SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 7 366H + NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile

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)

▼

83 Score

Top 17% Ranking

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%

GPU

74%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 7 366H

41,263 Benchmark Score

Top 7% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 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

The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H paired with the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile is an unusual combination: a very recent mobile CPU sitting in the 87th percentile of all processors, matched with an end-of-life professional laptop GPU resting at exactly the 50th percentile. The combined build percentile of 69 tells the story before any individual benchmark is examined — this is a CPU-forward laptop configuration where the processor consistently outruns the graphics solution. Notably, the FACT PACK contains no measured FPS data for this pairing, so all frame-rate discussion below is estimated from benchmark scores rather than direct game measurements.

GPU Analysis

The Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile is a Turing-generation part, built on TSMC's 12 nm process around the TU104 chip — a 545 mm² die packing 13,600 million transistors at a density of 25.0 million transistors per square millimetre. Those are large-die, professional-class proportions, and they translate into a specific hardware profile: 3072 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, 64 render output units, 48 RT cores, and 384 tensor cores.

The RT and tensor counts matter more than raw shaders for this card's identity. Forty-eight RT cores mean real-time ray tracing acceleration is present and usable, while 384 tensor cores open the door to GPU-accelerated inference and AI-assisted rendering features. For a workstation-oriented GPU, that combination is the whole point: viewport ray tracing in professional 3D applications and GPU compute in rendering engines both lean on these units. The FP32 throughput of 9.400 TFLOPS, with FP16 at 18.80 TFLOPS in a 2:1 ratio, gives a sense of the compute ceiling — modest by current flagship standards, but the 2:1 FP16 rate is genuinely useful for workloads that tolerate reduced precision.

Memory is the GPU's strongest asset. Sixteen gigabytes of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus yields 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which remains a comfortable figure for texture-heavy professional scenes and moderately large ML batches. The 16 GB capacity is arguably more relevant today than the card's compute throughput: many current professional applications and models simply need VRAM headroom, and a mid-tier compute part with 16 GB can outperform a faster card that runs out of memory.

Clocks sit at 1035 MHz base and 1530 MHz boost, with memory at 1750 MHz — 14 Gbps effective. The bus interface is PCIe 3.0 x16, which is worth flagging in a pairing with a CPU that offers PCIe Gen 5 lanes: the GPU cannot use them, so some platform bandwidth goes unexploited. The card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, meaning modern API feature sets remain accessible despite the architecture's age.

The percentile position of 50 against all GPUs is the headline constraint. With no benchmark scores recorded in the database for this card and an average benchmark score of zero, the analysis must lean on that percentile and the hardware specifications: the data places it squarely in the middle of the GPU landscape, capable of competent rendering performance but not exceptional results. Production status is listed as end-of-life, with Ampere-MW named as its successor generation — a relevant fact for anyone weighing long-term platform viability.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU side is where the data is rich. Across Cinebench generations the Core Ultra 7 366H posts 2870 multi-core and 405 single-core in R15, 11960 multi-core and 1688 single-core in R20, and 28477 multi-core and 4020 single-core in R23. The R23 figures are the most interpretable: a 28477 multi-core score places this chip in firmly capable territory for a mobile processor, while the 4020 single-core score indicates strong per-thread responsiveness.

PassMark results reinforce that picture with breadth. The multithread score of 33429 pairs with a single-thread score of 4043 — a near-mirror of the Cinebench single-core result, which is a good consistency check. Integer math lands at 83695, floating point math at 103615, data compression at 327455, and data encryption at 25845. Extended instructions score 26901, random string sorting 39814, find prime numbers 326, and physics 2880.

The average benchmark score across the CPU's results is 41263, and the percentile versus all CPUs is 87 — a strong standing. The nearest rivals table is revealing in its tightness: the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H averages 41215, just 0.1 percent behind; the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 averages 41208, also 0.1 percent off; and the AMD Ryzen 9 5900X averages 41376, which is 0.3 percent ahead. The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H trails at 40967, 0.7 percent behind. In other words, this processor competes in a statistical dead heat with both a current thin-and-light mobile rival and a well-regarded desktop 16-thread chip — an interesting cross-class result that suggests the 366H brings desktop-adjacent throughput to a laptop power envelope.

The combined build percentile of 69, against the CPU's individual 87 and the GPU's 50, quantifies the imbalance. When a combined score lands almost exactly between two component percentiles, the usual interpretation is that the lower-percentile component drags workloads that depend on it, while CPU-bound tasks retain most of the processor's advantage.

