SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX + NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile

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

87 / 100
HIGH-END

Power Build

Top 13% of systems. Excellent for 1440p Ultra or 4K High gaming.

1440p Ultra4K High

System Balance Analysis

CPU vs GPU performance ratio
GPU Bottleneck
CPU
97%
VS
GPU
76%

Your GPU is limiting system performance. Consider upgrading to a more powerful graphics card to better utilize your CPU.

PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX

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

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile

1,285 Benchmark Score
Top 24% 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.

Bottleneck Detected

GPU Bottleneck - Upgrading the weaker component will improve overall performance.

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

# Hardware Analysis: Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX + NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile

This pairing combines a 2025 flagship mobile CPU with an end-of-life 2019 professional mobile GPU, creating one of the most lopsided configurations in the database. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX sits at the 95th percentile among all CPUs, while the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile languishes at the 7th percentile among all GPUs. The combined percentile for this laptop-class build is 51, reflecting a system where the processor vastly outperforms the graphics solution in every measurable way. There are no measured FPS rows for this exact combination in the FACT PACK, so all gaming performance discussion is estimated from the benchmark scores.

GPU Analysis

The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile is built on the Turing architecture using the TU106 chip, manufactured on a 12 nm process at TSMC with 10,800 million transistors on a 445 mm² die. The GPU operates at a base clock of 945 MHz with a boost clock of 1380 MHz, and memory runs at 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective speed. Memory configuration consists of 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, yielding 336.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GPU has 1920 shading units, 120 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, along with 30 RT cores and 240 tensor cores.

Pixel fill rate is 88.32 GPixel/s, and texture fill rate is 165.6 GTexel/s. The FP32 compute performance is 5.299 TFLOPS, while FP16 reaches 10.60 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio. The GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, with a PCIe 3.0 x16 bus interface. It draws 80 W of power and comes as an MXM module with no power connectors, making it dependent on the host laptop's power delivery.

The single benchmark score available is 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, where the GPU scores 1285 points. This places it at the 7th percentile among all GPUs. The nearest rivals in the database are the NVIDIA GeForce GT 610 with a score of 1281 (0.3% ahead), the AMD Radeon R9 380 with 1293 (-0.6% behind), the NVIDIA GeForce GT 520 with 1267 (1.4% ahead), and the NVIDIA NVS 4200M with 1267 (1.4% ahead). The RTX 3000 Mobile is essentially tied with a decade-old entry-level desktop GPU in this synthetic workload, which speaks to its very low standing in the current GPU landscape.

For rendering workloads, the RTX 3000 Mobile's 5.299 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 30 RT cores provide baseline ray-traced capabilities, but the scores indicate that it will struggle with modern rendering tasks. The 6 GB VRAM is a limiting factor for large scenes and textures, and the 336.0 GB/s bandwidth constrains memory-intensive operations. The tensor cores (240) exist for AI-accelerated workflows, but their age and the GPU's overall low percentile suggest limited practical benefit in current software.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU benchmarks are extensive and consistently strong. In Cinebench R15, the Core Ultra 9 285HX scores 5656.5 in multi-core and 323.5 in single-core. Cinebench R20 results show 20236 in multi-core and 2856 in single-core. Cinebench R23 produces 36429.5 in multi-core and 2187.5 in single-core. PassMark tests show a multithread score of 56902, a single-thread score of 4618, and a physics score of 3476.

The GPU's 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1285 stands in stark contrast to the CPU's benchmark dominance. The CPU's average benchmark score is 76155, placing it at the 95th percentile among all CPUs. The GPU's average benchmark score is 1285, placing it at the 7th percentile among all GPUs. The combined percentile of 51 reflects the massive gap between the two components.

Looking at the CPU's nearest rivals, the AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX scores 76212 (0.1% ahead of the 285HX), the AMD EPYC Embedded 8224P scores 76492 (0.4% ahead), the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9945WX scores 76513 (0.5% ahead), and the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D scores 75779 (0.5% behind). The Core Ultra 9 285HX is effectively tied with these four high-end processors, all within half a percentage point of each other. This places the 285HX in the top tier of mobile CPUs, comparable to the best desktop and workstation processors available.

The GPU's nearest rivals show a different story. The GeForce GT 610 is 0.3% ahead, the Radeon R9 380 is 0.6% behind, and both the GeForce GT 520 and NVS 4200M are 1.4% ahead. These are all extremely low-end or ancient parts, and the Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile sits right alongside them. The combined picture is a system with elite-level processing power but graphics performance that is effectively at the bottom of the current GPU hierarchy.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX is a 24-core, 24-thread processor from the Core Ultra Series 2, based on the Arrow Lake architecture with the Arrow Lake-HX codename. It belongs to the Ultra 9 generation and is manufactured on a 3 nm process at TSMC, with 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. The base clock is 2.80 GHz with a boost clock of 5.50 GHz. The CPU has a 55 W TDP and features an unlocked multiplier. It uses the Intel BGA 2114 socket and is classified as a mobile market segment part with active production status, released on 2025-01-12.

