SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 9 285K + Intel Arc A380

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)

▼

92 Score

Top 8% Ranking

92 / 100

ULTIMATE READY

Apex Performer

Top 8% 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

86%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K

83,807 Benchmark Score

Top 3% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

Intel Arc A380

8,558 Benchmark Score

Top 14% 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

This build pairs the current flagship desktop processor from Intel with a modest, entry-level graphics card. The result is a system with immense computational power that is severely constrained in graphical tasks. The data shows a clear imbalance: the Core Ultra 9 285K is a top-tier productivity and compute monster, while the Arc A380 is a capable display adapter for basic use and light gaming. This analysis is based strictly on the provided benchmark data, which includes no measured FPS figures for this specific combination. Therefore, all gaming performance discussions are estimated from the individual CPU and GPU scores.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K is the centerpiece of this build, built on the Arrow Lake architecture and manufactured on a 3 nm process by TSMC. It features 24 cores and 24 threads, a configuration that prioritizes parallel throughput over multi-threading. The core layout includes a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a maximum boost clock of 5.70 GHz, allowing for significant single-thread performance when needed. The processor package contains 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die, with a substantial 36 MB of shared L3 cache and a 3 MB L2 cache per core. This cache hierarchy is designed to feed the 24 cores efficiently, minimizing latency in compute-heavy tasks.

The benchmark results confirm the CPU’s high-end positioning. It scores 42,522 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 2,377 in single-core, demonstrating excellent scaling across its 24 physical cores. Its Geekbench scores are similarly strong: 26,702 multi-core and 2,870 single-core. The PassMark suite shows a multi-thread score of 67,260 and a single-thread score of 5,087, placing it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs. This means it outperforms 96% of processors in the database, a figure that is reflected in its average benchmark score of 83,807. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus, scores a mere 0.2% higher, placing the two chips in the same performance tier. Even compared to server-class AMD EPYC processors, the 285K is competitive, trading blows with the EPYC 9135 and EPYC 4584PX, which score 1% and 0.9% lower, respectively.

For real-world workloads, these numbers translate to exceptional performance in video encoding, 3D rendering, software compilation, and data analysis. The high floating-point math score of 224,324 in PassMark indicates strong capability in scientific and simulation software. The data encryption score of 57,745 suggests it can handle heavy security protocols and database operations without becoming a bottleneck. For a desktop user, the 285K offers the kind of multi-core headroom typically reserved for workstations, making it a future-proof choice for demanding professional applications. The 125 W TDP is a manageable figure for such a high-core-count part.

GPU Analysis

The Intel Arc A380 is a stark contrast to the CPU. This is a budget-oriented graphics card based on the Xe-HPG architecture (Alchemist generation), manufactured on a 6 nm process. It is a small chip with 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die. The GPU operates at a base clock of 2000 MHz and a boost clock of 2050 MHz, with memory running at an effective speed of 15.5 Gbps. It is equipped with 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 96-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 186.0 GB/s. This is a limited configuration, particularly for modern games that demand more memory and bandwidth at higher resolutions.

In terms of compute resources, the A380 has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. It includes 8 dedicated ray tracing cores, but its overall rendering power is low. The FP32 performance is rated at 4.198 TFLOPS. Its benchmark scores reflect its entry-level status. It sits in the 44th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 8,558. Its PassMark G3D score is 6,252, and its DirectX 12 score is a low 35. Its direct competition comes from mobile and older parts like the NVIDIA GeForce MX330 and AMD Radeon 880M, which score 1.2% and 1.4% lower, respectively. The data shows the A380 is not built for high-end rendering; it is a capable solution for basic display output, video playback, and light esports titles. The 8 ray tracing cores are present for feature support, but the low raw throughput means ray-traced effects will be a performance challenge. This is a foundational GPU meant for everyday tasks, not a graphics powerhouse.

Benchmark Performance

The combined picture from the benchmark scores is one of extreme imbalance. The CPU’s average benchmark score of 83,807 places it in the 96th percentile, while the GPU’s average score of 8,558 places it in the 44th percentile. This pairing yields a combined percentile of 70 for the build. The CPU is nearly 10 times more powerful than the GPU by average benchmark score, a disparity that will define the system's behavior in almost every task.

