SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX + AMD Radeon 760M

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)

▼

90 Score

Top 10% Ranking

90 / 100

ULTIMATE READY

Apex Performer

Top 10% 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%

GPU

83%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX

76,155 Benchmark Score

Top 3% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

AMD Radeon 760M

6,019 Benchmark Score

Top 17% 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

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX and AMD Radeon 760M pairing represents a study in extremes, combining a top-tier 24-core mobile processor with an entry-level integrated graphics solution. The benchmark data indicates this is a configuration where the CPU is the dominant component, capable of workstation-class compute, while the GPU limits the system to mainstream gaming and graphics tasks. The combined percentile of 65 reflects this imbalance, positioning the pair above most systems overall but far from a balanced gaming rig.

Balance and Bottleneck

The performance data reveals a stark division of labor between these two components. The CPU’s average benchmark score of 76155 places it in the 95th percentile of all processors, while the GPU’s average score of 6019 lands in only the 35th percentile. This 60-percentage-point gap in percentile ranking is the clearest indicator of where the bottleneck lies: in any workload that relies on both components, the Radeon 760M will be the limiting factor.

For CPU-bound tasks such as data compression, encryption, and integer math, the Core Ultra 9 285HX operates without constraint. The PassMark data shows a multithread score of 56902 and a data compression score of 631885, figures that place the processor in the top 5% of all CPUs. These workloads scale with the 24 cores and 24 threads, and the integrated GPU is largely irrelevant to their execution. However, in gaming or GPU-accelerated rendering, the situation inverts. The Radeon 760M’s PassMark G3D score of 5310 is its strongest graphics result, yet this remains a fraction of what a discrete GPU would achieve, meaning frame rates will be dictated entirely by the GPU’s capabilities.

The absence of measured FPS data for this combination makes it impossible to quantify the exact FPS scaling between CPU and GPU in games, but the benchmark scores provide a clear qualitative picture. The CPU’s single-thread performance, evidenced by a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2187.5, is more than sufficient to feed any frame rate the Radeon 760M can produce. Conversely, the GPU’s 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 400 indicates a very low ceiling for graphics-intensive workloads. The bottleneck is therefore unambiguous: the GPU will cap performance in all visually demanding scenarios, while the CPU will sit idle waiting for the graphics pipeline to catch up.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU’s benchmark results establish it as a high-end mobile processor. In Cinebench R20, the multi-core score of 20236 and single-core score of 2856 demonstrate strong scaling across its 24 cores, while the R23 results of 36429.5 multi-core and 2187.5 single-core confirm this trend. The PassMark suite reinforces the CPU’s capabilities: a multithread score of 56902, floating point math at 194998, and integer math at 155076 all point to a processor that excels in compute-heavy tasks. The single-thread score of 4618 is equally impressive for a mobile chip, indicating responsive performance in lightly threaded applications.

The GPU’s benchmark results tell a different story. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 400 places it at the very bottom of modern graphics performance, while Geekbench scores of 20255 in OpenCL and 30336 in Vulkan show moderate compute capability. The PassMark G3D score of 5310 positions the Radeon 760M near the AMD Radeon RX 6400, which scores 6001, and the NVIDIA Quadro P2000, which scores 6049. This proximity to older discrete GPUs suggests the integrated solution can handle light gaming and basic graphics work, but it is not competitive with current discrete offerings.

The combined picture is one of a system that excels in CPU-bound scenarios but falls short in GPU-bound ones. The CPU’s 95th percentile ranking is offset by the GPU’s 35th percentile, resulting in a combined percentile of 65. This suggests that while the system is better than a majority of configurations, it will underperform in any task that requires substantial graphics processing relative to systems with more balanced component pairings.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX is built on the Arrow Lake architecture, manufactured on a 3 nm process by TSMC. It features 24 cores and 24 threads, with a base clock of 2.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz. The absence of hyperthreading means the thread count equals the core count, a design choice that prioritizes single-thread efficiency and power management over multi-thread throughput. The processor includes 36 MB of shared L3 cache, with 192 KB of L1 and 3 MB of L2 per core, providing ample fast memory for compute workloads.