Cache configuration includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. Memory support is DDR5 with a dual-channel bus, providing 102.4 GB/s of memory bandwidth, and ECC memory is supported. The CPU provides 20 PCIe Gen 5 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics come in the form of Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units. The part number is SRVFJ.

In PassMark tests, the CPU achieves 631885 in data compression, 48567 in data encryption, 49148 in extended instructions, 460 in find prime numbers, 194998 in floating point math, 155076 in integer math, 56902 in multithread, 3476 in physics, 77196 in random string sorting, and 4618 in single-thread. These scores indicate exceptional performance across mixed workloads.

The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 36429.5 places this CPU at the top of mobile processors, and the single-core score of 2187.5 is competitive with the best desktop parts. The fact that the nearest rivals include the Ryzen 9 9950X3D (a flagship desktop CPU) and the Threadripper PRO 9945WX (a workstation-class part) underscores how far mobile CPU performance has come. For real workloads, this means the 285HX can handle heavy compilation, 3D rendering, scientific computing, and multitasking without presenting a bottleneck. The 24 threads (with no hyperthreading, given 24 cores and 24 threads) are all full physical cores, which benefits workloads that scale linearly with core count.

Balance and Bottleneck

The balance between these two components is severely skewed toward the CPU. The CPU's 95th percentile versus the GPU's 7th percentile creates a situation where the processor is essentially never the limiting factor in any workload. In CPU-bound tasks such as software compilation, data processing, or physics calculations, the system performs at an elite level, with the 285HX matching or exceeding the best alternatives available.

In GPU-bound workloads, the Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile becomes the bottleneck almost immediately. The GPU's 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1285 is comparable to the GeForce GT 610 and GT 520, which are entry-level parts from over a decade ago. Any graphics-intensive application will be limited by the GPU's 5.299 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, 6 GB VRAM, and 336.0 GB/s bandwidth. The CPU could easily feed a much more powerful GPU, but the RTX 3000 Mobile simply cannot keep up with the data throughput the CPU can generate.

FPS scaling, while not measured for this exact combination, would follow the GPU's capabilities. In light or older games, the CPU's strength could help maintain high frame rates, but modern titles at higher resolutions and settings would be entirely GPU-limited. The 7th percentile GPU score suggests that even at 1080p with low settings, frame rates would be modest at best. The combined percentile of 51 reflects a system that is mediocre overall, held back entirely by the graphics component.

Who Should Build It

This configuration targets users who need maximum CPU performance with minimal GPU requirements. Software developers compiling large codebases would benefit from the 285HX's 24 cores and 36 MB of L3 cache, with PassMark data compression scoring 631885 and integer math at 155076 indicating strong throughput in build and analysis tasks. Students in computer science or engineering fields working on CPU-intensive projects would find the processor capable of handling complex simulations and data processing.

Small business workstations handling spreadsheets, databases, and server-side tasks would benefit from the CPU's multithread score of 56902 and ECC memory support. The integrated Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units provides basic display output without relying on the discrete GPU for everyday tasks. Content creators focused on CPU-rendered workloads, such as audio processing or video encoding that relies on the processor rather than the GPU, would find the 285HX's Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 36429.5 advantageous.

However, anyone needing GPU acceleration for 3D rendering, video effects, or gaming would be poorly served. The Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile's 6 GB VRAM and 7th percentile performance make it unsuitable for modern creative workloads. The system is best understood as a CPU workstation with a basic graphics adapter, not a balanced performance machine. Gamers at any resolution above 720p with modern titles would find the GPU severely limiting.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming is not viable with this configuration. The GPU's 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1285 places it at the 7th percentile, roughly on par with the GeForce GT 610, meaning even esports titles at low settings would struggle to maintain high frame rates. The CPU's power is irrelevant when the GPU cannot render frames quickly enough.

Streaming is problematic due to the GPU's age and lack of modern encoder capabilities. The 30 RT cores and 240 tensor cores provide some offload potential, but the low overall performance means software encoding on the CPU would likely be necessary, which would consume resources that could otherwise go to the game.

Video editing in applications that rely on GPU acceleration would be severely hampered. The Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile's 336.0 GB/s bandwidth and 6 GB VRAM limit timeline performance, preview rendering, and effect processing. CPU-based editing workflows would be acceptable, but any GPU-accelerated effects would be slow.

3D rendering with GPU acceleration is not recommended. The 5.299 TFLOPS FP32 compute is a fraction of what modern GPUs offer, and 6 GB VRAM restricts scene complexity. CPU rendering using the 285HX's 24 cores would be the only viable path, with Cinebench R23 multi-core at 36429.5 providing reasonable performance.