The CPU's performance is confirmed by its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 42,522 and Geekbench multi-core score of 26,702. These are figures that would make it a top choice for content creation and heavy multitasking. The GPU, on the other hand, scores 808 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, a low score that indicates it will struggle with modern 3D applications. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 38,224 is also modest, reinforcing its position as an entry-level part.

When analyzed together, the data suggests that any workload that relies heavily on the GPU will be bottlenecked by it. CPU-bound tasks, such as compiling code or rendering a video with software encoding, will run exceptionally fast. However, tasks that use GPU acceleration, such as 3D rendering in Blender or gaming, will be limited by the A380's capabilities. The system’s performance will be dictated by the workload's dependence on the GPU, with the CPU often left waiting for the graphics card to catch up.

Gaming Performance

The FACT PACK contains no measured FPS data for this specific CPU and GPU combination. The following gaming performance analysis is therefore an estimate based on the individual benchmark scores of the components. The Core Ultra 9 285K has the raw processing power to run any game engine with ease, and its high single-thread score of 2,377 in Cinebench R23 ensures it can handle game logic and physics calculations without issue. However, the Intel Arc A380 is the limiting factor in this build.

With a PassMark G3D score of 6,252 and a percentile rank of 44, the A380 is positioned as a 1080p entry-level card. In less demanding esports titles like Counter-Strike 2 or Valorant, the A380 could likely produce playable frame rates at medium to high settings. However, for modern AAA games, the 6 GB VRAM and 186.0 GB/s bandwidth are insufficient for high-resolution textures. At 1080p with ultra settings, the GPU would be the clear bottleneck, and frame rates would likely be low. The low DirectX 12 score of 35 further suggests that performance in the latest DirectX 12 titles will be poor. The 8 ray tracing cores are present, but the 4.198 TFLOPS of FP32 performance is too low to handle ray-traced effects at any playable frame rate. In essence, the system is capable of running older, less demanding games and esports titles, but it is not a suitable platform for high-refresh-rate or high-fidelity gaming. For a satisfying gaming experience, a far more powerful GPU would be required to match the CPU's potential.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The platform offers a clear and modern foundation. The Core Ultra 9 285K uses the Intel Socket 1851, which is the current socket for the Core Ultra Series 2 processors. It supports dual-channel DDR5 memory and offers PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU, providing a high-bandwidth path for future storage drives and graphics cards. The CPU also supports ECC memory, which is a feature valued in workstation environments for data integrity. With a TDP of 125 W and an unlocked multiplier, the 285K offers overclocking headroom, though it will require a robust cooling solution to maintain high clocks under load.

The GPU uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface and has a TDP of 75 W, with a suggested PSU of 250 W. This is a low-power card that is easy to accommodate. However, the upgrade path is clear: the first and most impactful upgrade would be the graphics card. The CPU’s 20 PCIe Gen 5 lanes and 102.4 GB/s of memory bandwidth are more than capable of feeding a high-end GPU. A modern, powerful graphics card would transform this system from a productivity-focused workstation into a top-tier gaming and rendering machine. The 125 W TDP of the CPU and the 75 W TDP of the GPU mean the system’s total power draw is low, but a future high-end GPU with a higher TDP would require a correspondingly more powerful PSU. The platform itself is not a bottleneck; the current GPU is.

Usage Scenarios

High-Refresh Gaming: Not recommended. The Arc A380's low benchmark scores (44th percentile, 6,252 PassMark G3D) will be the limiting factor, preventing high frame rates in modern titles. The CPU is capable, but the GPU cannot deliver the performance required for high-refresh-rate 1080p or 1440p gaming.

Streaming: Feasible with limitations. The Core Ultra 9 285K is immensely powerful and can handle the x264 encoding workload for streaming with ease, given its 42,522 Cinebench R23 multi-core score. However, the game being streamed might struggle to run well due to the GPU's limitations. This setup is better for streaming CPU-heavy games or for software encoding while playing less demanding titles.

Video Editing: Excellent for editing, less so for rendering. The CPU's high multi-core performance (26,702 Geekbench multi-core) will make timeline scrubbing and effects processing very smooth. However, the GPU's 4.198 TFLOPS FP32 performance and 6 GB VRAM are not ideal for GPU-accelerated export or rendering, which will be slow. The system will rely heavily on the CPU for rendering, which it does very well.