CPU Analysis

The Core Ultra 7 366H is a Panther Lake-H design, manufactured by Intel on its own 3 nm process node — a notable process figure for a mobile chip. It carries 16 cores and 16 threads, meaning no SMT doubling: one thread per core. That configuration shapes the benchmark profile. The 28477 Cinebench R23 multi-core score across 16 threads implies solid per-core throughput rather than thread-count inflation, and the 4020 single-core score is consistent with a design that boosts to 4.80 GHz from a 2.00 GHz base.

Cache is generous for the class: 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and an 18 MB shared L3. The per-core L2 figure in particular benefits workloads with localised data access — compilation, code interpretation, and simulation loops all fit that pattern, and the strong PassMark single-thread result of 4043 supports the inference.

The memory subsystem supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X on a dual-channel bus with 115.2 GB/s of bandwidth. That figure is worth pausing on: it is respectable for a mobile platform and helps feed the integrated Intel Xe3 Graphics, but it is far below the GPU's own 448.0 GB/s — so any workload that spills from VRAM into system memory will feel the cliff. ECC is not supported, which rules the platform out of some error-sensitive professional use cases.

The 25 W TDP is the most striking number in the CPU's column. Sustaining scores this close to a desktop-class rival at that thermal envelope is the story of the chip — the data implies an efficient architecture rather than a power-hungry one. The platform exposes PCIe Gen 5 with 12 CPU lanes, and the socket is Intel BGA 2540, ball-grid and soldered, with no unlocked multiplier. The release date of 2026-01-04 marks it as a very current part, and its production status is active.

For real workloads, the PassMark breakdown maps cleanly. Data compression at 327455 and encryption at 25845 indicate strong throughput for file archiving and cryptographic tasks. The physics score of 2880 and floating point result of 103615 point to capable simulation and scientific computation. Sorting at 39814 suggests good memory-latency behaviour. None of these numbers scream "record holder" — but at the 87th percentile, they don't need to.

Balance and Bottleneck

The balance question answers itself from the percentiles: CPU at 87, GPU at 50, combined at 69. In any workload that scales with graphics capability — gaming at higher settings, GPU rendering, viewport work — the Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile is the limiting component. In anything that scales with CPU throughput — compilation, encoding, simulation, batch processing — the Core Ultra 7 366H has headroom to spare, likely sitting partially idle while waiting on the GPU in mixed workloads.

Because there is no measured FPS data for this combination, the evidence must come from scaling logic. With a GPU at the exact median of the database and a CPU far above it, the expectation is GPU-bound behaviour in essentially all graphically demanding scenarios, at any resolution, at any quality preset. The 9.400 TFLOPS FP32 figure and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth set a ceiling that the CPU cannot lift. Conversely, at low resolutions and low settings where the CPU typically becomes the limiter, the 366H's strong single-thread score of 4043 implies it would not be the constraint.

There is also a bandwidth mismatch worth noting: the CPU's dual-channel 115.2 GB/s system memory versus the GPU's 448.0 GB/s VRAM. Any pipeline that forces data across that boundary — large scene loads, model training that oversubscribes 16 GB of VRAM — will bottleneck at the system bus. The PCIe 3.0 x16 GPU link inside a PCIe Gen 5-capable platform compounds this generational gap.

FAQ

Q: Does the database contain measured frame rates for this CPU+GPU pairing?

A: No. The FACT PACK includes no measuredFps entries for this combination, and dataIsMeasured is flagged as false. All frame-rate discussion here is estimated from the benchmark scores and percentile data.

Q: How does the Core Ultra 7 366H compare to its nearest rivals?

A: It is statistically tied with the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H (0.1 percent ahead), the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 (0.1 percent ahead), and the AMD Ryzen 9 5900X (0.3 percent behind), while leading the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H by 0.7 percent.

Q: Is the GPU still current?

A: No. The Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile is listed as end-of-life, released 2019-05-26, with Ampere-MW named as the successor generation.

Q: Does the CPU support overclocking or ECC memory?

A: Neither. The multiplier is locked and ECC memory is not supported.

Q: How much VRAM does the GPU have, and why does it matter?

A: 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth. That capacity gives the card relevance for memory-hungry professional and AI workloads despite its median percentile position.

Q: What PCIe generation does each component use?

A: The CPU platform offers PCIe Gen 5 with 12 CPU lanes; the GPU connects via PCIe 3.0 x16 — a generational mismatch that leaves platform bandwidth unused.

Q: What is the thermal profile of the CPU?

A: A 25 W TDP with a 2.00 GHz base and 4.80 GHz boost clock — scores near desktop-class rivals at that envelope point to strong efficiency.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: This is the weakest fit. With the GPU at the 50th percentile and no measured FPS data, expectations should be moderate — the data suggests competent play at mainstream settings rather than high-refresh ultra gaming, with the GPU as the firm limiter.

