SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 7 366H + NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile

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

83 / 100
HIGH-END

Power Build

Top 17% of systems. Excellent for 1440p Ultra or 4K High gaming.

1440p Ultra4K High

System Balance Analysis

CPU vs GPU performance ratio
Well Balanced
CPU
93%
VS
GPU
74%
PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 7 366H

41,263 Benchmark Score
Top 7% Market Ranking
View Full Specs →
GRAPHICS CARD

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile

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.

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

Intel Core Ultra 7 366H pairs with a NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile in a laptop build that lands at the 69th combined percentile. This is a mobile workstation-class configuration, not a desktop rig. The CPU is a 16-core, 16-thread Panther Lake part with a 25 W TDP, while the GPU is an end-of-life Turing-based professional card with 8 GB of GDDR6 memory. There are no measured FPS rows for this exact combination in the FACT PACK, so all frame rate discussion below is estimated from the benchmark scores, not from direct game testing.

Balance and Bottleneck

The balance here is unusual because the CPU and GPU come from very different performance generations and market tiers. The CPU sits at the 87th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 41263. The GPU sits at exactly the 50th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 0 in the FACT PACK. That gap alone suggests the CPU is the stronger component by far. In CPU-bound workloads — such as physics simulation, data compression, or single-threaded tasks — the processor will not be the limiting factor. The PassMark physics score of 2880 and the Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 28477 indicate a chip that can handle heavy compute without breaking a sweat.

The GPU, however, is the clear bottleneck for graphics-heavy tasks. The Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile delivers 7.987 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, which is modest by modern standards. Its 50th percentile ranking means half of all GPUs in the database perform better. In gaming at high resolutions or in 3D rendering with ray tracing enabled, the GPU will cap frame rates and render times well before the CPU runs out of headroom. The CPU’s 16 cores and 4.80 GHz boost clock will sit idle waiting for the GPU to catch up in most graphically intense scenes.

For memory bandwidth, the CPU supports dual-channel DDR5 or LPDDR5X with a theoretical bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. The GPU has its own 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth across a 256-bit bus. This means the GPU is not starved for memory throughput, but raw bandwidth does not compensate for the GPU’s older Turing architecture. The CPU also has 18 MB of shared L3 cache and 2.5 MB per core of L2, which helps in latency-sensitive tasks like random string sorting (PassMark score 39814) and integer math (83695).

The FPS scaling picture, estimated from these scores, is straightforward. At 1080p with medium settings, the CPU can push high frame rates in esports titles, but the GPU will limit you to roughly what a 50th-percentile GPU can deliver. At 1440p or 4K, the GPU becomes even more dominant as the limiting factor. The CPU’s single-thread performance — Cinebench R23 single-core score of 4020 and PassMark single-thread score of 4043 — is strong enough for high-refresh gaming, but only if the GPU can keep up. In mixed workloads like streaming while gaming, the CPU has enough multi-threaded headroom (PassMark multithread score 33429) to handle encoding, but the GPU’s lack of modern encoder efficiency will show in stream quality or system responsiveness.

Benchmark Performance

The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H delivers a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 28477 and a single-core score of 4020. In Cinebench R20, it scores 11960 multi-core and 1688 single-core. The older R15 test shows 2870 multi-core and 405 single-core. These numbers place the CPU at the 87th percentile among all CPUs, which is a strong result for a mobile part with a 25 W TDP. The average benchmark score of 41263 puts it in the same league as the AMD Ryzen 9 5900X, which averages 41376 — a 0.3% difference in favor of the Ryzen. Against the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H, the 366H is 0.1% ahead (41263 vs 41215). The AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 scores 41208, again a 0.1% gap. The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H trails at 40967, which is 0.7% behind.

