SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus + NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000

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

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
96%
VS
GPU
90%
PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus

66,159 Benchmark Score
Top 4% Market Ranking
View Full Specs →
GRAPHICS CARD

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000

17,789 Benchmark Score
Top 10% 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

Balance and Bottleneck

The pairing of an Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus with an NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 presents a distinctly imbalanced system, but not in the direction one might initially assume. The CPU sits in the 93rd percentile among all processors, while the GPU lands in the 61st percentile among all graphics cards. This 32-percentile gap indicates that the graphics card is the primary limiting factor for most performance-intensive workloads, particularly in gaming and GPU-accelerated rendering tasks where the Quadro RTX 4000's mid-pack standing will cap frame rates and compute throughput well before the 18-core processor reaches its limits.

Benchmark data supports this assessment clearly. The CPU's Cinebench R23 multicore score of 42,718 places it within 0.1% of the Intel Core 9 273PQE (66,099 average benchmark score versus 66,159 for the Ultra 5) and within 0.4% of the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D. Such proximity to flagship-tier processors confirms that the CPU is operating in an entirely different performance class than the GPU, which sits just 0.7% above the AMD Radeon HD 7790 and 0.9% above the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 in average benchmark scores. When the processor can outpace its nearest rivals by negligible margins while the GPU merely trades blows with mid-range parts from several generations ago, the bottleneck is unambiguous.

The PassMark multithread score of 50,146 further illustrates the CPU's headroom. This score represents substantial parallel processing capability that a GPU with 7.119 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput and a 160 W TDP cannot fully utilize in most real-world scenarios. In CPU-bound workloads such as data compression (553,155 in PassMark), integer math (123,030), and floating-point math (159,824), the processor will deliver exceptional results. Conversely, in GPU-bound tasks like DirectX 12 rendering (PassMark score of 52), the graphics card becomes the constraining factor, and even a significantly weaker CPU would produce similar frame rates.

Interestingly, the bottleneck shifts depending on workload type. For single-threaded applications, the CPU's PassMark single-thread score of 4,698 and Cinebench R23 single-core score of 6,030 are strong, but the GPU's PassMark G3D score of 15,117 still represents the weaker link for interactive graphics. For compute-heavy professional tasks, the GPU's 36 RT cores and 288 tensor cores provide specialized acceleration, yet the raw FP32 throughput of 7.119 TFLOPS limits peak compute performance to levels that the CPU's 18 cores can rival in certain parallel workloads. The system is best understood as a high-end CPU paired with a mid-range professional GPU, with the GPU dictating performance ceilings in graphics and the CPU providing massive reserves for non-graphics tasks.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus uses the Intel Socket 1851 platform, which supports DDR5 memory over a dual-channel interface with a memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. The platform also provides PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU, ensuring ample bandwidth for current and next-generation storage and expansion cards. ECC memory support is included, which is a notable feature for workstation builds where data integrity is paramount. The CPU's 125 W TDP is modest for an 18-core processor, and the system's suggested power supply is 450 W based on the GPU's requirements, leaving considerable headroom for future upgrades.

The GPU, NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000, connects via PCIe 3.0 x16 and draws up to 160 W through a single 8-pin power connector. While PCIe 3.0 is an older standard, the bandwidth available is sufficient for this GPU's 416.0 GB/s memory bandwidth. However, the platform's PCIe Gen 5 support means that a future GPU upgrade could take full advantage of newer bus standards. The Quadro RTX 4000 is end-of-life, with its successor being Workstation Ampere, so users planning to keep this system for several years should consider that the GPU will eventually become the first component needing replacement.

A sensible next upgrade would involve replacing the Quadro RTX 4000 with a more modern GPU. The CPU's 93rd percentile standing and 18 cores with 18 threads provide enough processing power to support a significantly faster graphics card without introducing a CPU bottleneck. The 450 W suggested PSU may need to be revisited depending on the replacement GPU's power requirements, but the platform itself—Socket 1851, DDR5, PCIe Gen 5—is future-ready. The CPU's unlocked multiplier also allows overclocking to extend its useful lifespan, though the base clock of 4.20 GHz and boost clock of 5.30 GHz already deliver strong out-of-box performance.

