SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 9 285 + AMD Radeon RX 7400

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)

▼

88 Score

Top 12% Ranking

88 / 100

HIGH-END

Power Build

Top 12% of systems. Excellent for 1440p Ultra or 4K High gaming.

1440p Ultra4K High

System Balance Analysis

CPU vs GPU performance ratio

Well Balanced

CPU

97%

GPU

79%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 9 285

75,488 Benchmark Score

Top 3% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

AMD Radeon RX 7400

2,467 Benchmark Score

Top 21% 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 9 285 paired with the AMD Radeon RX 7400 is a desktop build defined by extreme asymmetry: a 95th-percentile CPU bolted to a 17th-percentile GPU. The benchmark data places the processor among the fastest chips in the database — trading blows with workstation-class AMD EPYC and Ryzen PRO parts — while the graphics card scores in the same territory as entry-level and integrated-class hardware. The result is a machine that excels at CPU-bound work and merely handles GPU-bound work. One important caveat up front: the FACT PACK contains no measured FPS data for this exact combination, so every frame-rate discussion below is an estimate derived from the benchmark scores, not from in-game measurement.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming. This is where the pairing underdelivers relative to its processor. The RX 7400's PassMark G3D score of 11,897 and 17th-percentile GPU standing mean the graphics card, not the 24-core Ultra 9 285, sets the frame ceiling. Its nearest rivals include the Intel HD Graphics 610 and NVIDIA GeForce 710M — comparisons that make clear this is not a high-refresh gaming card. Esports titles at reduced settings are plausible; demanding AAA games at high refresh rates are not realistic expectations from these scores.

Streaming. The CPU side is excellent: a PassMark multithread score of 56,602 and physics score of 3,598 indicate ample headroom for encoding, compositing, and chat/overlay overhead while gaming. The bottleneck is the render side. Streaming a game the RX 7400 can barely push at ultra settings means the stream quality will be limited by what the GPU can produce, not by what the CPU can process.

Video editing. Multi-core throughput is the strong suit — Cinebench R23 multi-core at 48,945 points and R20 multi-core at 20,556 points place the Ultra 9 285 in serious production territory. Timeline scrubbing, proxy generation, and export will feel fast. GPU-accelerated effects are the weak link: the RX 7400's compute score of 5,152 in PassMark GPU Compute limits how much the graphics card can contribute to rendering and effects processing.

3D rendering. CPU rendering is a clear strength given the 95th-percentile CPU standing and near-parity with the AMD EPYC 8224P (deltaPct of -0.1, effectively a tie) and AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 9755X3D (-0.3). If the renderer runs on CPU cores, this build performs like a compact workstation. GPU-path rendering on the RX 7400's 1,792 shading units and 16.49 TFLOPS FP32 output will be modest.

Software development. This is arguably the build's best-case scenario. Compilation is single- and multi-thread sensitive, and the Ultra 9 285 posts a single-thread PassMark score of 4,881 alongside its strong multithread result. Random string sorting at 73,651 points and integer math at 164,869 points both support fast text processing, indexing, and build pipelines. The GPU is largely irrelevant here.

Student and office work. Overkill in the best way. Document editing, browsing, and video calls barely register against a chip of this class, and the integrated Arc Xe-LPG 64EU graphics provide display output redundancy. ECC memory support adds a reliability angle for users handling important data.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU numbers tell a consistent story of elite throughput. In Cinebench R15, the Ultra 9 285 scores 4,933 multi-core and 696 single-core; in R20, 20,556 multi-core and 2,901 single-core; in R23, 48,945 multi-core and 6,909 single-core. The single-core figures are particularly important — they sit in the 95th-percentile overall profile and indicate that lightly threaded applications will not be penalized despite the chip's many-core orientation. PassMark results reinforce this: 56,602 multithread, 4,881 single-thread, 3,598 physics, 194,988 floating point math, 164,869 integer math, 602,121 data compression, 46,949 data encryption, 45,357 extended instructions, and 459 find-prime-numbers. The average benchmark score of 75,488 lands it within a rounding error of the AMD EPYC 8224P (75,582), marginally ahead of the EPYC 4545P (75,373), and fractionally behind the Ryzen 7 PRO 9755X3D (75,716) and 9755 (75,738). In short: workstation-class CPU performance.

The GPU numbers tell the opposite story. The RX 7400 averages 2,467 across its benchmark set — 1,103 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, 11,897 in PassMark G3D, 5,152 in GPU Compute, 1,209 in G2D, and PassMark DirectX scores of 176 (DX9), 59 (DX10), 97 (DX11), and 44 (DX12). Its nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon 8040S (deltaPct 1.1), NVIDIA GeForce 710M (1.4), Intel HD Graphics 610 (1.8), and GT 710M (1.9). Being roughly 1–2 percent from integrated and legacy entry-level graphics is a damning comparison set for any gaming ambition. The combined build percentile of 56 exists almost entirely because the CPU drags the average upward.