PassMark results reinforce the CPU’s strength. The multithread score is 33429, floating point math hits 103615, and integer math reaches 83695. Data compression scores 327455, data encryption 25845, and extended instructions 26901. The single-thread score of 4043 and the prime number finding score of 326 are lower, but these are less representative of real-world workload performance. The CPU’s 16 cores and 16 threads (no hyperthreading in this part) handle parallel tasks well, as shown by the high multi-core Cinebench scores.

The GPU has no benchmark scores in the FACT PACK. Its percentile is 50, and its average benchmark score is 0. That means there is no direct numeric comparison to rivals. What we know is the hardware: TU104 chip on a 12 nm TSMC process, 2560 shading units, 160 TMUs, 64 ROPs, 40 RT cores, and 320 tensor cores. The pixel rate is 99.84 GPixel/s and the texture rate is 249.6 GTexel/s. FP16 performance is 15.97 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio). Memory is 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 448.0 GB/s bandwidth. The boost clock is 1560 MHz, base clock 1110 MHz.

The combined picture is a laptop where the CPU outperforms the GPU by a wide margin. The 69th combined percentile reflects this imbalance — the system is better than average overall, but the GPU drags the combined score down from what the CPU alone would suggest. For any workload that relies primarily on the CPU, this system will feel fast. For GPU-bound tasks like gaming at high settings or rendering with ray tracing, the system will feel dated.

FAQ

Q: Is the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H faster than the AMD Ryzen 9 5900X?

A: No. The 366H has an average benchmark score of 41263, while the Ryzen 9 5900X scores 41376. That is a 0.3% difference in favor of the Ryzen.

Q: How does the CPU compare to the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H?

A: The 366H scores 41263 on average, which is 0.1% higher than the 356H’s 41215. The performance difference is negligible.

Q: Can this laptop handle 4K gaming?

A: The GPU is at the 50th percentile, so it is average among all GPUs. With 8 GB of VRAM and 7.987 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, 4K gaming at high settings will be limited by the GPU. Expect playable frame rates only at lower settings or in less demanding titles.

Q: What is the CPU’s memory bandwidth?

A: The CPU supports dual-channel DDR5 or LPDDR5X memory with a theoretical bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s.

Q: Does the CPU support ECC memory?

A: No, ECC memory is not supported.

Q: What PCIe version does the CPU support?

A: The CPU supports PCIe Gen 5 with 12 lanes (CPU only). The GPU, however, uses a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface.

Q: Is the GPU still in production?

A: No, the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile is marked as end-of-life. Its release date is 2019-05-26.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The CPU uses an Intel BGA 2540 socket, which means it is soldered to the motherboard. Upgrading the CPU is not a practical option. The platform supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory in a dual-channel configuration, with a memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. The memory bus is dual-channel, so adding more RAM will improve capacity but will not increase bandwidth beyond the 115.2 GB/s limit. ECC memory is not supported, which rules out certain workstation error-checking scenarios.

The GPU is connected via PCIe 3.0 x16, which is an older interface. The CPU supports PCIe Gen 5 with 12 lanes, but the GPU cannot use those lanes because it is a mobile part soldered to the board. The GPU’s power connectors are listed as “None,” and its slot width is “IGP,” meaning it is integrated into the laptop chassis. The GPU has a TDP of 110 W, while the CPU has a TDP of 25 W. The suggested PSU field is null, so there is no power supply guidance in the FACT PACK. The total system power draw is roughly the sum of the CPU and GPU TDPs, but without a PSU rating, you must rely on the laptop’s internal power delivery.

A sensible next upgrade for this laptop would be adding more memory, since the CPU’s memory bandwidth is fixed but capacity can be increased. The CPU’s 18 MB of L3 cache and 16 cores make it well-suited for multitasking, so more RAM would help with large datasets in data compression (PassMark score 327455) or encryption (25845). Storage upgrades are also viable, but the FACT PACK does not list storage interfaces. The GPU cannot be upgraded because it is a mobile part. The platform is effectively a dead end for CPU or GPU swaps; the only meaningful hardware changes are memory capacity and storage.

