SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 9 285 + NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000

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

93 / 100
ULTIMATE READY

Apex Performer

Top 7% 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
97%
VS
GPU
90%
PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 9 285

75,488 Benchmark Score
Top 3% Market Ranking
View Full Specs →
GRAPHICS CARD

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000

17,789 Benchmark Score
Top 10% 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

# CPU Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 is a 24-core, 24-thread desktop processor built on the Arrow Lake architecture and manufactured on a 3 nm process by TSMC. It operates with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.60 GHz, while its 65 W TDP classification reflects a power-efficient design relative to its core count. The chip integrates 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die, with a cache hierarchy comprising 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. Memory support is limited to DDR5, running on a dual-channel bus with a theoretical bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s, and ECC memory is supported, which positions this processor for workstation reliability.

Benchmark data shows the Core Ultra 9 285 achieving a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 48,945 and a single-core score of 6,909. These results place the CPU at the 95th percentile among all processors, indicating top-tier performance. The multi-core score is particularly strong, reflecting the 24 physical cores' ability to handle heavily threaded workloads such as video rendering, scientific simulations, and batch processing. In Cinebench R20, the multi-core score of 20,556 and single-core score of 2,901 follow the same pattern, with the single-core performance suggesting excellent responsiveness in lightly threaded tasks like web browsing and office applications. The PassMark multithread score of 56,602 further corroborates the CPU's dominance in parallel workloads, while the single-thread score of 4,881 shows competitive performance in single-core scenarios.

Comparing to nearest rivals, the Core Ultra 9 285 sits within a narrow band of performance. Its average benchmark score of 75,488 is 0.1% lower than the AMD EPYC 8224P's 75,582, 0.2% higher than the AMD EPYC 4545P's 75,373, 0.3% lower than the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 9755X3D's 75,716, and 0.3% lower than the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 9755's 75,738. These deltas are minimal, suggesting that the Core Ultra 9 285 competes directly with server-class and high-end PRO processors in aggregate performance, though its desktop socket and 65 W TDP make it a distinct offering.

The PassMark data compression score of 602,121 and encryption score of 46,949 indicate strong performance in data-intensive tasks such as file archiving and secure communications. Floating-point math scores of 194,988 and integer math scores of 164,869 demonstrate balanced arithmetic capability, which is critical for scientific computing and financial modeling. The extended instructions score of 45,357 suggests robust SIMD and vector processing, benefiting multimedia applications and cryptography. The find prime numbers score of 459 is notably lower, reflecting a weaker performance in this specific integer-heavy test, but this is an outlier relative to the overall strong scores. Physics simulation scores of 3,598 in PassMark indicate adequate performance for physics-based rendering and game physics, though not class-leading.

The Core Ultra 9 285's architecture, with 24 threads matching 24 cores, means there is no hyper-threading overhead. This design choice favors consistent performance in fully parallel workloads but may slightly reduce efficiency in tasks that benefit from additional logical threads. The integrated graphics, Arc Xe-LPG with 64 execution units, provides basic display output and light media acceleration, but it is not intended for gaming or compute-intensive GPU tasks. The unlocked multiplier is not available, limiting overclocking potential, but the 5.60 GHz boost clock already delivers high per-core performance out of the box.

# GPU Analysis

The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 is a workstation GPU based on the Turing architecture, using the TU104 chip manufactured on a 12 nm process by TSMC. It features 2,304 shading units, 144 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operation units, along with 36 ray tracing cores and 288 tensor cores. The GPU operates at a base clock of 1005 MHz and a boost clock of 1545 MHz, with memory running at 1625 MHz (13 Gbps effective). The 8 GB of GDDR6 memory is accessed via a 256-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 416.0 GB/s, which is substantial for its class. The pixel rate is 98.88 GPixel/s and texture rate is 222.5 GTexel/s, while FP32 performance is rated at 7.119 TFLOPS and FP16 at 14.24 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio.

Benchmark results show the Quadro RTX 4000 achieving a PassMark G3D score of 15,117 and a PassMark GPU compute score of 6,176. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 74,540 and Vulkan score of 78,844 indicate strong compute and graphics API performance. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, the score is 1,873, which reflects modern gaming and rendering workloads. The DirectX 10, 11, and 12 scores of 108, 128, and 52, respectively, are lower, showing that the GPU is less optimized for legacy or specific DirectX paths. The DirectX 9 score of 205 is relatively higher, suggesting better compatibility with older titles. The PassMark G2D score of 846 points to adequate 2D desktop performance.

