SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 7 265 + NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000

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)

▼

94 Score

Top 6% Ranking

94 / 100

ULTIMATE READY

Apex Performer

Top 6% 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%

GPU

91%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 7 265

64,640 Benchmark Score

Top 4% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000

21,629 Benchmark Score

Top 9% 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

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 and NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 form a desktop pairing with a combined performance percentile of 80, driven by a CPU at the 93rd percentile and a GPU at the 67th percentile. No measured FPS data exists for this exact combination, so all frame-rate discussion in this analysis is estimated from the available benchmark scores rather than observed gaming results.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 is a 20-core, 20-thread desktop processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process by TSMC with 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. It runs at a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz, with a 65 W TDP and an Intel Socket 1851 interface. The chip supports DDR5 memory across a dual-channel bus with 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth, and it does not support ECC memory. The integrated Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 32EU provides basic display output, but the processor is not multiplier-unlocked. The CPU's launch MSRP is $394.

Benchmark results show a strong multi-core performance. In Cinebench R23, the chip scores 42,216 points multi-core and 5,960 points single-core. Cinebench R20 gives 6,268 multi and 884 single, while R15 gives 4,255 multi and 600 single. These numbers indicate that the chip is heavily optimized for multi-threaded workloads, with single-core performance that is competitive for its class but not the absolute top. The PassMark suite reinforces this: multi-thread score is 49,682, single-thread is 4,689, integer math is 134,773, floating-point math is 172,776, and data compression reaches 522,983. The physics test scores 2,923, and the extended instructions test scores 41,478.

The CPU's average benchmark score is 64,640, which places it at the 93rd percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals are the AMD EPYC 4464P (average score 64,823, delta -0.3%), the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F (64,438, +0.3%), the AMD EPYC 7343 (64,202, +0.7%), and the AMD EPYC 9124 (65,104, -0.7%). In practical terms, the Core Ultra 7 265 sits within 1% of all four rivals, meaning that for most multi-threaded applications, it is functionally interchangeable with those server-grade EPYC chips. The delta percentages indicate that it trails the EPYC 9124 and EPYC 4464P by 0.7% and 0.3%, respectively, while it leads the 265F and EPYC 7343 by 0.3% and 0.7%. For real workloads, this translates to rendering, video encoding, data compression, and software compilation all seeing near-top-tier throughput, with the 20 cores handling heavy parallel loads without difficulty.

Balance and Bottleneck

The most important structural fact is that there is no measured FPS data for this CPU-GPU combination; any gaming performance statements are estimates from the benchmark scores. The CPU sits at the 93rd percentile, while the GPU sits at the 67th percentile. This large gap means that in any graphics-limited scenario — such as high-resolution gaming or GPU-accelerated rendering — the Quadro RTX 5000 will be the limiting component. The CPU has more than enough headroom to feed a GPU that ranks only two-thirds of the way down the GPU distribution.

Conversely, for CPU-limited tasks such as physics simulation, data compression, or software compilation, the processor will dominate. The PassMark physics score of 2,923 and the data compression score of 522,530 show that the CPU is not the bottleneck for those operations. The GPU, by contrast, has a PassMark GPU compute score of 6,525, which is relatively modest. In a balanced system, the CPU can saturate the GPU in gaming at typical settings, but the GPU's lower percentile means that for any workload that pushes the GPU to its limit, the frame rate will be constrained by the graphics card. The combined percentile of 80 reflects this imbalance: the system is overall above average, but the GPU is the weaker link in the pairing.

GPU Analysis

The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 is a Turing-architecture workstation card based on the TU104 chip, fabricated on TSMC's 12 nm process with 13,600 million transistors on a 545 mm² die. It has a base clock of 1620 MHz and a boost clock of 1815 MHz, with memory running at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). The memory subsystem is 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The card packs 3072 shading units, 192 texture units, 64 ROPs, 48 RT cores, and 384 tensor cores. Its compute throughput is 11.15 TFLOPS FP32 and 22.30 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1). The pixel rate is 116.2 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 348.5 GTexel/s.

The GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. It has a 230 W TDP, requires a dual-slot cooler, and draws power via one 6-pin and one 8-pin connector; the suggested PSU is 550 W. The card measures 267 mm in length and 111 mm in height. It is end-of-life, with a release date of August 2018, and it was preceded by the Quadro Volta and succeeded by Workstation Ampere. Its launch MSRP was $2,299 USD.

Benchmark scores show that the card is not a top performer. In Geekbench, it scores 78,999 in OpenCL and 92,309 in Vulkan. In PassMark, the DirectX 9 score is 195, DirectX 10 is 113, DirectX 11 is 140, and DirectX 12 is 59. The G2D score is 709, G3D is 15,616, and GPU compute is 6,525. The low DirectX 12 score of 59 is striking, suggesting that the card is far better suited to older APIs or compute workloads than to modern game rendering. The average benchmark score is 21,629, placing it at the 67th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB (average 21,856, delta -1%), the NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile (21,379, delta +1.2%), the AMD Radeon HD 8970M (21,237, delta +1.8%), and the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL (21,153, delta +2.3%). In effect, the Quadro RTX 5000 is 1% slower than a GTX 1060 6 GB in the average benchmark, but it is 1.2% to 2.3% faster than the three other rivals. For rendering work, the 16 GB VRAM and 48 RT cores are valuable for large scenes and ray tracing, but the raw performance numbers place it well below contemporary gaming flagships.

Who Should Build It

This system is a desktop workstation with a CPU that is firmly in the top 7% of all processors and a GPU that is above the median but not by a large margin. The CPU's 20 cores and high multi-thread scores make it ideal for content creators, software developers, and engineers who work with parallel workloads. The GPU's 16 GB VRAM and 448 GB/s bandwidth are well suited for 3D rendering, video editing, and scientific visualizations that require large data sets to reside in local memory. The low TDP of the CPU (65 W) and the modest 230 W GPU make the system practical for small business workstations or student desks where energy efficiency and noise are considerations. The system is less ideal for high-refresh gaming, as the GPU's percentile is 67, meaning a large fraction of graphics cards perform better.

The launch MSRP of the CPU is $394 and the GPU is $2,299 USD, but that is a historical figure; the GPU is end-of-life. The combination is best used by professionals who need the CPU's massive multi-core throughput and the GPU's large VRAM capacity for memory-hungry tasks like texture-heavy renders or machine-learning inference, even if the GPU's raw compute is not top-tier.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU's average benchmark score is 64,482, which is the 93rd percentile of all CPUs. In the PassMark suite, the CPU scores 49,682 multi-thread, 4,689 single-thread, 172,776 floating-point math, and 134,773 integer math. In Cinebench R23, it reaches 42,216 multi-core and 5,960 single-core. The GPU's average benchmark score is 20,629, at the 67th percentile. Its PassMark G3D score is 15,616, and its Geekbench Vulkan score is 92,309. The combined percentile of this CPU+GPU pairing is 80. The CPU's nearest rival, the AMD EPYC 9124, is 0.7% higher in average score, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F is 0.3% lower. The GPU's nearest rival, the GTX 1060 6 GB, is 1.0% higher in average score, while the RTX A4000 Mobile is 1.2% lower. The overall picture is a CPU that leads its class and a GPU that trails its class slightly, resulting in a system that is strong for CPU-heavy tasks but only moderately good for GPU-heavy tasks.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The CPU uses the Intel Socket 1851, which is the current generation for Arrow Lake desktop processors. It supports DDR5 memory on a dual-channel bus, with a maximum memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. The CPU provides PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes, while the GPU uses PCIe 3.0 x16. The CPU's TDP is 65 W, and the GPU's TDP is 230 W; the suggested PSU for the GPU is 550 W. The GPU is end-of-life, so the most sensible next upgrade is a newer GPU that supports PCIe Gen 4 or Gen 5 to take advantage of the CPU's PCIe 5.0 lanes. The CPU itself is not unlocked, so overclocking is not possible, but the platform is current, so a future CPU replacement on the same socket may be possible, though no such models are listed in the data. The memory is DDR5, and the system has a single-socket design, so a user can add more DDR5 capacity or replace the GPU without changing the platform.