For users building fresh, the platform supports current DDR5 memory standards, and the 20 PCIe Gen 5 lanes from the CPU allow for high-speed NVMe storage and other expansion cards. The lack of integrated graphics on this CPU (marked as N/A) means a discrete GPU is mandatory, which this build already includes. The memory bus is dual-channel, so populating two DIMM slots is recommended to achieve the full 115.2 GB/s bandwidth. Overall, the upgrade path is clear: the CPU and platform are future-proof, while the GPU is the component that will likely need attention first.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus is a desktop processor from the Core Ultra Series 2, built on Arrow Lake Refresh architecture using a 3 nm process from TSMC. It houses 18 cores and 18 threads—notably without hyperthreading—with a base clock of 4.20 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. The chip contains 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die, with a cache hierarchy of 192 KB L1 per core, 3 MB L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3 cache. This is a substantial amount of cache, which benefits workloads with large working sets.

The benchmark results paint a picture of a processor that excels in both single-threaded and multi-threaded tasks. In Cinebench R23, the multicore score of 42,718 and single-core score of 6,030 are both strong figures. The R20 scores of 17,941 (multicore) and 2,532 (single-core) follow the expected scaling pattern. PassMark results show a multithread score of 50,146, which is 93rd percentile among all CPUs, placing it in the top 7% of processors tested. The nearest rival, the Intel Core 9 273PQE, has an average score of 66,099—just 0.1% behind this chip's 66,159 average—while the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D at 65,914 sits 0.4% behind. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus and AMD EPYC 4465P are 1% and 1.1% ahead, respectively, indicating that this CPU is firmly in the upper echelon of desktop processors.

For real workloads, these numbers translate to exceptional performance in CPU-intensive applications. The PassMark data compression score of 553,155 and floating-point math score of 159,824 suggest strong capabilities in scientific computing and data processing. Integer math at 123,030 and extended instructions at 42,880 further confirm the chip's versatility. The find prime numbers score of 452 is lower, but this is a niche workload that does not reflect typical usage. The physics score of 3,183 indicates solid performance in physics simulations, which benefits gaming and engineering applications.

The processor's 18 threads, while not matching the thread counts of 24-thread or 32-thread competitors, are more than sufficient for most desktop workloads. The high boost clock of 5.30 GHz ensures responsive single-threaded performance, which remains critical for many legacy applications and games that do not scale well across cores. The 3 nm process node from TSMC contributes to efficiency, though the 125 W TDP is not exceptionally low for a desktop chip—it reflects the performance class this processor occupies. The launch MSRP is $184, and the unlocked multiplier allows enthusiasts to push clocks higher, though the stock performance is already strong.

Who Should Build It

This system targets users who need substantial CPU horsepower but can accept mid-range GPU performance. The 93rd percentile CPU ranking makes it an excellent choice for professionals who run CPU-bound workloads such as software compilation, data analysis, financial modeling, and scientific simulations. The 18 cores and 18 threads, combined with 30 MB of L3 cache, provide the parallel throughput needed for these tasks, and the ECC memory support is a significant draw for workstation users who require data integrity.

Content creators working with video encoding, 3D rendering, and large batch processing will benefit from the CPU's multicore strength. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 42,718 indicates that CPU-based rendering in applications like Blender or V-Ray will complete quickly. However, GPU-accelerated rendering in these same applications will be limited by the Quadro RTX 4000's 7.119 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, so creators who rely heavily on GPU rendering may need to consider a more powerful graphics card.

Software developers and students in computer science will find this build well-suited for compiling large codebases, running virtual machines, and executing parallel algorithms. The PassMark multithread score of 50,146 and data encryption score of 41,292 support these use cases. Small business workstations that run databases, ERP systems, or other back-office applications will also benefit from the CPU's throughput, while the Quadro RTX 4000 provides workstation-class graphics drivers and reliability.

Gamers at 1080p or 1440p resolution will experience solid frame rates, though the GPU's 61st percentile ranking means it will not max out high-refresh-rate monitors in demanding titles. The CPU's single-thread performance (6,030 in Cinebench R23 single-core) ensures that frame pacing and minimum frame rates will be strong, but the GPU will cap maximum FPS in most games. Users who prioritize gaming above all else should consider a more powerful GPU, while those who need a balance of CPU throughput and professional graphics features may find this combination acceptable.