3D Rendering: Strong CPU rendering, weak GPU rendering. For CPU-based renderers like Blender Cycles or V-Ray, the 285K is a top-tier choice, with its 24 cores delivering exceptional performance. For GPU-based renderers, the A380 is underpowered and will result in long render times. Users should stick to CPU rendering to leverage the system's strengths.

Software Development: A superb choice. The 24 cores and 24 threads are ideal for compiling large codebases, and the high floating-point and integer math scores (224,324 and 172,379) will speed up code analysis and testing. The 36 MB L3 cache will also help with multi-threaded build processes. The GPU is irrelevant for most development tasks, making this a perfect match.

Student and Office Work: Massively overqualified but extremely responsive. The CPU's high single-thread score of 5,087 in PassMark ensures that any office application, web browser, or productivity suite will run instantly. The Arc A380 is more than sufficient for driving multiple 1080p or 1440p displays and handling video playback, making this a fast and responsive workstation for any academic or administrative task.

Who Should Build It

This build targets users for whom CPU compute power is the dominant requirement and gaming or GPU rendering is a secondary concern. It is ideal for software developers who compile large projects, data analysts who process large datasets, and researchers running complex simulations. The 96th percentile CPU performance ensures that these tasks are completed as quickly as possible. The system is also a good fit for video editors who primarily work with CPU-based effects and codecs and are willing to accept slower GPU-accelerated exports. For students and office workers, this is an overkill but extremely responsive system for multitasking and productivity, ensuring a smooth experience in any application. It is not a build for gamers or 3D artists who depend on GPU acceleration. The Arc A380 is a placeholder, not a final component. The target builder is a professional or enthusiast who wants a top-tier CPU platform now and plans to add a high-end GPU later.

FAQ

Q: Is the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K faster than the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus?

A: No. Based on the average benchmark scores, the Ultra 9 290K Plus is 0.2% faster than the 285K, placing them in the same performance tier.

Q: What is the GPU's performance percentile compared to the CPU's?

A: The GPU is in the 44th percentile of all GPUs, while the CPU is in the 96th percentile of all CPUs. The combined build percentile is 70.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does the CPU support?

A: The Core Ultra 9 285K supports dual-channel DDR5 memory, providing a maximum memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s.

Q: Does this CPU support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K supports ECC memory.

Q: What is the TDP of the Intel Arc A380 and the suggested PSU power?

A: The Intel Arc A380 has a TDP of 75 W, and the suggested PSU for it is 250 W.

Q: What is the launch MSRP of the GPU?

A: The launch MSRP of the Intel Arc A380 is 149 USD.

Q: Is there measured FPS data for this build?

A: No, the FACT PACK contains no measured FPS data for this CPU and GPU combination. All gaming performance discussions are estimates based on the benchmark scores.

Balance and Bottleneck

The system is defined by a severe bottleneck: the GPU. In any workload that is graphically intensive, such as gaming or GPU-accelerated rendering, the Arc A380 is the limiting component. Its 44th percentile score and 6 GB VRAM are insufficient to keep up with the demands of modern software. The CPU will be mostly idle while waiting for the GPU to process frames, resulting in performance that is typical of the GPU alone.

Conversely, in CPU-bound workloads like software compilation, video encoding with software codecs, or data processing, the CPU is the star and the GPU has no impact. The 285K’s 96th percentile performance will shine, and the A380 will simply handle display output. The bottleneck is absolute and depends entirely on the application. There is no scenario where the CPU bottlenecks the GPU. The CPU is so powerful that it will never be the limiting factor in a graphics task. The evidence is clear: the CPU’s average score is 83,807, nearly ten times the GPU's 8,558. The FPS in any game will be determined by the GPU, not the CPU. This pairing is a productive CPU platform with a temporary graphics solution, not a balanced system.

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 9 285K + Intel Arc A380

Apex Performer

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K

Intel Arc A380

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

CPU Analysis

GPU Analysis

Benchmark Performance

Gaming Performance

Upgrade Path and Platform

Usage Scenarios

Who Should Build It

FAQ

Balance and Bottleneck

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