SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 9 285 + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 SUPER

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

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 SUPER

2,690 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 NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 SUPER is a desktop combination defined by a striking imbalance: a CPU sitting in the 95th percentile of all processors, matched to a GPU positioned at the 18th percentile of all graphics cards. The combined build percentile of 57 reflects that tension directly. This is a compute-first machine — a 24-core Arrow Lake processor that trades blows with workstation-class AMD rivals — bolted to a mid-range Blackwell graphics card. No measured FPS data exists for this exact pairing, so all gaming figures discussed below are estimates derived from the benchmark scores rather than in-house measurements.

CPU Analysis

The Core Ultra 9 285 is a serious piece of silicon. Built on TSMC's 3 nm process within the Arrow Lake-S family, it packs 24 cores and 24 threads — a no-hyperthreading design where every thread maps to a physical core — into a 243 mm² die carrying 17,800 million transistors. The clock structure spans a 2.50 GHz base up to a 5.60 GHz boost, and the whole package fits inside a 65 W TDP, which is remarkable for a chip with this many cores. It drops into Intel Socket 1851 as an active, current-generation desktop part.

The cache hierarchy is generous and per-core-weighted: 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and a shared 36 MB L3 pool. There is no 3D V-Cache variant here — Intel's approach to the gaming-cache war is simply absent from this chip's design brief, which the benchmark data confirms. Memory support is DDR5 on a dual-channel bus delivering 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth, with ECC memory supported — a feature that quietly signals workstation intent. PCIe connectivity is Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU, enough for a full x16 graphics link plus a fast NVMe drive without lane sharing. The multiplier is locked, so manual overclocking is off the table. Integrated Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 EU handles display duties when no discrete card is present.

Benchmark results indicate elite multi-core throughput. A Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 48,945 sits comfortably in enthusiast-desktop territory, and the progression across Cinebench generations is consistent: 4,933 in R15 multi-core, 20,556 in R20 multi-core. Single-core performance is strong rather than spectacular — 6,909 in R23 single-core and 696 in R15 single-core — meaning per-thread responsiveness is good, but the chip's identity is throughput, not latency-heroics. That profile maps onto rendering, compilation, and batch processing far better than it maps onto lightly-threaded legacy applications.

Passmark tells the same story with more granularity. The multithread score of 56,602 pairs with a single-thread score of 4,881, giving a heavily multi-thread-tilted ratio. Individual subtests show breadth: 602,121 in data compression, 46,949 in encryption, 45,357 in extended instructions (SSE/AVX throughput), 194,988 in floating point math, and 164,869 in integer math. String sorting at 73,651 and physics at 3,598 round out a profile with no obvious weak lane. The average benchmark score of 75,488 places the chip in the 95th percentile of all CPUs measured.

The nearest rivals list is revealing. The Ultra 9 285 lands within a rounding error of the AMD EPYC 8224P (75,582 average, a delta of -0.1%), the AMD EPYC 4545P (75,373, +0.2%), and both the Ryzen 7 PRO 9755X3D and Ryzen 7 PRO 9755 (75,716 and 75,738, deltas of -0.3% each). Those are server and professional workstation processors. A desktop CPU benchmarking dead-even with EPYC silicon means sustained, parallel, long-duration workloads are this chip's home turf.

Balance and Bottleneck

The data shows a hard GPU bottleneck in anything graphics-bound. A 95th-percentile CPU feeding an 18th-percentile GPU means the processor will spend most gaming scenarios waiting. The Core Ultra 9 285's locked multiplier and absence of gaming-optimized cache stacking reinforce this: nothing in its architecture or its scores suggests it was tuned to push frame rates at the margin, and even if it were, the graphics card is the limiting layer.

Flip the workload, and the bottleneck inverts completely. In rendering, encoding, compression, and compilation, the GPU's 32.15 TFLOPS of FP32 and 672 GB/s of memory bandwidth contribute little to CPU-driven throughput tests, and the 24-core Arrow Lake part becomes the star. The combined build percentile of 57 is essentially the average of an elite CPU and an entry-tier GPU — a number that describes the whole machine accurately but describes neither half of it well.

The GPU's lone benchmark entry makes the tier picture unambiguous. A 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2,690 places it within striking distance of the NVIDIA Quadro K1100M (2,664 average, delta +1%), the GeForce GT 1030 (2,662, +1.1%), the Intel Arc Pro B50 (2,660, +1.1%), and the GeForce GT 440 (2,645, +1.7%). The data shows this card in the same performance conversation as entry-level and legacy parts by this metric, and any gaming expectations should be calibrated accordingly.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming. Not this build's strength. With the GPU at the 18th percentile and a Steel Nomad score comparable to entry-level cards, high-refresh 1440p or 4K gaming is out of reach; frame expectations must be framed as estimates, and modest ones, derived from those scores rather than measured data.