The GPU sits at the 61st percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 17,789. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon HD 7790 with an average score of 17,666 (0.7% higher), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 with 17,639 (0.9% higher), the AMD Radeon 780M with 17,588 (1.1% higher), and the AMD Radeon Pro 560 with 17,551 (1.4% higher). These deltas are small, placing the Quadro RTX 4000 in a competitive position against both older and newer GPUs, though the RTX 4060's presence in this list highlights that this workstation card is not far ahead of a mainstream consumer GPU from a later generation.

For rendering workloads, the Quadro RTX 4000's 36 ray tracing cores and 288 tensor cores provide hardware acceleration for ray-traced rendering and AI-based denoising, which are critical for professional 3D applications like Autodesk Maya or Blender. The 8 GB VRAM, while modest by modern standards, is sufficient for moderate scene complexity and 1080p or 1440p rendering. The 416.0 GB/s memory bandwidth ensures that texture streaming and large buffer transfers are not bottlenecks in most workstation tasks. The FP32 throughput of 7.119 TFLOPS is adequate for real-time previews and GPU-accelerated effects, though it will lag behind higher-tier cards in heavy compute tasks.

The GPU's TDP of 160 W and suggested PSU of 450 W indicate that it is power-efficient for its performance class. The single-slot design and 241 mm length make it suitable for compact workstations, and the 1x 8-pin power connector simplifies installation. The display outputs, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a and 1x USB Type-C, support multi-monitor setups and modern display connectivity. The bus interface is PCIe 3.0 x16, which is older than the CPU's PCIe Gen 5 support, but this does not significantly impact GPU performance in most workloads.

# Upgrade Path and Platform

The Core Ultra 9 285 uses the Intel Socket 1851, which is specific to the Arrow Lake platform. This socket supports DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, and the CPU's memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s is a key consideration for memory-intensive applications. The CPU provides 20 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, enabling high-speed connectivity for NVMe SSDs and future GPUs, though the Quadro RTX 4000 itself uses PCIe 3.0 x16. ECC memory support is available, which is a critical feature for data integrity in workstation environments.

The GPU's suggested PSU is 450 W, and its TDP is 160 W, while the CPU's TDP is 65 W. This combined power draw of approximately 225 W leaves significant headroom within the 450 W PSU recommendation, even when accounting for other system components. This means the platform is not power-constrained, and users could potentially upgrade to a more powerful GPU without needing a new power supply, provided the PSU has the necessary connectors. The GPU requires a single 8-pin power connector, which is standard on most modern PSUs.

A sensible next upgrade for this platform would focus on the GPU, as the CPU is already at the 95th percentile and unlikely to be a bottleneck. The Quadro RTX 4000, at the 61st percentile, is the weaker link in the pairing. Upgrading to a GPU with higher benchmark scores and more VRAM would benefit rendering and gaming workloads. However, the PCIe 3.0 x16 interface on the GPU is a limitation; the CPU's PCIe Gen 5 lanes are backward-compatible, but the GPU's older interface means it cannot fully utilize the newer standard's bandwidth. For memory, the dual-channel DDR5 support is current, and adding more capacity or faster modules could improve performance in memory-bound tasks, though the 102.4 GB/s bandwidth is already respectable.

The platform's production status is active for the CPU, ensuring ongoing availability and driver support. The GPU is end-of-life, which means drivers may become less frequent over time, but official support remains for the Turing architecture. The socket 1851 has limited longevity, as Intel typically moves to new sockets with each major architecture change, so future CPU upgrades within this socket are likely limited to the same generation. The presence of integrated graphics on the CPU provides a fallback if the discrete GPU fails or is removed, enhancing system resilience.

# Balance and Bottleneck

The pairing of the Core Ultra 9 285 with the Quadro RTX 4000 creates a significant imbalance in compute capability. The CPU, at the 95th percentile, is far more capable than the GPU, which sits at the 61st percentile. This means that in workloads that rely heavily on GPU compute, such as 3D rendering, video encoding, or gaming, the GPU will be the limiting factor. The CPU will often be idle or underutilized while waiting for the GPU to complete tasks, resulting in a bottleneck that reduces overall system throughput.