FAQ

Q: What socket does the Intel Core Ultra 7 265 use?

A: The CPU uses Intel Socket 1851.

Q: How much memory does the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 have?

A: The GPU has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus.

Q: What is the suggested power supply for the Quadro RTX 5000?

A: The suggested PSU is 550 W.

Q: Does the CPU support ECC memory?

A: No, the Core Ultra 7 265 does not support ECC memory.

Q: What is the combined percentile of this CPU and GPU pairing?

A: The combined percentile is 80.

Q: What is the CPU's Cinebench R23 multi-core score?

A: The CPU scores 42,216 in Cinebench R23 multi-core.

Q: What is the GPU's PassMark G3D score?

A: The GPU scores 15,616 in PassMark G3D.

Build Overview

This is a desktop workstation build that pairs the Intel Core Ultra 7 265, a 20-core Arrow Lake CPU with a 93rd percentile, with the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000, a 16 GB Turing GPU with a 67th percentile. The combined percentile is 80, indicating that the system is in the top 20% of all CPU+GPU pairings in the database. The CPU is a top-tier multi-threaded processor, while the GPU is a mid-range workstation card that is end-of-life. The CPU's high performance and the GPU's large VRAM make it a reasonable choice for professional workloads that are not purely graphics-bound. The system is a desktop-class build, and the lack of measured FPS data means that gaming performance is estimated from the scores rather than verified.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: The GPU's 67th percentile and its DirectX 12 score of 59 suggest that it is not a high-refresh gaming card. The CPU's high single-thread score of 5,960 in Cinebench R23 ensures it will not bottleneck, but the GPU will likely cap frame rates at moderate settings.

Streaming: The CPU has 20 cores and a PassMark data compression score of 522,530, making it well suited for software-based encoding while the GPU handles rendering. The GPU's compute score of 6,525 is modest, but the CPU's strong multi-core performance would allow for streaming without sacrificing CPU-bound tasks.

Video editing: The CPU's Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 42,216 and PassMark integer math of 134,773 provide strong support for timeline processing and encoding. The GPU's 16 GB VRAM and 448 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient for handling large 4K or 8K timelines, though the GPU's low DirectX 12 score suggests that GPU-accelerated effects might be limited.

3D rendering: The GPU's 48 RT cores and 16 GB VRAM are designed for ray-traced rendering, and the CPU's 20 cores can accelerate the simulation and physics side. The GPU's average score of 20,629 is low, but the large VRAM is a distinct advantage for large scenes.

Software development: The CPU's 20 threads and high data compression score of 522,530 make it excellent for compiling large codebases and running continuous integration tests. The GPU is not a major factor for development, but the CPU's 93rd percentile ensures fast compilation times.

Student and office work: The CPU's single-thread score of 5,960 and the 65 W TDP make it responsive for office applications, while the 230 W GPU is overkill for productivity tasks. The system would be more than sufficient for students or small business workstations that need to run heavy spreadsheets, coding environments, or light 3D work, though the GPU is more than needed.

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 7 265 + NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000

Apex Performer

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core Ultra 7 265

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000

Market Position

Game Performance Benchmarks

Cyberpunk 2077

Red Dead Redemption 2

Microsoft Flight Simulator

Control

Call of Duty: Warzone

Fortnite

Performance Insights

Optimal Performance

4K Gaming Ready

Performance Tiers Explained

Ultimate

High-End

Mid-Range

Entry Level

Legacy

CPU Analysis

Balance and Bottleneck

GPU Analysis

Who Should Build It

Benchmark Performance

Upgrade Path and Platform

FAQ

Build Overview

Usage Scenarios

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