FAQ

Q: What is the CPU's performance percentile compared to all other processors?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus is in the 93rd percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 66,159.

Q: How does the GPU compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 has an average benchmark score of 17,789, placing it 0.7% above the AMD Radeon HD 7790, 0.9% above the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060, 1.1% above the AMD Radeon 780M, and 1.4% above the AMD Radeon Pro 560. It ranks in the 61st percentile among all GPUs.

Q: What memory and expansion support does the platform offer?

A: The CPU supports DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus with 115.2 GB/s bandwidth, ECC memory is supported, and the platform provides 20 PCIe Gen 5 lanes from the CPU.

Q: Is the CPU overclockable?

A: Yes, the multiplier is unlocked, allowing overclocking. The base clock is 4.20 GHz and the boost clock is 5.30 GHz.

Q: What power supply is recommended for this system?

A: The suggested PSU for the GPU is 450 W. The CPU has a 125 W TDP and the GPU has a 160 W TDP.

Q: What is the GPU's memory configuration?

A: The Quadro RTX 4000 has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus with 416.0 GB/s bandwidth and a memory clock of 1625 MHz (13 Gbps effective).

Q: Does the CPU have integrated graphics?

A: No, the integrated graphics is marked as N/A, so a discrete GPU is required for display output.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: The CPU's single-thread score of 6,030 in Cinebench R23 and PassMark single-thread score of 4,698 provide excellent frame pacing, but the GPU's 61st percentile ranking and DirectX 12 score of 52 limit maximum FPS. At 1080p, competitive titles will run smoothly, but achieving 144+ FPS in demanding AAA games will require lower settings.

Streaming: The 18 cores and 18 threads provide ample headroom for software encoding while gaming. The PassMark multithread score of 50,146 ensures that simultaneous game and encode workloads will not overwhelm the CPU, though the GPU's video encoder capabilities are not specified in the data.

Video editing: CPU-based timeline operations and effect processing will be fast, thanks to the Cinebench R23 multicore score of 42,718. The GPU's 8 GB VRAM and 416.0 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient for 1080p and some 4K editing in Premiere Pro or DaVinci Resolve, though heavy GPU effects will be limited by 7.119 TFLOPS of FP32 performance.

3D rendering: CPU rendering in Blender or V-Ray will be strong due to the multicore performance. GPU rendering will be slower, as the Quadro RTX 4000's PassMark GPU compute score of 6,176 is modest by current standards, and its 36 RT cores are of the Turing generation.

Software development: Compilation times will be short with the multicore throughput. The PassMark integer math score of 123,030 and data compression score of 553,155 indicate strong performance in code compilation and build tools. The ECC memory support adds reliability for long-running builds.

Student and office work: This system is overkill for typical productivity tasks, but the headroom ensures no slowdowns in spreadsheet, document, or web-based workflows. The CPU's 93rd percentile ranking means it will remain responsive for years, though the GPU's 61st percentile is less future-proof for graphics-intensive applications.

GPU Analysis

The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 is a workstation-class GPU based on the Turing architecture, built on a 12 nm process from TSMC with 13,600 million transistors on a 545 mm² die. It features 2,304 shading units, 144 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs, along with 36 RT cores and 288 tensor cores. The GPU operates at a base clock of 1005 MHz with a boost clock of 1545 MHz, and its 8 GB of GDDR6 memory runs at 1625 MHz (13 Gbps effective) across a 256-bit bus, delivering 416.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth.

The benchmark results show a GPU that performs competently in professional workloads but is not competitive with modern gaming GPUs. The PassMark G3D score of 15,117 places it in the 61st percentile, with its nearest rival being the AMD Radeon HD 7790 (0.7% higher) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 (0.9% higher). The Geekbench OpenCL score of 74,540 and Vulkan score of 78,844 indicate decent compute capabilities, but the DirectX 12 score of 52 in PassMark is low, reflecting the GPU's age and architecture.

For rendering workloads, the GPU's 7.119 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 14.24 TFLOPS of FP16 (2:1) provide moderate compute throughput. The 36 RT cores and 288 tensor cores enable hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI inference, though these are first-generation implementations compared to newer architectures. The pixel rate of 98.88 GPixel/s and texture rate of 222.5 GTexel/s are sufficient for professional 3D viewport work at moderate resolutions.