The CPU’s benchmark scores highlight its suitability for demanding applications. The Cinebench R15 multi-core score of 5656.5 and R20 multi-core score of 20236 show strong performance in rendering tasks, while the PassMark physics score of 3476 indicates robust simulation capabilities. The data encryption score of 48567 and extended instructions score of 49148 suggest the processor is well-suited for security and scientific workloads that leverage modern instruction sets. The 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die demonstrate a dense, efficient design that achieves this performance within a 55 W TDP.

Compared to its nearest rivals, the Core Ultra 9 285HX is essentially tied with the AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX, which scores 76212, a mere 0.1% difference. It also sits within 0.5% of the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D, which scores 75779, and the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9945WX, which scores 76513. This clustering at the top of the performance charts indicates that the 285HX is at the absolute pinnacle of mobile CPU performance, making it an excellent choice for tasks like video encoding, 3D rendering, and software compilation where multi-core performance is paramount.

FAQ

Q: What is the combined performance percentile of this CPU and GPU pairing?

A: The combined percentile is 65, indicating the system performs better than 65% of all configurations in the database, though this is heavily weighted by the CPU’s strong showing.

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX compare to the AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX?

A: The two processors are effectively identical in performance, with the 285HX scoring 76155 on average versus the 8945HX’s 76212, a delta of -0.1%.

Q: What is the GPU’s performance percentile relative to all other GPUs?

A: The AMD Radeon 760M sits in the 35th percentile, meaning 65% of all GPUs in the database outperform it.

Q: Does the Radeon 760M support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the GPU includes 8 RT cores, and its API support includes DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), which mandates ray tracing capabilities.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of the Core Ultra 9 285HX?

A: The processor supports dual-channel DDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s, and it also supports ECC memory.

Q: How does the Radeon 760M compare to the NVIDIA Quadro P2000?

A: The Radeon 760M scores 5310 in PassMark G3D, while the Quadro P2000 scores 6049, making the 760M 0.5% slower on average.

Q: What is the process node for each component?

A: The CPU is manufactured on a 3 nm process by TSMC, while the GPU uses a 4 nm process, also from TSMC.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX uses the Intel BGA 2114 socket, which is a soldered mobile platform, meaning the CPU is not upgradeable in the traditional sense. The system’s upgrade path is therefore limited to what can be changed around the processor. The CPU supports dual-channel DDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s and ECC support, so upgrading to higher-capacity or faster DDR5 modules is a viable path to improve performance in memory-sensitive workloads.

For PCIe, the CPU provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes. This allows for a high-bandwidth connection to a discrete GPU or NVMe storage, though the integrated Radeon 760M itself uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface. The GPU’s TDP is 15 W, and it has no power connectors, drawing all power from the motherboard. The CPU has a TDP of 55 W, and there is no suggested PSU listed in the data, but the combined power draw of this configuration is low enough that it should be easily handled by any standard laptop power adapter.

The most sensible next upgrade for this system would be to add a discrete GPU, assuming the laptop chassis supports it via the CPU’s PCIe Gen 5 lanes. Alternatively, increasing memory capacity would benefit the integrated GPU, which uses system shared memory and has a bandwidth described as “System Dependent.” Since the GPU’s memory performance scales with the system’s RAM speed, upgrading to faster DDR5 modules would directly improve graphics performance. The CPU’s unlocked multiplier also suggests enthusiast-level tuning potential, though this is constrained by the laptop’s thermal and power delivery design.

GPU Analysis

The AMD Radeon 760M is an integrated graphics processor based on the RDNA 3.0 architecture, manufactured on a 4 nm process by TSMC. It features 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output pipelines, along with 8 RT cores for ray tracing. The GPU operates at a base clock of 800 MHz with a boost clock of 2599 MHz, delivering a pixel rate of 41.58 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 83.17 GTexel/s. Its FP32 performance is rated at 5.323 TFLOPS, which is modest for modern graphics workloads.

The GPU’s memory is system shared, meaning it uses a portion of the system’s DDR5 RAM rather than dedicated VRAM. This results in memory bandwidth that is “System Dependent,” and the bus width is likewise system shared. This design is typical for integrated graphics and explains why the GPU’s performance is heavily influenced by the CPU’s memory controller and the speed of the installed RAM. The GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, ensuring compatibility with modern game APIs.