Streaming. The CPU side is well-suited: 24 hardware threads with a 56,602 Passmark multithread score and 602,121 in data compression leave ample headroom for simultaneous encode and gameplay work. The GPU side is the constraint — the stream will run, but the game underneath it will be limited by the graphics card, not the processor.

Video editing. A mixed verdict. Timeline scrubbing, effects compilation, and export-side CPU work benefit directly from the 48,945 Cinebench R23 multi-core score and 194,988 floating point result. GPU-accelerated effects and AI-assisted tools lean on 200 tensor cores and 18 GB of GDDR7, which helps, but raw GPU rendering throughput sits low in the percentile table.

3D rendering. CPU rendering is excellent — dead even with EPYC-class rivals per the nearestRivals data. GPU rendering is the weak link, with the 2,690 Steel Nomad score and 32.15 TFLOPS FP32 indicating that viewport interactivity and CUDA-based render passes will trail the CPU's capabilities substantially.

Software development. Arguably the best-fit scenario. Large-codebase compilation scales with the 24 physical cores; data compression at 602,121 and encryption at 46,949 accelerate build pipelines, container work, and repository operations; the 4,881 single-thread score keeps IDEs and debuggers responsive. ECC support adds correctness for long-running builds.

Student and office work. Overkill on the CPU side and underpowered on the GPU side — but entirely functional. Browsing, documents, and web conferencing barely dent a chip that matches workstation processors, and the integrated Arc Xe-LPG graphics provide a fallback display path.

Who Should Build It

The target user is a developer, engineer, or content-creation professional whose work is CPU-bound. Software teams compiling large codebases get 24 physical cores with per-core L2 of 3 MB and a multi-core profile that benchmark results indicate matches AMD EPYC parts within a fraction of a percent. Small businesses building workstations will value ECC DDR5 support, the 65 W TDP, and the locked, predictable clock behavior. 3D artists who render on the CPU — and who treat the GPU as a viewport and display device rather than a compute engine — fit this configuration.

What this build is not for: gamers chasing high frame rates at any resolution. The GPU's 18th-percentile standing and its Steel Nomad peer group — GT 1030-class cards among them — make clear that anyone whose primary workload is graphics-bound should redirect the balance of the build toward the graphics card. Students in compute-heavy or engineering disciplines, and offices that want a long-lived, ECC-capable machine, are secondary candidates. The CPU's launch MSRP was $579.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU numbers, in full: Cinebench R15 multi-core 4,933 and single-core 696; Cinebench R20 multi-core 20,556 and single-core 2,901; Cinebench R23 multi-core 48,945 and single-core 6,909. Passmark results: multithread 56,602, single-thread 4,881, integer math 164,869, floating point math 194,988, data compression 602,121, encryption 46,949, extended instructions 45,357, prime finding 459, string sorting 73,651, physics 3,598. The average benchmark score is 75,488 at the 95th percentile versus all CPUs.

The GPU contributes a single recorded result: 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 at 2,690, for an average benchmark score of 2,690 and an 18th-percentile standing against all GPUs. Nearest rivals cluster within a couple of percent: Quadro K1100M at +1%, GT 1030 at +1.1%, Arc Pro B50 at +1.1%, GT 440 at +1.7%.

The combined picture is a build percentile of 57 — an arithmetic middle produced by an extreme split. Interpret it as two different machines sharing one case: a workstation-grade compute platform and an entry-tier graphics platform. Which one the user experiences depends entirely on whether the workload touches the GPU.

Gaming Performance

No measured FPS data exists for this exact CPU+GPU combination — the FACT PACK contains no measured frame-rate rows, and `dataIsMeasured` is false. Every gaming statement here is therefore an estimate derived from the benchmark scores, not a measurement.

The estimate is straightforward and unfavorable for demanding titles. An 18th-percentile GPU with a Steel Nomad score of 2,690 and a rival set anchored by entry-level cards cannot deliver smooth ultra-settings play in modern AAA games at high resolutions. What the estimates do support: lighter and older titles, reduced settings, and lower resolutions where the 6400 shading units, 80 ROPs, and 672 GB/s of bandwidth can stretch. The CPU will never be the frame limiter — a Passmark physics score of 3,598 and a 4,881 single-thread score guarantee enormous headroom on the simulation side — but that headroom is wasted when the render side caps out first. Esports-class and less demanding games are the realistic estimate; ultra-preset 4K AAA gaming is not.

