SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX + AMD Radeon 780M

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 285HX

76,155 Benchmark Score
Top 3% Market Ranking
View Full Specs →
GRAPHICS CARD

AMD Radeon 780M

17,588 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

# Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX + AMD Radeon 780M: Benchmark Analysis

This mobile pairing combines Intel’s top-tier Arrow Lake-HX silicon with AMD’s most capable integrated graphics, creating a laptop platform that prioritizes CPU throughput over discrete GPU muscle. Benchmark data shows the Core Ultra 9 285HX performing within 0.5% of desktop-class rivals like the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D and Ryzen 9 8945HX, while the Radeon 780M sits at the 61st percentile among all GPUs — a figure that places it near discrete cards like the Radeon Pro 560 and GeForce RTX 4060 in aggregate score, though its integrated nature means system memory dictates actual bandwidth.

GPU Analysis — VRAM, bandwidth, clocks, RT/tensor hardware, what the benchmark scores mean for rendering

The AMD Radeon 780M is an integrated graphics processor built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture, fabricated on a 4 nm TSMC process with 25,390 million transistors across a 178 mm² die. It operates with a base clock of 800 MHz and a boost clock of 2900 MHz, deriving all memory resources from the system’s shared DDR5 pool — there is no dedicated VRAM, and memory bandwidth is “System Dependent,” meaning the platform’s dual-channel memory configuration and speed directly influence GPU performance.

The GPU features 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 32 raster operation units, delivering a pixel rate of 92.80 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 139.2 GTexel/s. Floating-point performance reaches 8.909 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16 (at a 1:1 ratio), which is respectable for integrated graphics but far below discrete solutions. The 12 ray-tracing cores provide hardware RT support, though with the modest shading throughput, ray-traced workloads will be limited to lighter scenes. There are no tensor cores listed, so AI acceleration relies on the GPU’s general-purpose compute units.

In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, the 780M scores 480 points, while Geekbench results show 18,602 in OpenCL and 33,683 in Vulkan. These figures place the GPU at the 61st percentile overall, with an average benchmark score of 17,588. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon Pro 560 (0.2% higher), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 (0.3% higher aggregate), and the AMD Radeon HD 7790 (0.4% higher) — an interesting spread that suggests the 780M’s integrated design competes with older discrete cards in raw compute but lacks their dedicated memory bandwidth.

For rendering workloads, the 780M’s 8.909 TFLOPS of FP32 compute can handle basic 3D viewport work and light rendering tasks, but the absence of dedicated VRAM means large textures or complex scenes will spill into system memory, causing slowdowns. The pixel rate and texture rate figures indicate it can drive modern displays at moderate resolutions, but the system-shared memory architecture is the primary bottleneck for GPU-heavy tasks. The GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, ensuring compatibility with modern graphics APIs.

Benchmark Performance — exact CPU and GPU scores, percentile positions, and what the combined picture is

The Core Ultra 9 285HX delivers a multicore Cinebench R23 score of 36,429.5 and a single-core score of 2,187.5, while the Radeon 780M posts a 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 480 and a Geekbench OpenCL score of 18,602. The CPU sits at the 95th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 76,155 — placing it statistically even with the AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX (76,212, -0.1% delta) and the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D (75,779, +0.5% delta). The GPU’s 61st percentile is far lower, reflecting its integrated nature, yet the combined system percentile reaches 78, indicating the CPU dominates the overall performance profile.

In Cinebench R20, the CPU scores 20,236 multicore and 2,856 single-core, while R15 results show 5,656.5 multicore and 323.5 single-core. These numbers reveal a processor that scales exceptionally well across threads — the multicore-to-single-core ratios in R23 (roughly 16.6x) demonstrate near-linear scaling across its 24 threads, a hallmark of high-core-count mobile parts. PassMark tests reinforce this: multithread score of 56,902, single-thread score of 4,618, floating-point math at 194,998, and integer math at 155,076. Data compression hits 631,885, while encryption reaches 48,567.