Software development is this system's strongest scenario. The multithread score of 56902 and single-thread score of 4618 indicate fast compilation and responsive tooling. The 36 MB L3 cache and 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth support large codebases and parallel builds. The GPU is largely irrelevant for development tasks.

Student and office work benefits from the CPU's responsiveness and the integrated graphics for basic display. Data compression at 631885 and random string sorting at 77196 indicate strong performance in database and document processing. The system would handle spreadsheets, word processing, and browsing with ease, though the discrete GPU adds no value for these tasks.

Gaming Performance

No measured FPS data exists for this CPU+GPU combination, so all gaming figures are estimates based on the benchmark scores. The GPU's 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1285 and 7th percentile ranking suggest that modern games at 1080p with ultra settings would run at very low frame rates, likely in the single digits to low teens. Older games or those with modest requirements might achieve playable frame rates at 720p with low settings.

The 6 GB VRAM is a limiting factor for modern titles that often require 8 GB or more at high resolutions and texture settings. The 192-bit memory bus and 336.0 GB/s bandwidth further constrain performance in memory-intensive scenes. The CPU would not bottleneck in gaming scenarios; the GPU is the sole constraint.

For esports titles like Counter-Strike or League of Legends, the system might manage 60 FPS at 1080p with low settings, but even these games increasingly demand more GPU headroom. AAA titles at 1080p would be effectively unplayable at any reasonable quality setting. The RTX 3000 Mobile's ray tracing capabilities, while present with 30 RT cores, are too weak to enable RT features at playable frame rates.

FAQ

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

A: The Core Ultra 9 285HX scores 76155 on average, placing it 0.1% behind the AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX (76212), 0.4% behind the AMD EPYC Embedded 8224P (76492), 0.5% behind the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9945WX (76513), and 0.5% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D (75779). All four rivals are within half a percentage point.

Q: What is the GPU's performance tier?

A: The Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile scores 1285 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, placing it at the 7th percentile among all GPUs. It is within 1.4% of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 610, GT 520, and NVS 4200M, and within 0.6% of the AMD Radeon R9 380.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does the CPU support?

A: The CPU supports dual-channel DDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. It also supports ECC memory, which is unusual for a mobile processor.

Q: What is the GPU's VRAM capacity and type?

A: The GPU has 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, providing 336.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Memory runs at 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective speed.

Q: Does this system have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, the CPU includes Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units. This provides basic display output and can handle everyday tasks without the discrete GPU.

Q: What is the build class and overall percentile?

A: This is a laptop build with a combined percentile of 51. The CPU is at the 95th percentile while the GPU is at the 7th percentile, creating a significant imbalance.

Q: When was each component released?

A: The CPU was released on 2025-01-12 and is in active production. The GPU was released on 2019-05-26 and is end-of-life, with its predecessor being Quadro Pascal-M and successor Ampere-MW.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The CPU uses the Intel BGA 2114 socket, which is a soldered mobile platform, meaning the processor is not upgradeable without replacing the entire motherboard or system. Memory support is dual-channel DDR5 with ECC capability, and the 102.4 GB/s bandwidth is fixed by the platform. The CPU provides 20 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, which is ample for high-speed storage and external GPU connectivity if the laptop chassis supports it.

The GPU is an MXM module with an 80 W TDP and no power connectors, meaning it draws power from the slot. The suggested PSU is null in the database, and since this is a laptop, the power delivery is determined by the system's internal design. The GPU's PCIe 3.0 x16 interface is one generation behind the CPU's PCIe Gen 5 support, but this does not matter given the GPU's low performance ceiling.

A sensible next upgrade would be replacing the GPU module with a more modern MXM option, though the end-of-life status of the current GPU and the laptop platform's age may limit compatibility. The CPU is already at the top of its class, so upgrading the processor is not necessary. The most impactful change would be to use the CPU's integrated Arc Xe-LPG Graphics for everyday tasks and reserve the discrete GPU for workloads where its features are required, or to pair this CPU with a more capable GPU in a future build.

Build Overview

This is a laptop-class build combining the Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX, a 24-core Arrow Lake-HX processor from the Core Ultra Series 2, with the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile, a Turing-architecture professional GPU. The CPU is the dominant component, achieving a 95th percentile ranking with an average benchmark score of 76155, while the GPU sits at the 7th percentile with a 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 1285. The combined percentile of 51 places this system in the middle of the overall performance distribution, but the distribution is highly uneven.

The CPU's performance is elite, matching or slightly exceeding the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D and coming within half a percentage point of the Threadripper PRO 9945WX. The GPU's performance is effectively at the bottom of the database, comparable to the GeForce GT 610 and GT 520. This build is best understood as a CPU-centric mobile workstation where graphics performance is an afterthought. It suits users who need maximum processing power for CPU-bound tasks and do not require modern GPU acceleration. As a balanced gaming or creative system, it fails completely. As a portable compute powerhouse with basic display capabilities, it succeeds.