Streaming: The CPU is the asset here. A 33429 PassMark multithread score and 28477 Cinebench R23 multi-core result leave ample threads for encoding alongside play, though the GPU's median position caps the game-side quality of the stream.

Video editing: Well supported. The 16 GB of VRAM handles timeline buffers and effects, the 384 tensor cores accelerate supported operations, and the CPU's 2870 R15 / 28477 R23 multi-core scores drive export and proxy work. The 115.2 GB/s system bandwidth is the number to watch on large projects.

3D rendering: Viable with caveats. The 48 RT cores and 9.400 TFLOPS FP32 deliver real GPU rendering, and 16 GB of VRAM accommodates sizeable scenes — but the 50th-percentile standing means render times will trail faster current cards. CPU fallback rendering benefits from the strong multi-core scores.

Software development: Excellent. The 4043 single-thread score drives snappy IDE and interpreter behaviour, 16 threads serve parallel compilation, and the 2.5 MB per-core L2 cache with an 18 MB shared L3 suits build workloads.

Student and office work: Overkill in the best way. Everyday multitasking is bounded by the single-core scores of 4020 (R23) and 4043 (PassMark), both strong, and the platform would remain responsive under heavy browser and application loads.

Gaming Performance

To restate clearly: no measured FPS figures exist for this exact combination — the database's measuredFps entries for this pairing are empty, and dataIsMeasured is false. Every frame-rate statement in this section is therefore an estimate derived from benchmark scores, not measurement.

The estimate framework comes from the percentile split: GPU at 50, CPU at 87. At that GPU standing, the data implies playable frame rates in most modern titles at mainstream resolutions and settings, with headroom shrinking as resolution and quality rise — the 448.0 GB/s bandwidth and 9.400 TFLOPS of compute set the ceiling. At lower resolutions and settings, where the CPU would normally become the limiter, the 4043 single-thread score suggests the processor would keep up comfortably; the bottleneck would remain on the graphics side. Ray-traced gaming is possible thanks to the 48 RT cores, but the estimates should be tempered accordingly given the card's median position. Treat all of this as directional, not definitive.

Build Overview

This is a laptop-class build, per the buildClass field, pairing a very recent, active-production Intel Core Ultra 7 366H — Panther Lake-H, 3 nm, released 2026-01-04 — with an end-of-life NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile on the 12 nm Turing architecture. The overall tier reads as upper-mid-range: a combined percentile of 69, assembled from an 87th-percentile CPU and a 50th-percentile GPU. It is best characterised as a compute-and-capacity-forward mobile workstation configuration, where processor throughput and VRAM size are the strengths and graphics throughput is the median element. The generational spread between an active CPU platform and a retired GPU is the defining quirk of the pairing.

Who Should Build It

Content creators are the primary audience: video editors and 3D artists who value the 16 GB of VRAM, the 48 RT cores, and 384 tensor cores, backed by a CPU whose 28477 Cinebench R23 multi-core score rivals desktop parts. Software developers benefit directly from the 4043 single-thread score and 16-thread throughput, making this a strong mobile development machine. Students in technical fields get a platform that handles coursework, simulation, and parallel compilation without strain. Small business workstations fit the profile for CAD-adjacent and analysis work, though the absence of ECC memory rules out error-corrected deployments. Gamers are the poorest match — specifically, players targeting high-refresh or high-resolution ultra settings should look elsewhere, since the 50th-percentile GPU caps that ambition. The realistic gamer for this machine plays at mainstream settings and cares more about the CPU's capabilities.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The upgrade story is constrained by physics of the laptop class: the CPU is soldered to Intel BGA 2540 with no unlocked multiplier, so no CPU-side upgrade path exists within the chassis. Platform features that do carry forward are the memory support — DDR5 and LPDDR5X on dual channels at 115.2 GB/s — and the PCIe Gen 5 CPU lanes, 12 of them, which a future GPU generation could actually exploit where the current PCIe 3.0 x16 card cannot.

On power, the numbers are small: a 25 W CPU TDP and a 110 W GPU TDP, with no suggested PSU figure provided for the card and no power connectors required. The sensible next upgrade is therefore not internal componentry but a platform move: a successor GPU generation — the database lists Ampere-MW as this card's successor line — would lift the 50th-percentile graphics ceiling while better using the Gen 5 lanes. Given that the CPU already competes within 0.3 percent of a desktop-class rival in the Ryzen 9 5900X, the data indicates the graphics side is where any future investment would pay off, and the processor has the headroom to feed something considerably faster.

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 7 366H + NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile

Power Build

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core Ultra 7 366H

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile

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

GPU Analysis

Benchmark Performance

CPU Analysis

Balance and Bottleneck

FAQ

Usage Scenarios

Gaming Performance

Build Overview

Who Should Build It

Upgrade Path and Platform

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