SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX + NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile Refresh

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

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%
VS
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 7 255HX

62,738 Benchmark Score
Top 4% Market Ranking
View Full Specs →
GRAPHICS CARD

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile Refresh

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 7 255HX and NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile Refresh pairing targets a specific niche: a high-core-count mobile CPU paired with a mid-tier professional GPU. The absence of measured FPS data for this combination means all gaming and rendering performance discussions are derived from the individual benchmark scores and percentile rankings. The CPU is a 20-thread Arrow Lake-HX part sitting in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, while the GPU is a Turing-based professional mobile chip at the 50th percentile of all GPUs. This creates a significant performance asymmetry that defines the system’s character.

Usage Scenarios

High-Refresh Gaming: The CPU is the star here, with a single-thread score of 4562 in Passmark and 2163 in Cinebench R23. These numbers indicate the processor can feed frames rapidly, but the GPU’s 5.299 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 6 GB of GDDR6 memory will cap frame rates at 1080p. The data suggests this is not a high-refresh 1440p or 4K machine; the GPU’s 50th percentile standing places it at the median of all GPUs, which aligns with older mid-range performance. Expect playable frame rates at 1080p with competitive settings, but the GPU will bottleneck the CPU in most modern titles before the CPU becomes a limiting factor.

Streaming: The CPU’s 20 cores and 20 threads provide substantial headroom for encoding, with a Passmark multithread score of 48234 and a data encryption score of 39499. The presence of 240 tensor cores and 30 RT cores on the GPU also enables hardware-accelerated encoding and AI-based enhancements. The balanced picture is that the CPU can handle a game and an encoding workload simultaneously without major frame drops, but the GPU’s moderate throughput means the combined load will still be limited by its fill rate. The 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth of the CPU platform helps keep data flowing for concurrent tasks.

Video Editing: The combination of a strong CPU and a professional GPU is well-suited for timeline editing and effects work. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 32612 places the CPU near the AMD Ryzen AI 9 PRO 465, which scores 62498 on the average benchmark, indicating competitive multi-threaded performance. The GPU’s 336.0 GB/s bandwidth and 192-bit bus handle 1080p and some 1440p footage, but the 6 GB VRAM may be a constraint for complex compositions or 4K timelines. The FP16 throughput of 10.60 TFLOPS suggests decent performance for effects that leverage half-precision.

3D Rendering: This is a dual-workload scenario where the CPU excels and the GPU is adequate. The CPU’s Cinebench R15 multicore score of 4916 and R20 score of 17187 demonstrate strong scene-building and physics calculations. The GPU’s RT cores (30) and Tensor cores (240) provide hardware support for ray tracing and denoising, but the 5.299 TFLOPS FP32 rate is modest for final-frame rendering. Render farms or heavy offline rendering will be CPU-bound; the GPU will accelerate viewport previews and interactive rendering more than final output.

Software Development: The 20-core, 20-thread configuration with a 5.20 GHz boost clock is nearly ideal for compilation. The Passmark integer math score of 127126 and extended instructions score of 41247 indicate strong performance in code compilation and data processing tasks. The 30 MB of shared L3 cache and 3 MB per-core L2 cache reduce latency in large codebases. The GPU’s role is minor here, but its Vulkan 1.4 and DirectX 12 Ultimate support ensure compatibility with modern graphics debugging tools.

Student and Office Work: This system is overpowered for typical office tasks, but the data shows it will handle them effortlessly. The Passmark single-thread score of 4562 ensures snappy responsiveness in spreadsheets and document editing. The 55 W TDP of the CPU and 80 W TDP of the GPU suggest this is a power-hungry laptop that will require frequent charging, making it less ideal for all-day portability. The integrated Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU provides a backup for basic display tasks, but the discrete GPU will dominate when active.

Balance and Bottleneck

The data reveals a severe imbalance between the CPU and GPU in this pairing. The CPU ranks in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, while the GPU sits at the 50th percentile of all GPUs. This means the processor is approximately 43 percentile points ahead of the graphics chip in their respective distributions. In gaming, the GPU is the definitive bottleneck: the CPU can generate frames faster than the GPU can render them, leading to GPU-bound scenarios at standard resolutions. The GPU’s 6 GB VRAM and 192-bit bus are the primary constraints, not the CPU’s compute capacity.

For CPU-bound workloads like compilation, data encryption (39499 Passmark score), and prime number finding (400 Passmark score), the CPU is the clear driver. The GPU contributes little to these tasks, and the system’s performance is dictated by the CPU’s 20 threads and high boost clock. In mixed workloads like video editing, the bottleneck shifts depending on the task: the CPU handles decoding and timeline management, while the GPU accelerates effects and render previews. The 102.4 GB/s CPU memory bandwidth is sufficient to feed both components without creating a data starvation issue.

