SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 5 336H + NVIDIA RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation

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

Well Balanced

CPU

91%

GPU

80%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 5 336H

34,485 Benchmark Score

Top 9% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

NVIDIA RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation

3,596 Benchmark Score

Top 20% 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

# CPU Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H sits in the Core Ultra Series 3 family, built on the Panther Lake architecture at a 3 nm process node. It is a 16-core, 16-thread mobile processor with a base clock of 1.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. The core configuration is notable for its 1:1 thread-to-core ratio, meaning there is no hyperthreading-style overlap; each physical core handles exactly one thread. This design choice can simplify scheduling in some workloads while placing greater emphasis on raw core count and clock speed for multithreaded throughput.

The cache hierarchy is substantial for a mobile part: 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The L3 allocation is particularly interesting — 18 MB shared across 16 cores provides a decent pool for frequently accessed data, though it is not class-leading. Memory support includes DDR5 and LPDDR5X across a dual-channel bus, yielding a memory bandwidth figure of 115.2 GB/s. For a processor with a 25 W TDP, this bandwidth is sufficient to feed 16 cores without severe starvation, though heavy memory-bound workloads will still feel the constraint of dual-channel rather than quad-channel access.

The CPU's benchmark scores tell a story of a well-rounded mobile workhorse. In Cinebench R23, the multi-core score of 23991 is strong for a 25 W part, while the single-core score of 3387 points to efficient per-thread performance. The R20 numbers — 10076 multi-core and 1422 single-core — follow the expected scaling pattern, and R15 scores of 2418 multi-core and 341 single-core round out the picture. These figures suggest that the 336H can sustain meaningful all-core loads without thermal throttling becoming a dominant factor, likely because the 3 nm process keeps power density manageable.

PassMark results add another dimension. The multi-thread score of 28545 and single-thread score of 4013 indicate balanced performance across both heavily parallel and lightly threaded tasks. Data compression scores 280340, which is a very strong result for a mobile CPU and suggests excellent throughput for archiving, backup, and database-style workloads. Data encryption at 21291 is comparatively modest, hinting that cryptographic operations are not this chip's primary strength. Extended instructions score 24542, showing solid SIMD capability for media processing and scientific computing. Integer math at 62070 and floating-point math at 82415 reveal that FP-heavy workloads benefit more from this architecture than integer-bound tasks. Find prime numbers scores just 299, which is low and indicates that certain niche computational patterns do not map well to this core layout. Random string sorting at 34402 and physics at 2682 complete the PassMark suite, with the physics score being notably low and suggesting that the CPU may not be the best choice for real-time physics simulations in gaming or engineering contexts.

The average benchmark score of 34485 places this CPU in the 84th percentile of all CPUs, which is a strong showing for a mobile processor. The nearest rivals are instructive: the Intel Core i7-13700HX scores 34554, a mere 0.2% higher, meaning the 336H effectively trades blows with a previous-generation HX-series chip. The Intel Core i5-13450HX sits 0.4% behind, and the AMD Ryzen 7 3700X — a desktop part — is 0.7% behind. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 trails by 0.8%. This clustering within a 1% band suggests that the 336H is positioned at a performance level where small silicon lottery variations or thermal differences between laptop chassis could flip the ranking order. For real workloads, this means the 336H is competitive with a range of desktop-class CPUs from a few generations ago, which is impressive given its mobile form factor and modest TDP.

# Benchmark Performance

The combined benchmark picture for this build is dominated by a striking asymmetry. The CPU performs admirably, sitting in the 84th percentile of all CPUs with an average score of 34485. The GPU, however, tells a very different story. The NVIDIA RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation scores just 3596 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, placing it in only the 21st percentile of all GPUs. This is a massive gap in relative standing — the CPU is near the top quartile of all processors, while the GPU is in the bottom quartile.

The GPU's nearest rivals in the benchmark database underscore how unusual this pairing is. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 545 scores 3594, a 0.1% difference. The GeForce GT 735M scores 3616 (0.6% higher), the GeForce GTX 1050 scores 3629 (0.9% higher), and the AMD Radeon HD 6770 scores 3649 (1.5% higher). These are all older, entry-level or mid-range GPUs from previous generations. The RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation is being benchmarked alongside hardware from a completely different era, and it is losing to all but one of them. This does not mean the RTX 5000 is a weak GPU in absolute terms — it has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory and a 256-bit bus — but the single 3DMark Steel Nomad score suggests that its DX12 rendering performance is far below what the name "RTX 5000" might imply.