The CPU’s TDP of 25 W is low for a 16-core part, which suggests the laptop is designed for sustained multi-threaded workloads without thermal throttling. The GPU’s 110 W TDP is the dominant power draw. The combination of a 25 W CPU and a 110 W GPU means the cooling solution must handle the GPU’s heat more than the CPU’s. For users considering this laptop, the upgrade path is limited to RAM and storage, not compute components.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H is a 16-core, 16-thread processor from the Core Ultra Series 3, built on Intel’s 3 nm Panther Lake architecture. The base clock is 2.00 GHz and the boost clock reaches 4.80 GHz. The L1 cache is 192 KB per core, L2 is 2.5 MB per core, and L3 is 18 MB shared. The process node is 3 nm, fabricated by Intel. The production status is active, with a release date of 2026-01-04.

The CPU’s benchmark scores show a strong multi-threaded performer. Cinebench R23 multi-core of 28477 is the headline number, and Cinebench R20 multi-core of 11960 confirms it. The single-core R23 score of 4020 is also impressive, indicating high IPC for a mobile chip. PassMark results show a multithread score of 33429, with floating point math at 103615 and integer math at 83695. Data compression at 327455 suggests the CPU excels at archiving and file management tasks. Data encryption at 25845 is lower, which may reflect the lack of dedicated hardware acceleration for certain encryption algorithms.

The CPU has no hyperthreading — 16 cores and 16 threads — which is unusual for a modern part. This means each core handles one thread, and multi-threaded scaling relies entirely on physical cores. The 87th percentile ranking among all CPUs places it in the upper tier, but the nearest rivals are all within 0.7% of its average score. The AMD Ryzen 9 5900X, a desktop CPU, is 0.3% faster. The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H and AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 are both 0.1% slower. The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H is 0.7% slower.

For real workloads, this CPU can handle software compilation, video encoding, and 3D rendering without breaking a sweat. The 16 physical cores provide consistent multi-threaded performance, and the 4.80 GHz boost clock helps with single-threaded tasks like spreadsheet calculations or web browsing. The 25 W TDP is remarkably low for this level of performance, which makes it suitable for thin-and-light laptops that still need desktop-class compute. The integrated Intel Xe3 Graphics is present, but the dedicated Quadro GPU will handle most graphics tasks.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: The CPU’s single-thread score of 4020 (Cinebench R23) and PassMark single-thread score of 4043 are strong, but the GPU’s 50th percentile ranking limits frame rates. At 1080p in esports titles, the CPU can push high frame rates, but the GPU will cap them at an average level. For 144Hz monitors, expect to lower settings in demanding games. The GPU’s 7.987 TFLOPS of FP32 performance is not enough for high-refresh 1440p gaming.

Streaming: The CPU has ample multi-threaded headroom (PassMark multithread 33429) to handle software encoding while gaming. The GPU’s Turing architecture includes tensor cores (320) that can assist with AI-based encoding, but the GPU is end-of-life. Streaming at 1080p60 should be smooth, but the GPU may struggle with simultaneous gaming and encoding in newer titles.

Video editing: The CPU’s Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 28477 and PassMark floating point math of 103615 indicate strong performance in rendering timelines and applying effects. The GPU’s 8 GB of VRAM and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth can accelerate effects in programs that use CUDA, but the older Turing architecture will not match modern GPUs. Export times will be CPU-bound, which is a positive.

3D rendering: The CPU excels here with 16 cores and a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 28477. Ray-traced renders in CPU-based engines will be fast. GPU-based rendering with OptiX or similar will be limited by the GPU’s 40 RT cores and 7.987 TFLOPS of FP32. The GPU is at the 50th percentile, so expect mid-range render times.

Software development: The CPU’s 16 cores and 18 MB of L3 cache handle compilation tasks well. PassMark integer math of 83695 and data compression of 327455 suggest fast builds and package management. The lack of ECC memory is a minor drawback for long-running builds, but the CPU’s stability is not in question.

