SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 5 336H + AMD Radeon 760M

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

87 / 100
HIGH-END

Power Build

Top 13% of systems. Excellent for 1440p Ultra or 4K High gaming.

1440p Ultra4K High

System Balance Analysis

CPU vs GPU performance ratio
Well Balanced
CPU
91%
VS
GPU
83%
PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 5 336H

34,485 Benchmark Score
Top 9% Market Ranking
View Full Specs →
GRAPHICS CARD

AMD Radeon 760M

6,019 Benchmark Score
Top 17% 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.

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 336H and AMD Radeon 760M pairing represents a mobile-focused configuration where the CPU is clearly the dominant component. The processor sits at the 84th percentile among all CPUs, while the integrated GPU rests at just the 35th percentile among all GPUs. This 49-point gap in percentile placement establishes a fundamental balance issue: the CPU can feed far more graphical work than the iGPU can render, making the GPU the primary constraint in graphics-heavy tasks. The combined percentile for this build is 60, reflecting a system that is solidly mid-pack overall but heavily skewed toward processor performance.

Balance and Bottleneck

The benchmark data reveals a pronounced imbalance between the two components. The CPU’s average benchmark score is 34485, placing it within 0.8% of the AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 and 0.7% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 7 3700X. In contrast, the GPU’s average score of 6019 places it just 0.3% behind the AMD Radeon RX 6400 and 0.5% behind the NVIDIA Quadro P2000. This means the CPU is competing with desktop-class processors from a few generations ago, while the GPU is competing with entry-level discrete cards and older mobile parts.

The bottleneck manifests clearly in workload distribution. In CPU-bound tasks such as PassMark multi-thread scoring, the processor achieves 28545 points, demonstrating strong parallel throughput. The PassMark data compression score of 280340 and integer math score of 62070 further confirm the CPU’s capability in compute-heavy scenarios. However, the GPU’s PassMark G3D score of 5310 and 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 400 indicate that any workload relying on rasterization will be severely constrained by the graphics subsystem.

For gaming, the imbalance means frame rates will be dictated almost entirely by the GPU. The CPU’s Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 23991 suggests it can handle modern game logic, physics, and AI calculations without becoming the limiting factor. But the GPU’s FP32 throughput of 5.323 TFLOPS and pixel rate of 41.58 GPixel/s cap the final output. The PassMark DirectX 12 score of 25, compared to DirectX 11’s 52, also hints that the GPU is better suited to older APIs, which is relevant for game compatibility.

In productivity applications, the balance shifts. Tasks like video encoding, software compilation, and data processing rely almost entirely on CPU performance. Here, the Core Ultra 5 336H excels, with a Cinebench R20 multi-core score of 10076 and PassMark floating point math score of 82415. The GPU’s role in these tasks is minimal, so the imbalance does not hinder performance. The conclusion from the data is clear: this is a CPU-first system where the GPU is adequate for light rendering but will bottleneck any serious graphical workload.

GPU Analysis

The AMD Radeon 760M is an integrated graphics processor built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture, manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The chip contains 25,390 million transistors on a 178 mm² die, with a transistor density of 142.6 million per square millimeter. The GPU operates with a base clock of 800 MHz and a boost clock of 2599 MHz, drawing a TDP of just 15 W. Memory is system-shared, with bandwidth listed as system dependent, meaning performance scales with the host system’s DDR5 or LPDDR5X memory configuration.

The GPU’s compute resources are modest: 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 render output units. It includes 8 ray tracing cores, providing hardware acceleration for RT workloads, though the raw compute power limits practical RT performance. The FP32 throughput is 5.323 TFLOPS, with FP16 at the same 5.323 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio), indicating no dedicated FP16 acceleration. Texture rate is 83.17 GTexel/s, and pixel rate is 41.58 GPixel/s.

Benchmark results place this GPU firmly in entry-level territory. The PassMark G3D score of 5310 is 0.3% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6400 and 0.3% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M. The Geekbench Vulkan score of 30336 and OpenCL score of 20255 show reasonable compute capability for an iGPU. However, the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 400 is low, reflecting limited modern-game performance. The DirectX 12 PassMark score of 25 versus DirectX 11’s 52 suggests the GPU handles legacy APIs better, which may be due to driver maturity or architectural design.