The combined percentile for this CPU+GPU pairing is 53%, which places it almost exactly in the middle of all builds. This is a fascinating result because it shows that the strong CPU is dragged down by the weak GPU to the point where the overall system sits at the median. The data implies that if the GPU were swapped for something more capable, the combined percentile would rise significantly, but as configured, the build is hamstrung by its graphics component.

For real workloads, this means the system will excel at CPU-bound tasks like compilation, spreadsheet calculations, and multi-threaded productivity applications, but it will struggle with GPU-accelerated tasks like 3D rendering, video encoding with hardware acceleration, and modern gaming at high settings. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 23991 suggests the CPU can handle sustained heavy loads, while the 3DMark score indicates that any workload which offloads to the GPU will see frame rates or render times comparable to a GTX 1050-class experience.

# Balance and Bottleneck

The bottleneck analysis here is unambiguous. The GPU is the limiting factor in any workload that uses it, while the CPU has substantial headroom. Evidence for this comes from the percentile gap: the CPU's 84th percentile versus the GPU's 21st percentile is a 63-point spread, which is extreme. In practical terms, the CPU could drive a much more powerful GPU without becoming the constraint.

The FPS scaling picture, while not measured for this exact combination, can be inferred from the benchmark scores. The GPU's 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 3596 is in the same range as the GTX 1050 (3629) and GT 735M (3616). These GPUs are historically associated with 1080p gaming at medium-to-low settings in modern titles, and sometimes struggling at 1440p. The CPU, meanwhile, with its single-core score of 4013 in PassMark and Cinebench R23 single-core of 3387, is more than capable of feeding frames to a much faster GPU. This means that in gaming scenarios, the GPU will be pegged at maximum utilization while the CPU idles at a fraction of its capacity. The system will exhibit classic GPU-bound behavior: lower resolutions will not yield proportionally higher frame rates because the GPU is already saturated.

For productivity, the bottleneck reverses. In CPU-only workloads like data compression (280340) or floating-point math (82415), the GPU is irrelevant, and the CPU performs at its 84th percentile level. In GPU-accelerated tasks like video encoding using NVENC or 3D rendering in GPU-based renderers, the weak GPU becomes the constraint, and the CPU's strength cannot compensate. The system is thus a tale of two machines: a fast CPU workstation that happens to have a slow GPU attached.

The TDP figures reinforce this imbalance. The CPU has a 25 W TDP, while the GPU has a 120 W TDP. The GPU consumes five times the power of the CPU, yet delivers performance in the 21st percentile. This is a power-inefficient configuration in GPU-bound scenarios — the GPU is drawing significant power for relatively low output. The CPU, by contrast, is delivering top-quartile performance on modest power draw, making it an efficient part of the pairing.

# FAQ

Q: What is the CPU's most impressive benchmark result relative to its power envelope?

A: The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 23991, achieved at a 25 W TDP, places the Intel Core Ultra 5 336H in the 84th percentile of all CPUs, within 0.2% of the Intel Core i7-13700HX which has a much higher power budget.

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

A: The RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation scores 3596 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, which is 0.1% above the GeForce GT 545 (3594), 0.6% below the GeForce GT 735M (3616), 0.9% below the GTX 1050 (3629), and 1.5% below the Radeon HD 6770 (3649).

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the stronger component in this build?

A: The CPU is dramatically stronger, sitting in the 84th percentile of all CPUs, while the GPU sits in only the 21st percentile of all GPUs. The combined percentile for the build is 53%, indicating the GPU drags the overall performance down significantly.

Q: What memory does the CPU support?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory in a dual-channel configuration, with a memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. It does not support ECC memory.

Q: What is the GPU's memory configuration?

A: The RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 576.0 GB/s and memory clock of 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective).

Q: What architecture is the GPU based on?

A: The GPU uses the Ada Lovelace architecture with the AD103 chip, manufactured on a 5 nm process at TSMC, containing 45,900 million transistors on a 379 mm² die.

Q: What is the production status of both components?

A: Both the CPU and GPU are listed as actively in production. The CPU has a release date of 2026-01-04, while the GPU has a release date of 2023-03-20.

# Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: This build is not suitable for high-refresh gaming. The GPU's 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 3596 places it below the GeForce GTX 1050, which means even at 1080p with medium settings, modern titles will struggle to reach high frame rates. The CPU could easily drive a faster GPU, but the GPU will be the hard ceiling. Expect 60 FPS to be a stretch goal in demanding titles, and high-refresh 144 Hz displays will be underutilized.