Student and office work: The CPU’s single-thread performance (PassMark single-thread 4043) makes everyday tasks like word processing and spreadsheet work feel instant. The 25 W TDP means long battery life, and the 16 cores provide headroom for multitasking across many applications. The GPU is overkill for office work, but it does not hurt. The 8 GB of VRAM is unused in these scenarios, but the system remains responsive.

Gaming Performance

There are no measured FPS rows in the FACT PACK for this CPU+GPU combination. All frame rate figures below are estimates derived from the CPU’s 87th percentile and the GPU’s 50th percentile benchmark scores. The GPU has no direct benchmark scores, so its performance is inferred from its hardware specs: 2560 shading units, 8 GB GDDR6, and 7.987 TFLOPS of FP32.

At 1080p with ultra settings, the GPU will be the limiting factor. A 50th-percentile GPU typically delivers playable frame rates (40-60 FPS) in most AAA titles at 1080p, but not high refresh rates. The CPU’s strong single-thread performance (Cinebench R23 single-core 4020) ensures that frame times are consistent, but the GPU will cap the average FPS. Esports titles like CS2 or Valorant might reach 100+ FPS at 1080p with competitive settings, but the GPU’s Turing architecture lacks modern features like DLSS 3 frame generation.

At 1440p, the GPU’s 8 GB of VRAM and 256-bit memory bus (448.0 GB/s) are adequate, but the 50th percentile ranking suggests average performance. Expect 30-50 FPS in demanding titles at high settings. The CPU will not bottleneck at this resolution; the GPU is fully saturated. At 4K, the GPU is out of its depth. The 7.987 TFLOPS of FP32 is roughly half of what modern high-end GPUs deliver, and 8 GB of VRAM may be insufficient for 4K textures. Frame rates will drop below 30 FPS in most AAA games.

The estimated FPS figures are best-case scenarios. The GPU’s end-of-life status means driver optimization is no longer a priority, and newer games may run worse than the hardware specs suggest. The CPU’s integrated Intel Xe3 Graphics is not a gaming solution, so the Quadro is the only option. For gaming, this laptop is best suited to 1080p with medium settings or older titles.

Build Overview

This is a laptop build (buildClass: laptop) pairing a 16-core Intel Core Ultra 7 366H with an NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile. The combined percentile is 69, which places the system above average but not in the top tier. The CPU is the standout component at the 87th percentile, while the GPU is exactly average at the 50th percentile. The CPU’s average benchmark score of 41263 is nearly identical to the AMD Ryzen 9 5900X (41376), a desktop processor, which highlights how strong the mobile CPU is.

The GPU is an end-of-life Turing part from 2019, built on a 12 nm process with a 545 mm² die and 13,600 million transistors. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, but its architecture predates the latest features. The system’s overall tier is mid-range: the 69th combined percentile means it outperforms most laptops but is not a high-end gaming or rendering machine. The CPU’s low TDP of 25 W and the GPU’s 110 W TDP make this a balanced power draw, but the GPU will be the first component to feel outdated.

Who Should Build It

This laptop is for users who need strong CPU performance in a mobile form factor and do not require advanced graphics. Software developers working on large codebases will benefit from the 16 cores and Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 28477, which speeds up compilation and testing. Students in engineering or data science fields will find the CPU’s PassMark data compression score of 327455 useful for handling large datasets, and the 25 W TDP supports long battery life for campus use.

Content creators who edit video or render 3D scenes will see fast CPU-bound performance, but the GPU’s 50th percentile ranking will be a bottleneck for GPU-accelerated effects. Small business workstations that run CPU-intensive financial models or simulations will perform well, as the CPU’s 87th percentile ranking ensures quick processing. Gamers should look elsewhere unless they play at 1080p with medium settings, as the GPU’s 7.987 TFLOPS and 8 GB VRAM will limit frame rates in modern titles. This is a professional workhorse, not a gaming laptop.