The combined picture shows a laptop that excels at CPU-bound tasks — rendering, compilation, scientific computing — but the GPU’s 61st percentile means gaming and GPU-accelerated workloads will lag behind discrete solutions. The 78th combined percentile reflects a system that is “good but not great” for graphics, while being exceptional for processing. The lack of measured FPS data for this exact pairing means all gaming performance must be estimated from the benchmark scores, which is a critical caveat for any purchase decision.

CPU Analysis — cores, clocks, architecture, what the benchmark scores mean for real workloads

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX is a 24-core, 24-thread processor from the Core Ultra Series 2, built on Arrow Lake architecture (codename Arrow Lake-HX) using a 3 nm TSMC process with 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. It runs at a base clock of 2.80 GHz with a boost clock of 5.50 GHz, and its 55 W TDP is notably efficient for a processor with this core count — a result of the advanced process node. The CPU supports dual-channel DDR5 memory with a theoretical bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s, includes ECC memory support, and connects via PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU.

The cache hierarchy is substantial: 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. This large on-die cache helps feed the 24 cores, particularly in workloads with high cache reuse like database operations or scientific simulations. The processor is multiplier-unlocked, enabling overclocking on supported platforms, and was released in January 2025 with an active production status.

Benchmark results indicate the CPU performs at the top tier of mobile processors. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 36,429.5 places it near desktop-class parts — its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX (a desktop-replacement mobile chip) and even the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9945WX, though those comparisons are within 0.5% aggregate. The single-core score of 2,187.5 in R23 demonstrates excellent per-thread performance, crucial for lightly-threaded applications like legacy games or office software.

In real-world terms, the PassMark scores translate to specific capabilities: floating-point math at 194,998 handles scientific and engineering simulations, integer math at 155,076 accelerates database and file operations, and data encryption at 48,567 supports secure transactions. The physics score of 3,476 and prime number finding at 460 suggest strong computational throughput for modeling and cryptography. The multithread score of 56,902 is nearly 12x the single-thread score of 4,618, confirming the CPU’s scaling efficiency across its 24 threads.

Balance and Bottleneck — which component limits which workload, using percentiles and FPS scaling as evidence

The performance asymmetry between the CPU and GPU creates a clear bottleneck hierarchy. The CPU’s 95th percentile versus the GPU’s 61st percentile means that in most workloads, the Radeon 780M will be the limiting factor — particularly in graphics-intensive tasks like gaming or GPU rendering. The CPU can feed frames far faster than the GPU can render them, meaning CPU-bound scenarios (high frame rates at low resolutions) will be constrained by the GPU’s rendering throughput.

Evidence from the scores: the CPU’s Cinebench R23 multicore score of 36,429.5 suggests it can handle complex physics and AI calculations for gaming, but the GPU’s 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 480 indicates it will struggle with modern game engines at high settings. In CPU-bound tasks like software compilation or video encoding, the CPU will saturate its cores while the GPU remains idle — here the CPU is the primary performer, and the GPU’s role is minimal.

Memory bandwidth compounds this imbalance. The CPU’s 102.4 GB/s theoretical bandwidth is shared with the GPU, which has no dedicated memory. In gaming, the GPU must compete with the CPU for memory access, further reducing effective performance. The GPU’s “System Dependent” bandwidth means that a slower memory configuration will disproportionately impact gaming FPS, while the CPU’s cache hierarchy (36 MB L3) can partially mitigate memory pressure for CPU workloads.

For mixed workloads, the balance depends on the task. Video editing uses both components — the CPU for encoding and the GPU for effects and preview — and the 780M’s 8.909 TFLOPS will accelerate effects but may bottleneck on complex timelines. 3D rendering in CPU-based engines (like Cinebench) will show the CPU’s full strength, while GPU-accelerated renderers will be limited by the 780M. The combined 78th percentile reflects this tug-of-war: excellent CPU performance drags the system score up, but the GPU prevents it from reaching the top tier.

