatively: the RTX 3070 TiM's specifications — 16.60 TFLOPS FP32, 5,888 shading units, 46 RT cores, 184 tensor cores, 135.4 GPixel/s pixel rate and 259.4 GTexel/s texture rate — place it at the 50th percentile of GPUs. Estimated from that percentile and its specifications, expectations are high-settings 1080p gaming at high frame rates in most titles, and 1440p high-settings play at comfortable rates in mainstream engines. Ray-traced scenarios should be treated more cautiously: 46 RT cores provide hardware acceleration, but the estimated penalty for heavy RT combined with the 8 GB buffer argues for selective RT features rather than full stacks.

The CPU contributes zero estimated bottleneck at these targets: with R23 single-core at 6,030 and a 5.30 GHz boost, the processor will not be the component dropping frames at 1080p or 1440p. DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), Vulkan 1.4, and OpenGL 4.6 support mean every current engine's rendering path is available, including hardware-accelerated features enabled by the tensor cores.

GPU Analysis

The RTX 3070 TiM is an Ampere-architecture card built on the GA104 chip, fabricated by Samsung on an 8 nm process. The die measures 392 mm² and carries 17,400 million transistors at a density of 44.4M per mm² — note the contrast with the host CPU's 3 nm, 243 mm², 17,800-million-transistor construction; the two parts are near-equal in transistor count but a full process generation apart.

Memory is 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, running at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) for 448 GB/s of bandwidth. Clocks are 915 MHz base and 1410 MHz boost. The shader array comprises 5,888 shading units, 184 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, delivering the 135.4 GPixel/s and 259.4 GTexel/s rates quoted above and 16.60 TFLOPS of FP32 — with FP16 at a 1:1 ratio, also 16.60 TFLOPS, a trait of Ampere that benefits mixed-precision workloads.

Ray tracing is handled by 46 RT cores and AI workloads by 184 tensor cores, which together with DirectX 12 Ultimate support define the card's modern feature set. Physical and power characteristics: a 220 W TDP, triple-slot footprint fed by a single 8-pin connector, PCIe 4.0 x16 interface, and dimensions of 270 mm length, 140 mm height, 55 mm width. Display outputs are one HDMI 2.1 and three DisplayPort 1.4a.

For rendering work specifically, the card's position at the 50th percentile of all GPUs means mid-pack throughput in rasterization. In GPU render engines, the 184 tensor cores enable Optix-class denoising and AI-assisted paths, and 448 GB/s of bandwidth keeps data flowing — but 8 GB of VRAM is the binding constraint on scene complexity, not compute. Production status is end-of-life, with the GeForce 40 series listed as its successor and the GeForce 20 series as its predecessor.

Build Overview

This is a desktop-class build, and its tier is best read from the percentiles: CPU at 93, GPU at 50, combined at 72. That profile describes a performance-leaning system with a mainstream graphics card — a builder who prioritized processor throughput, likely for creation or development work, and paired it with a capable but mid-tier GPU for display and moderate rendering duties.

The CPU itself is a Core Ultra Series 2 part, codenamed Arrow Lake Refresh, on Intel Socket 1851, released March 2026 and in active production with a launch MSRP of $184. The GPU is an end-of-life Ampere card from the GeForce 30 series. The asymmetry in product lifecycle is worth flagging: one component is current and purchasable new; the other is exiting the market. Builders should factor platform longevity accordingly — the socket, memory, and PCIe standards all come from the CPU side and are fully current.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming. Estimated from the scores, the 50th-percentile GPU with a 93rd-percentile CPU points to 1080p high-refresh play as the sweet spot, with 1440p as a comfortable secondary target; the CPU guarantees no frame pacing issues from the processor side at either resolution.

Streaming. A strong fit on paper: 18 cores with a 50,146 PassMark multithread score leave abundant capacity for encoding alongside gameplay, and the 553,155 compression score suggests smooth recording pipelines. Figures are estimates, as no measured data exists for this pairing.

Video editing. The 42,718 Cinebench R23 multi-core result drives fast timeline scrubbing and export on CPU-bound codecs; the GPU's 184 tensor cores assist AI effects, but 8 GB of VRAM caps GPU-heavy project sizes.

3D rendering. CPU-based rendering is elite for the class — within 0.1% of an Intel Core 9 273PQE. GPU-path rendering is mid-tier at the 50th percentile, with 448 GB/s bandwidth aiding throughput and 8 GB of VRAM limiting scene scale.

Software development. The 6,030 R23 single-core score, 4,698 PassMark single-thread, 3 MB per-core L2, and ECC-capable DDR5 at 115.2 GB/s make this a compilation-focused and reliability-tolerant development machine.

Student and office work. Vastly overprovisioned for documents and browsing, which is not a criticism: the same headroom means the system stays responsive under heavy multitasking for years, and the 125 W CPU TDP keeps thermals manageable in an office enclosure.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The platform fundamentals are all on the CPU side: Intel Socket 1851, dual-channel DDR5 at 115.2 GB/s with ECC support, and PCIe Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes. Those Gen 5 lanes matter for the future — the GPU currently uses a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface, so a graphics upgrade to a Gen 5 card would run at full speed on this board, and a fast NVMe storage upgrade can use the CPU's lane allocation directly.

Power headroom is defined by the numbers: CPU TDP of 125 W, GPU TDP of 220 W, and a suggested PSU of 550 W for the system. That suggestion covers the current configuration; a substantially faster GPU will typically carry a higher power draw and a larger suggested PSU, so builders planning a graphics upgrade should treat the 550 W figure as sized for today's pairing rather than the platform's ceiling.

The sensible next upgrade is unambiguous from the data. The CPU sits at the 93rd percentile, trading blows with a Ryzen 9 7950X3D and an EPYC 4465P; replacing it would yield marginal gains. The GPU, at the 50th percentile with 8 GB of VRAM and an end-of-life status, is both the performance bottleneck and the lifecycle risk. A graphics card well above the 50th percentile — with a larger VRAM buffer to clear the 8 GB capacity constraint — converts the combined percentile upward most directly, letting the 18-core CPU finally run against a GPU of its own class. The successor GeForce 40 series is the natural direction indicated by the product lineage in the data.

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 TiM

Power Build

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus

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

FAQ

Benchmark Performance

Who Should Build It

Balance and Bottleneck

Gaming Performance

GPU Analysis

Build Overview

Usage Scenarios

Upgrade Path and Platform

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