Balance and Bottleneck

This is one of the most lopsided pairings the data can describe. The CPU sits at the 95th percentile of all CPUs; the GPU sits at the 17th percentile of all GPUs. In any workload that scales with both components, the RX 7400 is the limiting factor by an enormous margin.

For gaming specifically, the consequence is a hard frame ceiling regardless of resolution or settings. A 95th-percentile processor could theoretically feed frames to a far faster graphics card — the single-thread score of 4,881 and physics score of 3,598 indicate the CPU side of the pipeline is never the constraint at playable frame rates. Estimated FPS scaling from the benchmark scores suggests that lowering resolution and graphical settings will produce only limited gains, because at the RX 7400's performance level the CPU's surplus capacity simply goes unused. Conversely, there is no scenario in this database's data where the GPU outpaces the CPU.

For productivity, the bottleneck inverts by workload type. Pure CPU tasks — rendering, compiling, compression at 602,121 points — run at full capability. Anything requiring GPU compute acceleration, such as effects rendering or GPU-based encoding paths, falls back to the RX 7400's 5,152 compute score and slows accordingly. The rational mitigation, supported by the data, is to route heavy work to the CPU's 24 threads and treat the GPU strictly as a display adapter.

Who Should Build It

Developers and software engineers are the primary fit. The compile-and-test workload profile — high single-thread speed, massive multi-thread headroom, strong integer and string performance — maps directly onto this CPU's scores. The GPU requirement for that profession is essentially zero, which conveniently matches what the RX 7400 delivers.

Content creators focused on CPU-bound pipelines benefit next. Video editors working with codec-optimized or CPU-rendered workflows get 48,945 points of R23 multi-core throughput; 3D artists using CPU render engines get performance comparable to EPYC-branded workstation chips. Creators dependent on GPU rendering or heavy GPU effects should look elsewhere.

Small business workstations are a strong use case: ECC memory support, a 65 W TDP processor, and desktop-class stability make this a credible office-server or workstation-lite configuration where graphics needs are limited to multi-monitor output — the RX 7400's one HDMI 2.1a and three DisplayPort 2.1 outputs handle that cleanly.

Gamers should temper expectations severely. At 1080p with reduced settings, estimated performance from the benchmark scores suggests playable frame rates in lighter titles, but the 17th-percentile GPU ranking rules out high-refresh ultra-settings gaming at any resolution. This is not a build for 1440p or 4K gaming, and the data does not support recommending it for that purpose. Students and general office users will find it massively capable but should recognize the GPU is the weak leg.

CPU Analysis

The Core Ultra 9 285 is an Arrow Lake-S desktop processor built on TSMC's 3 nm process, packing 17,800 million transistors into a 243 mm² die. It runs 24 cores and 24 threads — one thread per core, no SMT-style doubling — with a 2.50 GHz base clock boosting to 5.60 GHz. The 5.60 GHz boost is what drives the excellent single-core results: 696 in R15, 2,901 in R20, and 6,909 in R23 single-core tests, plus the 4,881 PassMark single-thread score.

Cache configuration follows a distributed design: 192 KB of L1 and 3 MB of L2 per core, with a shared 36 MB L3 pool. That per-core L2 allocation helps explain the strong sustained multi-core results, since each core has substantial local capacity before touching shared resources. Memory support is DDR5 over a dual-channel bus delivering 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth, and ECC is supported — an unusual, workstation-friendly feature for a desktop part.

Platform details matter here too: the chip uses Intel Socket 1851, provides PCIe Gen 5 with 20 CPU-attached lanes, and carries Arc Xe-LPG integrated graphics with 64 EUs as a display-output fallback. The 65 W TDP is notably low for a 24-core flagship-class part and is reflected in the efficiency-optimized profile of the benchmark results. The locked multiplier (multiplierUnlocked: false) means the performance measured is the performance buyers get — there is no overclocking headroom to recover.

In practical terms, the benchmark profile describes a chip that behaves like a compact workstation CPU: near-EPYC multi-core throughput (within 0.1 percent of the EPYC 8224P's average), flagship-grade single-thread responsiveness, and memory bandwidth sufficient to keep all 24 threads fed in most workloads.

Gaming Performance

No measured FPS data exists for this exact CPU+GPU combination in the FACT PACK — the measuredFps field is empty and dataIsMeasured is false. All frame-rate discussion below is therefore estimated from benchmark scores, not measured in-game results.

The estimate framework is straightforward. The RX 7400's G3D score of 11,897 and Steel Nomad result of 1,103 place it in the same performance band as integrated-class graphics per the rival list. Estimated from those scores: competitive esports and older titles at 1080p with low-to-medium settings are the realistic target; modern AAA games at 1080p will likely require significant setting reductions for playable frame rates; ultra-settings play at any resolution is not a supported expectation from this data. At higher resolutions like 1440p and 4K, the 8 GB of GDDR6 and 288 GB/s of bandwidth become additional constraints on top of the raw compute deficit.