The GPU's 160 W TDP and single-slot design make it a practical choice for workstations where space and power are constrained. The 3x DisplayPort 1.4a and 1x USB Type-C outputs support multi-monitor setups, and the PCIe 3.0 x16 interface is adequate for this GPU's bandwidth needs. However, the GPU is end-of-life, with its successor being Workstation Ampere, so users should be aware that driver support and performance will not improve over time. The launch MSRP was 899 USD, but current pricing is not included in the data.

Build Overview

This is a desktop build that pairs a top-tier 18-core processor with a mid-range professional workstation GPU. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus is in the 93rd percentile among all CPUs, while the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 sits in the 61st percentile among all GPUs. The combined percentile for this pairing is 77, reflecting the CPU's dominance in the overall performance profile.

The system occupies a hybrid position: it offers flagship-level CPU performance for compute-heavy tasks, while the GPU provides workstation-class features such as ECC support (via the CPU), certified drivers, and specialized RT and tensor cores, albeit at a performance level that is below current mid-range gaming cards. This is not a balanced gaming rig, nor is it a pure workstation—it is a system that prioritizes processor throughput while maintaining professional graphics capabilities.

Users should understand that the Quadro RTX 4000, while named "RTX," is from the Turing generation and is significantly outperformed by newer NVIDIA cards. The CPU, by contrast, is current-generation and will remain competitive for several years. The build is best suited for users who know their workloads are CPU-bound and who need workstation graphics features without requiring top-tier GPU compute performance.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU's average benchmark score is 66,159, placing it in the 93rd percentile. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core 9 273PQE, scores 66,099 (0.1% behind), while the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D scores 65,914 (0.4% behind). The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus scores 66,855 (1% ahead) and the AMD EPYC 4465P scores 66,925 (1.1% ahead). Key CPU benchmarks include Cinebench R23 multicore at 42,718, single-core at 6,030, and PassMark multithread at 50,146.

The GPU's average benchmark score is 17,789, placing it in the 61st percentile. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon HD 7790 at 17,666 (0.7% ahead), NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 at 17,639 (0.9% ahead), AMD Radeon 780M at 17,588 (1.1% ahead), and AMD Radeon Pro 560 at 17,551 (1.4% ahead). Key GPU benchmarks include PassMark G3D at 15,117, Geekbench OpenCL at 74,540, and Geekbench Vulkan at 78,844.

The combined picture is a system where the CPU outperforms its nearest rivals by margins of 0.1% to 0.4%, while the GPU trades blows with much older or lower-tier parts. The CPU's 93rd percentile versus the GPU's 61st percentile creates a 32-point gap, confirming that the GPU is the performance ceiling for graphics workloads. The combined percentile of 77 reflects this imbalance—the system is stronger than its GPU alone would suggest but weaker than its CPU alone would indicate.

Gaming Performance

No measured FPS data exists for this exact CPU+GPU combination. The FACT PACK contains no measured FPS rows for this pairing, so all frame rate figures discussed here are estimates based on the benchmark scores of each component.

Based on the GPU's PassMark G3D score of 15,117 and DirectX 11 score of 128, this system should handle 1080p gaming at medium to high settings in most titles. The DirectX 12 score of 52 is low, suggesting that newer games using DX12 will see reduced performance. The GPU's 8 GB of VRAM is sufficient for 1080p textures but may be limiting at 1440p with high-resolution texture packs.

The CPU's strong single-thread performance (Cinebench R23 single-core score of 6,030) ensures that CPU-bound scenarios, such as open-world games with many NPCs or physics simulations, will not bottleneck frame rates. However, the GPU's 61st percentile ranking means that maximum frame rates will be capped by graphics processing in GPU-bound scenes. For competitive esports titles at 1080p, frame rates in the 100+ range are plausible given the GPU's PassMark scores, though the DirectX 9 score of 205 suggests older API games will perform better.

At 1440p, the GPU will struggle to maintain high frame rates in demanding titles, and the 416.0 GB/s memory bandwidth may become a limiting factor for high-resolution textures. Ray tracing performance will be poor due to the Turing-generation RT cores, which are significantly slower than newer implementations. Users seeking high-refresh gaming should look to more powerful GPUs, while those prioritizing CPU-heavy workloads with occasional gaming will find this system adequate.