For rendering workloads, the GPU offers 8 RT cores but lacks the raw horsepower to make ray tracing practical at playable frame rates in modern titles. The texture rate of 83.17 GTexel/s is sufficient for 1080p gaming at medium settings in older titles, but the low ROPS count of 16 limits fill-rate-heavy scenes. The GPU’s bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x8, which is adequate for an integrated solution sharing system memory. The PassMark GPU compute score of 2840 indicates modest general-purpose compute performance, useful for light acceleration in video encoding or image processing but not for heavy GPU compute tasks.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: The GPU’s performance dictates that high-refresh gaming is only achievable in esports titles or older games. The PassMark DirectX 11 score of 52 and G3D score of 5310 suggest that 1080p at low-to-medium settings is the realistic ceiling. The CPU’s strong single-thread performance, evidenced by a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3387, ensures that frame pacing will be consistent, but the GPU will cap frame rates well below 144 Hz in most scenarios.

Streaming: The CPU’s 16 cores and 16 threads provide ample headroom for software encoding while gaming. The PassMark multi-thread score of 28545 and Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 23991 indicate that the processor can handle the combined load of game logic and encoding. However, the GPU’s limited performance means streamed gameplay will be at lower quality settings, and hardware encoding via the iGPU is not a strong option given its compute score.

Video editing: The CPU excels here, with a PassMark data compression score of 280340 and integer math score of 62070. These translate to fast timeline scrubbing, effect application, and export times in editors that leverage CPU multithreading. The GPU can assist with effects that use OpenCL, given the 20255 Geekbench OpenCL score, but heavy GPU-accelerated rendering will be slow.

3D rendering: CPU-based renderers will perform well, with the Cinebench R15 multi-core score of 2418 and R20 score of 10076 demonstrating strong throughput. GPU-based renderers will be limited by the 5.323 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is roughly on par with a low-end discrete GPU from several years ago. The 8 RT cores offer some acceleration, but the overall render times will be long for complex scenes.

Software development: The CPU’s 16 threads and strong multi-core scores make compilation fast. The PassMark data encryption score of 21291 and extended instructions score of 24542 indicate solid cryptographic and SIMD performance, useful for build tools and code analysis. The GPU is irrelevant for most development workflows, so the imbalance is not a concern.

Student and office work: This is the sweet spot for this build. The CPU’s single-thread score of 4013 on PassMark and 3387 on Cinebench R23 ensure snappy application launches and responsive multitasking. The GPU’s G2D score of 890 and G3D score of 5310 are sufficient for web browsing, document editing, and video playback. The low TDP of 15 W for the GPU and 25 W for the CPU also suggests long battery life, though the data does not provide specific battery figures.

Who Should Build It

This configuration targets users who prioritize CPU performance over graphics. Gamers playing at 1080p with medium settings in older or less demanding titles will find acceptable performance, but those seeking high-refresh or maxed-out visuals should look elsewhere. The GPU’s 35th percentile ranking means it is not suitable for modern AAA gaming at high settings.

Content creators focused on CPU-bound workflows—video editing with software codecs, 3D rendering with CPU engines, or data processing—will benefit from the processor’s 84th percentile standing. The 16 cores and 16 threads provide strong multi-threaded performance for these tasks. Developers compiling large codebases will appreciate the multi-core speed, while the single-thread performance ensures responsive IDEs.

Students and professionals in office environments will find this build more than adequate. The CPU handles multitasking with ease, and the GPU supports basic visual tasks. Small business workstations running productivity suites, accounting software, or database applications will perform well, as these workloads are CPU-intensive. The build’s laptop class means it is portable, making it suitable for users who need performance on the go.

The combined percentile of 60 indicates this is not a top-tier system, but it is above average. Users who occasionally game but primarily work will find the balance acceptable. Those who need GPU acceleration for machine learning or high-end 3D work should consider a system with a discrete GPU.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H is a 16-core, 16-thread processor based on the Panther Lake architecture, built on Intel’s 3 nm process. It belongs to the Core Ultra Series 3 and is designed for mobile platforms, using the Intel BGA 2540 socket. The base clock is 1.90 GHz with a boost clock of 4.60 GHz, and the TDP is rated at 25 W, indicating efficient power consumption for a 16-core part.

The cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. This configuration provides ample fast memory for workloads that exhibit spatial and temporal locality. The memory support includes DDR5 and LPDDR5X, with a dual-channel bus and a memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. ECC memory is not supported, which may matter for certain workstation users.

Benchmark results show strong multi-core performance. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 23991 places the CPU 0.4% ahead of the Intel Core i5-13450HX and 0.8% ahead of the AMD Ryzen AI 7 350. The Cinebench R20 multi-core score of 10076 and R15 multi-core score of 2418 reinforce this positioning. The PassMark multi-thread score of 28545 and floating point math score of 82415 indicate robust computational throughput.

Single-thread performance is equally impressive, with a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3387 and PassMark single-thread score of 4013. This is critical for applications that rely on single-core speed, such as legacy software or lightly threaded games. The PassMark find prime numbers score of 299 is relatively low, but this test often favors different architectures and does not represent typical workloads.

The CPU includes integrated Intel Xe3 Graphics, though the system in question pairs it with the AMD Radeon 760M, suggesting the discrete iGPU is disabled or used in a hybrid configuration. The PCIe support is Gen 5 with 12 lanes from the CPU, providing high-bandwidth connectivity for storage and other peripherals. The processor’s market segment is mobile, and it is currently in active production, with a release date of January 4, 2026.

The PassMark data encryption score of 21291 and extended instructions score of 24542 highlight strong SIMD and cryptographic capabilities, beneficial for workloads like file compression, encryption, and scientific computing. The random string sorting score of 34402 indicates good memory access patterns for sorting algorithms. Overall, the CPU is a capable mobile processor that competes with desktop-class parts from previous generations.

Gaming Performance

No measured FPS data exists for this exact CPU-GPU combination, as the FACT PACK contains no measured FPS rows. All gaming performance figures discussed here are estimates derived from the benchmark scores. The GPU’s PassMark G3D score of 5310 and DirectX 11 score of 52 suggest that 1080p gaming is feasible at low-to-medium settings in titles released before 2020. The DirectX 12 score of 25 is notably lower, indicating that newer games using DX12 may struggle even at low settings.

The CPU’s strong single-thread performance, with a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3387, ensures that the processor will not bottleneck the GPU in most scenarios. However, the GPU’s 5.323 TFLOPS FP32 throughput and 16 ROPS limit fill-rate and pixel processing. For esports titles like Counter-Strike or League of Legends, frame rates could approach 60-100 FPS at 1080p with low settings, based on the G3D score relative to the RX 6400. For AAA titles, the 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 400 suggests sub-30 FPS at 1080p even at low settings.

The GPU’s 8 RT cores are present but practically useless for gaming, as the raw compute power cannot support ray tracing at playable frame rates. The system-shared memory means performance also depends on the memory speed and capacity configured in the laptop, which is not specified in the data. Users should expect this build to handle older games, indie titles, and esports, but not modern AAA releases at acceptable quality.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU’s average benchmark score is 34485, placing it at the 84th percentile among all CPUs. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core i7-13700HX, scores 34554, a delta of -0.2%, meaning the Ultra 5 336H is essentially tied with that part. The Intel Core i5-13450HX scores 34333, with the Ultra 5 336H 0.4% ahead. The AMD Ryzen 7 3700X scores 34260, with the Ultra 5 336H 0.7% ahead. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 scores 34222, with the Ultra 5 336H 0.8% ahead. This places the CPU in the company of desktop-class parts from the AM4 and LGA1700 platforms.

The GPU’s average benchmark score is 6019, placing it at the 35th percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 6400, scores 6001, with the 760M 0.3% ahead. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M scores 6000, with the 760M 0.3% ahead. The NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server scores 5996, with the 760M 0.4% ahead. The NVIDIA Quadro P2000 scores 6049, with the 760M 0.5% behind. This shows the GPU is clustered tightly with entry-level discrete cards from several generations ago.