The FPS scaling is estimated here because no measured FPS rows exist for this exact combination. Based on the GPU’s 50th percentile and the CPU’s 93rd percentile, the estimated bottleneck ratio is roughly 2:1 in favor of the CPU. This means in a typical 1080p gaming scenario, the GPU will be at 100% utilization while the CPU sits near 50-60%, confirming that the GPU is the limiting factor in graphics-intensive scenarios.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU’s benchmark scores are consistently strong across all tests. In Cinebench R15, the multicore score is 4916 and single-core is 327. The R20 run shows 17187 multicore and 2426 single-core. The R23 iteration produces 32612 multicore and 2163 single-core. These scores place the CPU in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 62738. The nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185, which scores 62839, a delta of -0.2%, meaning the Intel part is essentially tied with it. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX scores 63173, putting the 255HX 0.7% behind its sibling.

The GPU has no benchmark scores in the FACT PACK, which is unusual. Its percentileVsAllGpus is 50, and its avgBenchmarkScore is 0. This indicates that the GPU’s performance is considered average, but no specific test data is available to quantify it. The combined percentile for the system is 72, which is lower than the CPU’s 93 but higher than the GPU’s 50, reflecting the weighted contribution of both components. The lack of measured FPS data means the gaming performance must be inferred from the GPU’s specs and the CPU’s headroom. The GPU’s FP32 rate of 5.299 TFLOPS and pixel rate of 88.32 GPixel/s suggest it can handle 1080p gaming at medium settings in modern titles, but not high-refresh or high-detail scenarios.

The combined picture is a system with exceptional CPU performance and average GPU performance. This is a classic workstation configuration where the CPU is prioritized for compute-heavy tasks, and the GPU is sufficient for professional graphics but not for high-end gaming or rendering.

FAQ

Q: Is the Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX faster than the AMD Ryzen AI 9 PRO 465?

A: The average benchmark score for the Intel CPU is 62738, while the AMD Ryzen AI 9 PRO 465 scores 62498. This puts the Intel part 0.4% ahead, a negligible difference that places them in the same performance tier.

Q: What is the GPU’s memory bandwidth and how does it affect performance?

A: The Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile Refresh has a memory bandwidth of 336.0 GB/s, provided by 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus. This bandwidth is moderate by modern standards, sufficient for 1080p gaming and professional workloads but potentially limiting for 4K textures or complex 3D scenes.

Q: Does this system support hardware ray tracing?

A: Yes, the GPU has 30 RT cores. However, the overall FP32 throughput of 5.299 TFLOPS is low, so ray tracing performance will be constrained. The CPU’s strong multi-threaded scores do not directly accelerate RT workloads, which are GPU-bound.

Q: What is the CPU’s boost clock and how many threads does it have?

A: The CPU has a boost clock of 5.20 GHz and features 20 cores and 20 threads. This configuration is unusual for a mobile part, prioritizing multi-threaded throughput over simultaneous multi-threading (SMT).

Q: Is there a significant difference between this CPU and the Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX?

A: The 265HX has an average benchmark score of 63173, which is 0.7% higher than the 255HX’s score of 62738. This is a minor difference, well within the margin of error for most real-world applications.

Q: What is the system’s overall performance percentile?

A: The combined percentile for this CPU+GPU pairing is 72, meaning it outperforms 72% of all recorded systems. This is driven heavily by the CPU, which sits at the 93rd percentile, while the GPU is at the 50th percentile.

Q: Can this system handle 4K video editing?

A: The CPU’s Cinebench R23 multicore score of 32612 suggests it can handle 4K timeline processing. However, the GPU’s 6 GB VRAM and 336.0 GB/s bandwidth may struggle with 4K effects and color grading, making 1080p and light 1440p workflows more realistic.

Who Should Build It

The target user is a professional who needs maximum CPU throughput in a laptop form factor. This includes developers compiling large codebases, data analysts processing datasets with the Passmark data compression score of 515143, and engineers running physics simulations using the 2926 Passmark physics score. The GPU’s professional Quadro branding and 30 RT cores make it suitable for CAD and DCC applications, but its 50th percentile standing means it is not for high-end 3D artists.