In contrast, workloads that are CPU-bound, such as data compression, encryption, or software compilation, will see the CPU performing at its full potential, with the GPU playing a minimal role. The PassMark data compression score of 602,121 and encryption score of 46,949 highlight the CPU's strength in these areas, which are not reliant on the GPU. For gaming, the GPU's performance will dictate frame rates, and the CPU's high single-core score of 4,881 in PassMark ensures that it can feed frames to the GPU without becoming a bottleneck, but the GPU's lower percentile will cap maximum FPS.

The combined percentile of the build is 78, reflecting the GPU's drag on the overall performance. The FPS scaling, while not measured for this exact combination, can be estimated from the benchmark scores. The GPU's 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1,873 and PassMark G3D score of 15,117 suggest it can handle 1080p gaming at high settings but will struggle at 4K or with ray tracing enabled. The CPU's performance is sufficient for high-refresh-rate gaming at lower resolutions, but the GPU will limit frame rates to what its raw throughput allows.

The memory bandwidth disparity is also notable. The GPU's 416.0 GB/s is over four times the CPU's 102.4 GB/s, which is typical since the GPU requires far more bandwidth for texture and frame buffer access. This does not create a bottleneck per se, but it highlights that the GPU is designed for high-throughput tasks, while the CPU is optimized for latency-sensitive, sequential workloads. In practical terms, a user running a multi-threaded CPU rendering task will see the CPU excel, while the same user running a GPU-accelerated render will see the GPU limit performance.

# Who Should Build It

This build targets users who need exceptional CPU performance for multi-threaded workloads but have modest GPU requirements. Software developers compiling large codebases will benefit from the CPU's 24 cores and high multi-core scores, such as the Cinebench R23 result of 48,945, which translates to faster build times. Data scientists and researchers running simulations or data processing will find the PassMark multithread score of 56,602 and data compression score of 602,121 valuable for handling large datasets. The ECC memory support is a draw for professionals who require data integrity in financial or scientific computing.

Content creators who work primarily with CPU-based rendering, such as video editors using software encoders or 3D artists using CPU renderers, will see strong performance. The CPU's Cinebench R20 multi-core score of 20,556 indicates it can handle complex scenes and long render times efficiently. However, creators who rely on GPU acceleration for rendering or effects will find the Quadro RTX 4000 limiting, given its 61st percentile standing and 8 GB VRAM. Students and small business users engaged in office productivity, web development, or light data analysis will find the system more than capable, with the CPU's single-core score of 6,909 in Cinebench R23 ensuring snappy application responsiveness.

Gamers at 1080p or 1440p will find the GPU adequate for many titles, but those seeking high-refresh-rate or 4K gaming will be disappointed. The CPU's performance ensures that it will not be a bottleneck in gaming, but the GPU's 7.119 TFLOPS FP32 performance and 8 GB VRAM will limit settings and resolutions. This build is not ideal for gamers seeking a dedicated gaming rig, but it can serve as a dual-purpose workstation that handles occasional gaming.

# Gaming Performance

No measured FPS rows exist for this exact combination, as the FACT PACK contains no measuredFps data. Therefore, all FPS discussions are estimates based on the benchmark scores. The GPU's 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1,873 and PassMark G3D score of 15,117 suggest that at 1080p with ultra settings, the Quadro RTX 4000 can deliver playable frame rates in many esports and older titles, potentially exceeding 60 FPS. For more demanding AAA games, frame rates may drop to 30-50 FPS at 1080p, depending on the title's optimization.

At 1440p, the GPU's 8 GB VRAM and 416.0 GB/s bandwidth will become stressed, and frame rates will likely fall below 60 FPS in most modern games at ultra settings. The GPU's DirectX 12 score of 52 in PassMark is low, indicating weaker performance in modern APIs, which could further reduce frame rates in DX12 titles. The ray tracing cores, while present, are from the Turing generation and are less efficient than newer implementations, so enabling ray tracing will significantly impact performance, likely making it unusable at higher resolutions.

The CPU's high single-core performance, with a Cinebench R23 score of 6,909, ensures that it can maintain high frame rates in CPU-bound scenarios, such as open-world games with many NPCs. However, the GPU will cap overall frame rates. For gaming, this build is best suited to 1080p with medium to high settings, where the GPU can keep up with the CPU's output. At 4K, the GPU will be the definitive bottleneck, and frame rates will be below 30 FPS in most titles, making it unsuitable for high-resolution gaming.

# FAQ

Q: What is the CPU's core and thread count?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 has 24 cores and 24 threads, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.60 GHz.