GPU Analysis

The RTX 5070 SUPER's spec sheet reads better than its benchmark position. The GB205 chip on TSMC's 5 nm node carries 31,100 million transistors across 263 mm², at a density of 118.3M per mm². Clocks run from a 2,325 MHz base to a 2,512 MHz boost, with memory at 1,750 MHz — 28 Gbps effective. The memory subsystem is the headline: 18 GB of GDDR7 on a 192-bit bus, delivering 672 GB/s of bandwidth, a figure that comfortably supports high-resolution texture streaming and large AI models in memory.

Compute resources include 6,400 shading units, 200 TMUs, 80 ROPs, 50 RT cores, and 200 tensor cores. Throughput figures are 32.15 TFLOPS FP32, with FP16 at a 1:1 ratio of 32.15 TFLOPS, a 201.0 GPixel/s pixel rate, and a 502.4 GTexel/s texture rate. Ray tracing and AI hardware are present in full: the 50 RT cores handle BVH traversal for real-time ray-traced rendering, and the 200 tensor cores drive DLSS-class upscaling and neural rendering workloads — capabilities that matter more than raw raster throughput for this card's realistic gaming envelope.

The board itself is practical: dual-slot, 245 mm long, 115 mm tall, 40 mm wide, drawing 275 W through a single 16-pin connector over PCIe 5.0 x16. Display outputs are modern — one HDMI 2.1b and three DisplayPort 2.1b — with DirectX 12 Ultimate, Vulkan 1.4, and OpenGL 4.6 API support.

For rendering specifically, the data says: capable on paper, modest in practice. The Steel Nomad score of 2,690 against rivals within a few percent of entry-level parts means GPU rendering throughput trails the card's spec-sheet promise. The 18th percentile placement is the number that matters for expectations; tensor-core-accelerated workflows and the 18 GB frame buffer are where the card justifies itself.

FAQ

Q: Is this a balanced gaming build?

A: No. The data shows a 95th-percentile CPU paired with an 18th-percentile GPU. In graphics-bound workloads the GPU is the bottleneck by a wide margin; the CPU's gaming headroom goes largely unused.

Q: How does the Core Ultra 9 285 compare to its rivals?

A: It benchmarks essentially even with the AMD EPYC 8224P (-0.1%), AMD EPYC 4545P (+0.2%), and Ryzen 7 PRO 9755X3D / 9755 (-0.3% each) — server and workstation processors — while sitting in the 95th percentile of all CPUs.

Q: Can the CPU be overclocked?

A: No. The multiplier is locked. Its 5.60 GHz boost clock is the ceiling, within a 65 W TDP.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does the platform have?

A: The CPU's dual-channel DDR5 controller delivers 102.4 GB/s; the GPU adds 672 GB/s across its 18 GB of GDDR7 on a 192-bit bus.

Q: Are there measured FPS numbers for this pairing?

A: No. The dataset contains no measured frame rates for this combination, so all gaming figures are estimates from the benchmark scores — and those estimates point toward modest frame rates in demanding titles.

Q: Is this build suitable for software development?

A: Yes — it is one of the best-fit scenarios. A Passmark multithread score of 56,602, 602,121 in data compression, 24 physical cores, and ECC DDR5 support make it a strong compilation and build machine.

Q: Does the platform support modern display and expansion standards?

A: Yes. The GPU offers HDMI 2.1b and three DisplayPort 2.1b outputs over PCIe 5.0 x16, and the CPU provides 20 Gen 5 lanes, DirectX 12 Ultimate, and Vulkan 1.4 support.

Build Overview

This is a desktop build — `buildClass` confirms it — built around an unusual thesis: maximum CPU, minimum GPU. The Core Ultra 9 285 is a 3 nm, 24-core Arrow Lake-S processor whose 95th-percentile average score of 75,488 places it alongside EPYC and Ryzen PRO workstation silicon. The RTX 5070 SUPER brings modern Blackwell 2.0 architecture, GDDR7 memory, and full RT/tensor hardware, but its 18th-percentile standing and 2,690 Steel Nomad score anchor it in entry territory by the data.

The combined percentile of 57 is the honest summary: a machine whose overall tier is middling only because its two halves are extremes. Users who need the CPU half — developers, engineers, CPU-rendering artists, ECC-minded small businesses — get genuine workstation-class capability in a desktop envelope. Users who need the GPU half should look elsewhere; the data is unambiguous about which component carries this build.

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 9 285 + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 SUPER

Power Build

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core Ultra 9 285

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 SUPER

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

CPU Analysis

Balance and Bottleneck

Usage Scenarios

Who Should Build It

Benchmark Performance

Gaming Performance

GPU Analysis

FAQ

Build Overview

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