Usage Scenarios — grounded in the scores: high-refresh gaming, streaming, video editing, 3D rendering, software development, student and office work

High-refresh gaming: The Radeon 780M’s 61st percentile and 480 point 3DMark Steel Nomad score indicate it can handle esports titles at moderate settings, but high-refresh (144 Hz+) gaming at demanding settings is beyond its capabilities. The CPU’s single-core score of 2,187.5 in R23 ensures frame pacing is not CPU-limited, but the GPU will cap FPS well below refresh-rate thresholds for modern AAA games.

Streaming: The CPU’s 24 cores and 36 MB L3 cache provide ample headroom for software encoding while gaming, with the 55 W TDP allowing sustained load. The PassMark data encryption score of 48,567 supports secure stream delivery, though the GPU’s lack of dedicated encode hardware means all encoding falls to the CPU — a viable but power-intensive approach.

Video editing: The CPU’s Cinebench R23 multicore score of 36,429.5 excels at export and rendering, while the 780M accelerates preview and effects with its 8.909 TFLOPS. The shared memory architecture may cause timeline scrubbing to stutter with high-resolution footage, but the CPU’s strength in floating-point math (194,998) helps with color grading and effects processing.

3D rendering: CPU-based renderers like Cinebench will leverage all 24 cores, with the R23 multicore score indicating near-desktop-class performance. GPU-accelerated renderers will be limited by the 780M’s 61st percentile and lack of dedicated VRAM, making complex scenes impractical.

Software development: The CPU’s PassMark multithread score of 56,902 accelerates compilation and testing, with the 3 MB L2 per core reducing cache misses in large codebases. The 17,800 million transistors and 3 nm process ensure efficient power draw during long build sessions.

Student and office work: The CPU’s single-thread score of 4,618 in PassMark handles document processing and web browsing with ease, while the 55 W TDP supports all-day battery life. The 780M’s 61st percentile is more than sufficient for productivity applications, making this a capable all-rounder for academic work.

Who Should Build It — target users and industries tied strictly to the measured performance

This platform targets users who prioritize CPU performance above all else. The 95th percentile CPU and 78th combined percentile indicate that developers, researchers, and engineers running CPU-intensive workloads will find the Core Ultra 9 285HX exceptionally capable — its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 36,429.5 rivals desktop parts, while the 55 W TDP enables mobile deployment.

Content creators working primarily with CPU-based tools (like Cinebench or HandBrake) will benefit from the 24 cores and 36 MB L3 cache, with the PassMark floating-point score of 194,998 supporting complex simulations. However, those needing GPU acceleration for rendering or effects should look elsewhere, as the 780M’s 61st percentile will bottleneck. Gamers at 1080p with medium-to-low settings can expect playable frame rates in less demanding titles, but high-refresh or high-detail gaming is out of reach.

Industries suited to this build include software development (compilation-heavy workflows), scientific computing (the CPU’s 95th percentile excels at numerical analysis), and financial modeling (data encryption at 48,567 supports secure transactions). Small business workstations running office suites and databases will find the CPU’s single-thread performance of 4,618 in PassMark more than adequate, while the ECC memory support ensures data integrity for critical applications. Students in engineering or computer science fields will appreciate the CPU power for simulations and coding assignments, though they should pair it with an external GPU for graphics-heavy coursework.

Gaming Performance — measured FPS by game and resolution

No measured FPS rows exist for this exact combination — the data set contains no measuredFps values for the Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX paired with the AMD Radeon 780M. All frame rate expectations below are estimated from the benchmark scores and should be treated as approximations, not measured results.

Based on the GPU’s 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 480 (61st percentile) and the CPU’s strong single-core performance, the Radeon 780M can reasonably handle esports titles like Counter-Strike 2 or Valorant at 1080p with competitive settings, potentially reaching playable frame rates given the CPU’s ability to maintain high frame pacing. The pixel rate of 92.80 GPixel/s supports 1080p output, but the system-shared memory bandwidth will limit texture-heavy scenes.