The DirectX-tier scores hint at where the card struggles most: PassMark DirectX 12 scores 44, compared to 176 in DirectX 9 — a steep drop in modern API paths where the card's limited shading resources (1,792 units) and 28 RT cores are pushed hardest. Estimated ray-traced gaming performance should be considered off the table; the RT hardware exists on paper but the surrounding resources are too thin for it to carry ultra-settings workloads.

The CPU, for its part, contributes nothing limiting here — and that is the frustration. The 95th-percentile processor ensures the GPU is always the frame-setter, at every resolution and every settings tier the estimates cover.

FAQ

Q: Is this build good for gaming?

A: No, not by the benchmark data. The RX 7400 ranks in the 17th percentile of all GPUs with a G3D score of 11,897, placing it near integrated-class graphics. Estimated performance supports lighter 1080p gaming only, and no measured FPS data exists for this pairing.

Q: What is the main bottleneck in this build?

A: The GPU, decisively. The CPU sits at the 95th percentile; the GPU at the 17th. Any workload scaling on graphics performance is limited by the RX 7400 long before the Core Ultra 9 285's 24 threads are saturated.

Q: How does the CPU compare to rivals?

A: Its average benchmark score of 75,488 is within 0.1 percent of the AMD EPYC 8224P (75,582), 0.2 percent ahead of the EPYC 4545P (75,373), and 0.3 percent behind the Ryzen 7 PRO 9755X3D (75,716) and 9755 (75,738) — effectively workstation-class performance.

Q: Is the CPU good for productivity work like video editing or compiling?

A: Yes. Cinebench R23 multi-core stands at 48,945, PassMark multithread at 56,602, and single-thread at 4,881 — a profile that handles rendering, encoding, and compilation with equal competence.

Q: Can the CPU be overclocked?

A: No. The multiplier is locked on this part (part number SRQD4), so the measured benchmark scores represent its ceiling.

Q: Does the build support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Core Ultra 285 supports ECC over its dual-channel DDR5 interface, which adds a reliability option unusual for a desktop platform.

Q: How much VRAM does the RX 7400 have, and is it enough?

A: 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 288 GB/s of bandwidth. For the estimated light 1080p gaming this card supports, 8 GB is adequate; for modern AAA titles at higher settings, it is a likely constraint.

Build Overview

This is a desktop-class build (buildClass: desktop) pairing a flagship-tier Arrow Lake processor with an entry-tier RDNA 3 graphics card. Its overall tier is difficult to state as a single number precisely because the two halves disagree so strongly: the combined percentile of 56 is an arithmetic compromise between a 95th-percentile CPU and a 17th-percentile GPU, and it describes neither component accurately.

The honest summary: this is a workstation-grade computing platform with a display adapter attached. The Core Ultra 9 285 brings 24 cores at up to 5.60 GHz, 36 MB of shared L3, Gen 5 PCIe with 20 CPU lanes, DDR5 with ECC, and benchmark scores that shadow EPYC-class hardware. The RX 7400 brings a dual-slot, low-power graphics solution — 43 W TDP, a single 6-pin connector, a 200 W suggested PSU — with display outputs of one HDMI 2.1a and three DisplayPort 2.1. As a coherent whole, the pairing makes sense only when the workload is CPU-dominant. As a gaming or GPU-compute build, the data does not support it.

GPU Analysis

The Radeon RX 7400 is a Navi 33-based card — codename "Hotpink Bonefish" — built on TSMC's 6 nm process with 13,300 million transistors across a 204 mm² die at a density of 65.2 million transistors per mm². Its RDNA 3.0 architecture configuration includes 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 28 RT cores, producing a pixel rate of 147.2 GPixel/s, a texture rate of 257.6 GTexel/s, and FP32 compute of 16.49 TFLOPS (FP16 at 32.97 TFLOPS in a 2:1 ratio).

Clocks run from a 1,452 MHz base to a 2,300 MHz boost, with a 2,200 MHz game clock — indicating that sustained gaming loads hold near peak frequencies. Memory is 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus clocked at 2,250 MHz (18 Gbps effective), delivering 288 GB/s of bandwidth. The bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x8, a cost-conscious choice that slightly constrains host transfer bandwidth compared to full-width interfaces. There are no tensor cores, and API support extends to DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

What the benchmark scores mean for rendering: not much, unfortunately. The 5,152 GPU Compute score and 16.49 TFLOPS FP32 figure describe modest compute capability — sufficient for basic GPU acceleration, video decode, and display duties, but far below what dedicated compute or high-fidelity rendering demands. The 28 RT cores exist architecturally, but the Steel Nomad score of 1,103 and DX12 PassMark result of 44 indicate that ray-traced and modern-API rendering workloads will run at levels consistent with the card's 17th-percentile standing. For rendering purposes, the practical guidance from this data is unambiguous: put the work on the CPU's 24 cores, not on this GPU.

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 9 285 + AMD Radeon RX 7400

Power Build

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core Ultra 9 285

AMD Radeon RX 7400

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

Usage Scenarios

Benchmark Performance

Balance and Bottleneck

Who Should Build It

CPU Analysis

Gaming Performance

FAQ

Build Overview

GPU Analysis

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