Streaming: The CPU's strong multi-threaded performance (Cinebench R23 multi-core 23991, PassMark multi-thread 28545) can handle software encoding for streaming while gaming, but the GPU's weak rendering performance means the game itself will run poorly. The 16 cores and 16 threads provide enough headroom for encoding overhead, but the overall experience will be limited by the GPU.

Video editing: This is a mixed scenario. CPU-based effects and timeline operations will benefit from the 84th percentile CPU performance, with data compression at 280340 and floating-point math at 82415 indicating responsive scrubbing and effect processing. However, GPU-accelerated effects, color grading with GPU compute, and hardware encoding will be slow, making export times longer than they would be with a better GPU.

3D rendering: CPU-based renderers will perform well, with the multi-core score of 23991 in Cinebench R23 translating to respectable render times. GPU-based renderers will be severely limited by the RTX 5000 Mobile's 21st percentile performance, making it a poor choice for real-time viewport rendering or GPU-accelerated final renders.

Software development: This is a strong scenario for the CPU. Compilation is heavily multi-threaded and benefits from the 16 cores and 18 MB of L3 cache. The integer math score of 62070 and extended instructions score of 24542 indicate solid throughput for build tools, code analysis, and testing frameworks. The GPU is not a factor in most development workflows.

Student and office work: The CPU's single-thread performance (PassMark single-thread 4013, Cinebench R23 single-core 3387) handles everyday productivity with ease. Spreadsheets, word processors, web browsing, and data analysis will all feel responsive. The GPU's weakness is irrelevant for these tasks, making this build adequate for general office use despite its poor graphics performance.

# GPU Analysis

The NVIDIA RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation is built on the Ada Lovelace architecture using the AD103 chip, manufactured on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It contains 45,900 million transistors on a 379 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 121.1 million per square millimeter. The GPU has 9728 shading units, 304 texture mapping units, and 112 raster output units. It features 76 ray tracing cores and 304 tensor cores, indicating hardware support for both ray tracing and AI-accelerated workloads.

The memory subsystem is substantial: 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 576.0 GB/s and a memory clock of 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective). This is a large memory pool that would typically support high-resolution textures and large datasets. The compute capabilities include 41.15 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16 (at 1:1 ratio), a pixel rate of 236.9 GPixel/s, and a texture rate of 643.0 GTexel/s.

Despite these specifications, the benchmark results are puzzling. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 3596 places this GPU in the 21st percentile of all GPUs, with nearest rivals including the GeForce GT 545 (0.1% higher), GT 735M (0.6% lower), GTX 1050 (0.9% lower), and Radeon HD 6770 (1.5% lower). These are all GPUs from a much older era, and the RTX 5000 Mobile is barely keeping pace with them. This suggests that either the benchmark is not representative of the GPU's capabilities, or the implementation in this mobile form factor is severely constrained.

The GPU's TDP is 120 W, which is high for a mobile part and indicates it has a significant power budget. The bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x16, and it supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The predecessor is Ampere-MW and the successor is Blackwell-MW, confirming its position in the Ada generation. The clock speeds are 1425 MHz base and 2115 MHz boost, which are reasonable for a mobile GPU.

For rendering workloads, the 16 GB of VRAM is a genuine asset — it can hold large scenes and high-resolution textures without spilling to system memory. However, the raw throughput as measured by the benchmark suggests that actually rendering those scenes will be slow. The 41.15 TFLOPS of FP32 compute is respectable on paper, but the benchmark score indicates real-world performance that does not align with the theoretical numbers.

# Who Should Build It

This build targets a narrow set of users who prioritize CPU performance and have minimal GPU demands. The CPU's 84th percentile ranking makes it an excellent choice for software developers who compile large codebases, researchers running CPU-bound simulations, and data analysts processing large datasets. The integer math score of 62070 and data compression score of 280340 indicate strong performance for these workloads.

Content creators who work primarily in CPU-based tools — such as audio production, document processing, or CPU-rendered 3D animation — will find the 16 cores and 25 W TDP appealing for mobile use. The single-thread performance of 4013 in PassMark ensures that interactive applications remain responsive even under multi-threaded load.

Gamers at 1080p with low-to-medium settings will find this build marginally adequate, but only for older or less demanding titles. The GPU's 21st percentile performance means that modern AAA games will require significant settings reductions. Gamers at 1440p or 4K should look elsewhere entirely.