For modern AAA games at 1080p, the 780M’s 8.909 TFLOPS of FP32 compute suggests low-to-medium settings will be necessary, with frame rates likely in the 30-60 FPS range depending on title and optimization. Ray-traced games will struggle due to the 12 RT cores operating within an integrated budget — expect significant frame rate drops when RT is enabled. At 1440p or higher, the GPU’s 61st percentile and lack of dedicated VRAM make playable frame rates unlikely except in very light titles. The CPU’s 36 MB L3 cache helps with game asset streaming, but the GPU remains the definitive bottleneck in all gaming scenarios.

FAQ

Q: How does the Core Ultra 9 285HX compare to its nearest rivals in CPU benchmarks?

A: The CPU averages 76,155 across all benchmarks, placing it within 0.5% of the AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX (76,212), AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D (75,779), and AMD Threadripper PRO 9945WX (76,513). It sits at the 95th percentile among all CPUs.

Q: Is the Radeon 780M comparable to a discrete GPU?

A: The GPU’s average benchmark score of 17,588 places it at the 61st percentile, with its nearest rivals being the AMD Radeon Pro 560 (17,551, 0.2% behind) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 (17,639, 0.3% ahead). However, its system-shared memory architecture limits real-world performance versus discrete cards with dedicated VRAM.

Q: What memory configuration does this platform support?

A: The CPU supports dual-channel DDR5 memory with a theoretical bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s and ECC memory capability. The GPU uses “System Shared” memory, meaning its bandwidth is system-dependent.

Q: Can this laptop handle 3D rendering workloads?

A: CPU-based rendering is excellent — the Cinebench R23 multicore score of 36,429.5 places it at the 95th percentile. GPU-based rendering is limited by the 780M’s 8.909 TFLOPS and 61st percentile ranking, making complex scenes impractical.

Q: What is the power draw of this CPU?

A: The Core Ultra 9 285HX has a TDP of 55 W, which is low for a 24-core processor, thanks to its 3 nm TSMC process node. The GPU is rated at 15 W, making the combined platform power-efficient for its performance class.

Q: Does the CPU support overclocking?

A: Yes, the multiplier is unlocked, allowing overclocking on supported motherboard platforms. The base clock is 2.80 GHz with a boost clock of 5.50 GHz.

Q: What PCIe connectivity is available?

A: The CPU provides PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU itself. The GPU connects via PCIe 4.0 x8, and the socket is Intel BGA 2114.

Upgrade Path and Platform — socket, memory support, PCIe, PSU headroom from suggestedPsu/tdp, what a sensible next upgrade looks like

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX uses the Intel BGA 2114 socket, which is a mobile (laptop) package — this means the CPU is soldered and not upgradeable in most designs. The platform supports dual-channel DDR5 memory with ECC capability, and the CPU provides PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes, enabling high-speed NVMe storage and discrete GPU connections.

The Radeon 780M is an integrated GPU with no power connectors and a 15 W TDP, while the CPU has a 55 W TDP, giving a combined maximum draw of roughly 70 W for the core components. The suggested PSU is null in the data, so power supply requirements are system-dependent, but the low TDPs mean a standard laptop adapter is sufficient. The GPU uses PCIe 4.0 x8, which is backward-compatible but limits bandwidth versus the CPU’s Gen 5 lanes.

For a sensible upgrade path, the primary bottleneck is the GPU. Users who need better graphics performance should consider a laptop with a discrete GPU, as the 780M’s 61st percentile cannot be upgraded in this form factor. The CPU itself is already near the top of the mobile stack — its 95th percentile means an upgrade would yield minimal gains. Memory upgrades are possible if the laptop supports higher-speed DDR5 modules, which could improve both CPU and GPU performance given the shared memory architecture.

A pragmatic next step for this platform is adding an external GPU (eGPU) via the PCIe lanes, though the GPU’s PCIe 4.0 x8 interface limits bandwidth compared to a direct connection. Alternatively, users can optimize software settings to lean on the CPU’s strength — using CPU-based renderers and encoders rather than GPU-accelerated ones. The 17,800 million transistors and 3 nm process suggest this CPU will remain relevant for years, so the upgrade path is less about the processor and more about adding graphics capability if needed.