Q: Does the GPU support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 has 36 ray tracing cores, based on the Turing architecture, and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2).

Q: What memory type does the CPU support?

A: The CPU supports DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, with a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s and ECC memory support.

Q: What is the GPU's VRAM size and bandwidth?

A: The GPU has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory with a 256-bit bus and a bandwidth of 416.0 GB/s.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The CPU's average benchmark score is 75,488, which is 0.1% lower than the AMD EPYC 8224P, 0.2% higher than the AMD EPYC 4545P, and 0.3% lower than both the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 9755X3D and AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 9755.

Q: What is the recommended PSU for this GPU?

A: The suggested PSU for the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 is 450 W, and the GPU's TDP is 160 W.

Q: Is the CPU overclockable?

A: No, the CPU's multiplier is locked, meaning it is not unlocked for overclocking, but it has a high boost clock of 5.60 GHz.

# Build Overview

This build pairs the Intel Core Ultra 9 285, a 24-core desktop CPU from the Core Ultra Series 2, with the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000, an end-of-life workstation GPU based on the Turing architecture. The build class is desktop, and the combined percentile is 78, indicating that the system performs better than 78% of all tracked configurations. However, the CPU's 95th percentile and the GPU's 61st percentile create a lopsided pairing, where the CPU is far more capable than the GPU.

The CPU is a top-tier processor for multi-threaded workloads, with an average benchmark score of 75,488, placing it at the 95th percentile. The GPU, with an average benchmark score of 17,789, is at the 61st percentile, making it a mid-range performer. This build is best suited for users who prioritize CPU performance for tasks like rendering, compilation, or data processing, but who have less demanding GPU needs. It is not a balanced gaming system, but it can serve as a workstation with occasional gaming capability.

# Benchmark Performance

The CPU's exact benchmark scores include a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 48,945 and a single-core score of 6,909, along with a PassMark multithread score of 56,602 and single-thread score of 4,881. The GPU's scores include a PassMark G3D score of 15,117, a Geekbench OpenCL score of 74,540, and a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1,873. The CPU's average benchmark score is 75,488, which is 0.1% lower than the AMD EPYC 8224P and 0.3% lower than the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 9755X3D. The GPU's average benchmark score is 17,789, which is 0.9% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 and 1.1% higher than the AMD Radeon 780M.

The combined picture shows a system where the CPU dominates in compute-intensive tasks, while the GPU provides adequate but not exceptional graphics performance. The CPU's 95th percentile and the GPU's 61st percentile result in a combined percentile of 78, reflecting the GPU's drag on overall standing. This is a workstation-class CPU with a mid-range GPU, suitable for professional workloads that are CPU-bound, but less ideal for GPU-accelerated tasks or high-end gaming.

# Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: The CPU's high single-core score of 6,909 in Cinebench R23 prevents it from bottlenecking frame rates, but the GPU's 61st percentile and 7.119 TFLOPS FP32 performance limit frame rates. At 1080p, the GPU can deliver playable frame rates in esports titles, but high-refresh 1440p or 4K gaming is not feasible.

Streaming: The CPU's 24 cores and 24 threads can handle encoding workloads, with a PassMark multithread score of 56,602, while the GPU's tensor cores can assist with AI-based encoding features. However, the GPU's lower performance may limit in-game frame rates during streaming, making it a secondary consideration.

Video editing: For CPU-based editing and encoding, the Core Ultra 9 285's Cinebench R20 multi-core score of 20,556 ensures fast timeline scrubbing and export times. The GPU's 8 GB VRAM and 416.0 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient for 1080p or 1440p previews, but GPU-accelerated effects may be slower due to the GPU's 61st percentile.

3D rendering: CPU-based renderers will see exceptional performance, with the Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 48,945 enabling quick renders. GPU-based renderers will be limited by the Quadro RTX 4000's 36 ray tracing cores and 7.119 TFLOPS, which is adequate for small scenes but not for complex, high-resolution renders.

Software development: The CPU's 24 cores and high integer math score of 164,869 in PassMark speed up compilation and testing. The GPU is largely irrelevant for this workload, making this an excellent choice for developers who need fast build times.

Student and office work: The CPU's single-core score of 4,881 in PassMark ensures responsive application performance, while the GPU's 846 G2D score handles desktop compositing. This build is overkill for basic tasks but provides headroom for future, more demanding workloads.