Students and office workers who need a portable system for general productivity will appreciate the CPU's efficiency and the large 16 GB GPU memory for running multiple virtual displays or memory-hungry applications. The GPU's weakness is unlikely to affect typical academic or office workloads.

Small business workstations that handle financial modeling, database management, or software development would benefit from the CPU's multi-threading and the system's overall 53rd percentile combined performance, though they should verify that their specific applications do not rely heavily on GPU acceleration.

# Build Overview

This is a laptop-class build (buildClass: "laptop") pairing the Intel Core Ultra 5 336H with the NVIDIA RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation. The CPU is a 16-core, 16-thread Panther Lake mobile processor with a 25 W TDP, while the GPU is an Ada Lovelace mobile chip with a 120 W TDP and 16 GB of GDDR6 memory. The combined percentile is 53%, placing this system at the median of all builds in the database.

The pairing is unusual because the CPU is a top-quartile performer (84th percentile) while the GPU is a bottom-quartile performer (21st percentile). This creates a system that excels at CPU-bound tasks but underwhelms in GPU-accelerated workloads. The 63-point percentile gap between the two components is a strong indicator of an imbalanced configuration. The system's overall tier, as suggested by the 53rd combined percentile, is mid-range, but this masks the extreme disparity between components. In CPU-heavy applications, the system performs like a high-end machine; in GPU-heavy applications, it performs like a budget machine from several generations ago.

# Upgrade Path and Platform

The CPU uses the Intel BGA 2540 socket, which is a ball-grid array design soldered to the motherboard. This means the CPU is not upgradeable in a traditional sense — it is permanent. The platform supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory in dual-channel configuration, with a maximum bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. The CPU provides PCIe Gen 5 with 12 lanes, which is sufficient for a modern GPU and one or two NVMe drives.

The GPU, with a 120 W TDP, uses a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface and has no power connectors listed, suggesting it draws power through the motherboard or a proprietary connector. The suggested PSU is not listed, but the combined TDP of 145 W (25 W CPU + 120 W GPU) indicates that a modest power supply would suffice for a laptop-class system. Since this is a laptop build, the upgrade path is limited — the GPU is also likely soldered and non-upgradeable.

A sensible next upgrade for this platform would be to increase memory capacity if the laptop supports it, as the dual-channel bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s could become a bottleneck if the memory is not populated to the maximum supported capacity. The 16 GB GPU memory is already generous, so VRAM is not an upgrade concern. The PCIe Gen 5 lanes from the CPU provide future-proofing for storage upgrades, but the overall platform is constrained by its mobile form factor and the inability to swap the GPU.

# Gaming Performance

No measured FPS data exists for this exact CPU+GPU combination. The FACT PACK contains no measuredFpsUltraByGame entries, so all frame rate expectations below are estimates derived from the benchmark scores rather than direct measurements.

Based on the GPU's 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 3596, which is 0.9% below the GeForce GTX 1050 (3629), gaming performance will be comparable to that older mid-range GPU. At 1080p with ultra settings, modern AAA games would be expected to run between 25-40 FPS depending on the title, with esports titles like CS:GO or Valorant potentially reaching 60-80 FPS due to their lighter GPU requirements. The CPU's strong single-thread performance (PassMark 4013, Cinebench R23 single-core 3387) ensures that frame pacing will be consistent, but the GPU will cap maximum frame rates.

At 1440p, the GPU's 16 GB of VRAM is not the limiting factor — the rendering throughput is. Expect frame rates roughly 30% lower than 1080p, which would put most modern titles in the 20-30 FPS range at ultra settings. At 4K, the system would be effectively unplayable for modern games, with frame rates dropping below 15 FPS in demanding titles.

The ray tracing cores (76) are present, but the GPU's baseline performance is so low that enabling ray tracing would cut frame rates by half or more, making it impractical. The tensor cores (304) could enable DLSS if the driver supports it, which would provide a meaningful performance boost, but the base rendering capability remains the constraint. For gamers, this build is best suited to 1080p with medium-to-low settings in older or less demanding titles, and it is not recommended for any high-refresh or high-resolution gaming scenarios.

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 5 336H + NVIDIA RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation

Power Build

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core Ultra 5 336H

NVIDIA RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation

Market Position

Game Performance Benchmarks

Cyberpunk 2077

Red Dead Redemption 2

Microsoft Flight Simulator

Control

Call of Duty: Warzone

Fortnite

Performance Insights

Strong Performance

Performance Tiers Explained

Ultimate

High-End

Mid-Range

Entry Level

Legacy

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