Benchmark results show the Radeon 760M is capable of light gaming and basic graphics work. The PassMark G3D score of 5310 places it near the AMD Radeon RX 6400 (6001) and the NVIDIA Quadro P2000 (6049), both of which are older discrete GPUs. The Geekbench Vulkan score of 30336 suggests it can handle some compute tasks, but the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 400 indicates that it will struggle with demanding modern titles, particularly at higher resolutions or graphics settings. The GPU’s 35th percentile ranking confirms its position as an entry-level solution, suitable for productivity and casual gaming rather than high-end rendering.

Who Should Build It

This configuration is best suited for users who prioritize CPU performance above all else and have minimal graphics requirements. The 95th percentile CPU makes it an excellent choice for software developers, data analysts, and researchers who run compilation, simulation, or data processing workloads that are heavily multithreaded. Students in engineering or computer science fields would benefit from the CPU’s compute power for tasks like running virtual machines or compiling large codebases, while the integrated GPU is sufficient for everyday productivity and web browsing.

Content creators who work primarily with CPU-bound tasks, such as audio processing or 2D rendering, would find this system capable, though 3D artists or video editors relying on GPU acceleration would be hampered by the Radeon 760M. For small business workstations, the CPU’s ECC memory support and robust multi-core performance make it a strong candidate for database management, financial modeling, or any application where data integrity and processing speed are critical. Gamers should only consider this build for esports titles or older games at low settings and 720p or 1080p resolutions, as the GPU’s 35th percentile ranking will limit frame rates in more demanding titles.

Build Overview

This build pairs the Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX, a 24-core mobile processor from the Core Ultra Series 2, with the AMD Radeon 760M, an integrated GPU based on the RDNA 3.0 architecture. The system is classified as a laptop, and its combined percentile of 65 places it above the majority of configurations in the database. The CPU is a top-tier performer in the 95th percentile, while the GPU is an entry-level component in the 35th percentile, creating a significant performance asymmetry.

The Core Ultra 9 285HX is a flagship mobile processor built on the Arrow Lake architecture with a 3 nm process, featuring 24 cores and 24 threads with a boost clock of 5.50 GHz. The Radeon 760M is a modest integrated GPU with 512 shading units and 8 RT cores, sharing system memory for its graphics operations. This pairing is best described as a CPU-centric system, where the processor’s workstation-class performance is the primary selling point, and the GPU serves as a basic display output and light gaming solution.

Gaming Performance

No measured FPS data exists for this exact CPU and GPU combination. The FACT PACK contains no measured FPS rows, so all frame rate discussions are estimated from the benchmark scores and should be treated as approximations rather than definitive results.

Based on the GPU’s benchmark scores, gaming performance will be modest. The Radeon 760M’s PassMark G3D score of 5310 is comparable to older discrete GPUs like the AMD Radeon RX 6400 and NVIDIA Quadro P2000, which were entry-level offerings in their time. In practical terms, this suggests the system can handle esports titles like Counter-Strike or League of Legends at 1080p with moderate settings, potentially achieving playable frame rates above 60 FPS. However, for AAA games, the GPU’s 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 400 indicates that frame rates will be significantly lower, likely requiring 720p resolution and low graphics settings to maintain playability.

The CPU’s strong single-thread performance, with a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2187.5, ensures that it will not be a bottleneck in gaming scenarios. The processor can easily feed frames to the GPU, but the GPU’s 5.323 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and system-shared memory will limit the overall gaming experience. Ray tracing, despite the 8 RT cores, will be largely impractical due to the low compute throughput. Users should expect this system to function as a capable productivity machine that can occasionally game, rather than a dedicated gaming laptop.

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX + AMD Radeon 760M

Apex Performer

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX

AMD Radeon 760M

Market Position

Game Performance Benchmarks

Cyberpunk 2077

Red Dead Redemption 2

Microsoft Flight Simulator

Control

Call of Duty: Warzone

Fortnite

Performance Insights

Optimal Performance

4K Gaming Ready

Performance Tiers Explained

Ultimate

High-End

Mid-Range

Entry Level

Legacy

Balance and Bottleneck

Benchmark Performance

CPU Analysis

FAQ

Upgrade Path and Platform

GPU Analysis

Who Should Build It

Build Overview

Gaming Performance

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