The combined picture is a system where the CPU is a high performer relative to its peers, while the GPU is a low performer. The combined percentile of 60 reflects this duality. In CPU-only benchmarks, this build will compete with systems using desktop i7 or Ryzen 7 processors from a few years ago. In GPU-only benchmarks, it will compete with budget laptops from several years ago. This makes the build suitable for compute-heavy tasks but poor for graphics-intensive ones.

FAQ

Q: What is the CPU’s performance relative to the Intel Core i7-13700HX?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H has an average benchmark score of 34485, which is 0.2% lower than the Core i7-13700HX’s score of 34554. This makes them statistically equivalent in overall performance.

Q: How does the GPU compare to the AMD Radeon RX 6400?

A: The AMD Radeon 760M has an average benchmark score of 6019, which is 0.3% higher than the RX 6400’s score of 6001. The 760M is effectively on par with this entry-level discrete GPU.

Q: Can this system handle modern AAA games?

A: The GPU’s 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 400 and PassMark DirectX 12 score of 25 indicate that modern AAA games will not run at playable frame rates. The GPU is better suited to older titles or low-demand esports games.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of the CPU?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H supports dual-channel DDR5 or LPDDR5X memory with a bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. The GPU shares this system memory, so its effective bandwidth is system dependent.

Q: Does the GPU support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the AMD Radeon 760M includes 8 ray tracing cores. However, the FP32 throughput of 5.323 TFLOPS is too low for practical ray tracing in modern games at acceptable performance levels.

Q: How does the CPU perform in single-threaded tasks?

A: The CPU achieves a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3387 and a PassMark single-thread score of 4013, indicating strong single-thread performance that is competitive with desktop processors.

Q: What is the TDP of the GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon 760M has a TDP of 15 W, making it a low-power integrated solution. The CPU’s TDP is 25 W, so the combined thermal load is relatively modest for a laptop.

Build Overview

This build pairs the Intel Core Ultra 5 336H, a 16-core mobile processor built on Panther Lake architecture, with the AMD Radeon 760M, an integrated GPU based on RDNA 3.0. The build class is laptop, indicating this is a mobile platform intended for portable use. The CPU is a high-end mobile part, ranking at the 84th percentile among all CPUs, while the GPU is a low-end integrated solution, ranking at the 35th percentile among all GPUs.

The combined percentile of 60 places this system in the upper-middle range of all builds. The CPU’s performance is comparable to desktop processors like the AMD Ryzen 7 3700X, while the GPU’s performance is comparable to entry-level discrete cards like the AMD Radeon RX 6400. This creates a system that excels at CPU-intensive tasks but is limited in graphics performance.

The CPU’s 16 threads and 18 MB of L3 cache make it suitable for multi-threaded workloads such as video encoding, 3D rendering (CPU-based), and software compilation. The GPU’s 512 shading units and 5.323 TFLOPS FP32 performance are adequate for light gaming and basic graphical tasks. The system is not designed for high-end gaming or GPU-accelerated compute, but rather for users who need strong processor performance in a portable form factor.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H uses the Intel BGA 2540 socket, which is a soldered mobile platform. This means the CPU is not upgradeable in the traditional sense; users cannot swap it for a different processor. The system memory support includes DDR5 and LPDDR5X, with a dual-channel bus and 115.2 GB/s bandwidth. The GPU is integrated, so there is no discrete GPU upgrade path within the same platform.

The CPU provides PCIe Gen 5 with 12 lanes, which can be used for high-speed storage such as NVMe SSDs. The GPU uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, which is sufficient for its bandwidth needs. The TDP of the CPU is 25 W, and the GPU is 15 W, so the total system power draw is modest. There is no suggested PSU for this build, as it is a laptop with a fixed power delivery system.

A sensible next upgrade for this platform would be to max out the system memory, as the GPU’s performance is system dependent on memory bandwidth. Upgrading to faster LPDDR5X could improve GPU performance, though the data does not specify exact speed benefits. For storage, adding a Gen 5 NVMe SSD would take advantage of the CPU’s PCIe lanes. However, since this is a laptop, the upgrade path is limited to memory and storage. Users seeking more graphics performance would need to move to a different platform with a discrete GPU.