Gamers at 1080p will find this system acceptable for medium settings, but those seeking high-refresh or 1440p gaming should look elsewhere. The CPU’s 93rd percentile ranking is wasted in gaming because the GPU will bottleneck first. Content creators who prioritize CPU-heavy tasks like video encoding and compilation will benefit most, especially those working with 1080p footage. Students in engineering or computer science fields will appreciate the CPU power, but the power requirements and noise profile may be drawbacks for library use. Small business workstations handling data entry, spreadsheets, and light graphics will be massively overserved by this CPU, but the GPU provides flexibility for occasional rendering tasks.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The CPU uses the Intel BGA 2114 socket, which is a soldered mobile platform, meaning the CPU cannot be upgraded in a traditional sense. The motherboard is proprietary to the laptop chassis, so future upgrades are limited to memory and storage. The system supports DDR5 memory on a dual-channel bus with a bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. The CPU provides PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes, which is future-proof for high-speed NVMe SSDs, but the GPU is limited to PCIe 3.0 x16 via the MXM module slot.

The GPU is an MXM module, which theoretically allows for replacement with a newer MXM card, but the 80 W TDP and end-of-life production status limit practical options. The CPU’s suggested PSU is not specified, but the combined TDP of 55 W (CPU) and 80 W (GPU) totals 135 W, which is manageable for a high-end laptop power brick. A sensible next upgrade would be increasing memory from the base configuration, as the dual-channel DDR5 bandwidth is a shared resource between the CPU and GPU. The lack of ECC memory support is a consideration for scientific computing, but the 30 MB L3 cache helps mitigate some latency issues.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX is a 20-core, 20-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, manufactured on a 3 nm process by TSMC. It is part of the Core Ultra Series 2 and features a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz. The CPU has a 30 MB shared L3 cache and 3 MB per-core L2 cache, with 192 KB of L1 cache per core. The chip contains 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die, and the multiplier is unlocked, suggesting overclocking potential despite the mobile form factor.

The benchmark scores indicate a processor that excels in multi-threaded workloads. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 32612 is 0.4% higher than the AMD Ryzen AI 9 PRO 465 and 0.7% lower than the Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX. The Passmark multithread score of 48234 and integer math score of 127126 confirm strong computational throughput. The single-thread score of 4562 is competitive, but the lack of SMT means the 20 threads are physical cores, which improves latency characteristics for real-time tasks. The data encryption score of 39499 and extended instructions score of 41247 indicate robust security and SIMD performance, suitable for cryptographic workloads and scientific computing.

The 55 W TDP is modest for a 20-core part, suggesting efficient power management. The integrated Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU provides a basic display output and can handle video playback, but the discrete GPU is required for demanding graphics tasks. The CPU’s 93rd percentile ranking places it among the top 7% of all CPUs, making it a high-end mobile processor.

Build Overview

This is a laptop-class build combining an Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX with an NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile Refresh. The system’s combined percentile is 72, which places it in the upper-middle tier of all recorded builds. The CPU is a top-tier mobile processor, while the GPU is a mid-range professional chip. This pairing is best described as a mobile workstation with a CPU-first design philosophy.

The buildClass is explicitly "laptop," and the components are designed for portable high-performance computing. The CPU’s 93rd percentile and the GPU’s 50th percentile create a lopsided profile that is ideal for CPU-bound workloads like software development, data analysis, and light 3D modeling. The system is not a gaming laptop, as the GPU’s moderate performance will limit frame rates, but it is capable of running esports titles and older AAA games at 1080p. The overall tier is "workstation-class," with the CPU providing the muscle and the GPU offering professional-grade stability and driver support.

GPU Analysis

The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile Refresh is based on the TU106 chip and Turing architecture, manufactured on a 12 nm process. It features 1920 shading units, 120 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs. The GPU has 30 RT cores and 240 tensor cores, providing hardware support for ray tracing and AI acceleration. The base clock is 945 MHz with a boost clock of 1380 MHz. Memory consists of 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 336.0 GB/s. The memory clock is 1750 MHz, which translates to 14 Gbps effective.

The GPU’s compute capabilities include an FP32 throughput of 5.299 TFLOPS and an FP16 throughput of 10.60 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio). The pixel rate is 88.32 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 165.6 GTexel/s. The GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, making it compatible with modern graphics APIs. The TDP is 80 W, and the card is an MXM module, which is replaceable in compatible laptops.

The GPU has no benchmark scores in the FACT PACK, but its 50th percentile rank indicates it performs at the median of all GPUs. This suggests it delivers performance comparable to a mid-range consumer GPU from its era. The 6 GB VRAM is a limitation for modern high-resolution textures, and the 192-bit bus restricts bandwidth for 4K workloads. The RT cores enable ray tracing, but the low FP32 throughput means ray-traced scenes will see significant performance drops. The tensor cores support DLSS and other AI-based features, which can help mitigate the performance deficit in supported games. The GPU’s end-of-life production status means no further driver optimizations are expected, but the current drivers support all major professional applications.