SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 9 285K + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010

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)

▼

88 Score

Top 12% Ranking

88 / 100

HIGH-END

Power Build

Top 12% of systems. Excellent for 1440p Ultra or 4K High gaming.

1440p Ultra4K High

System Balance Analysis

CPU vs GPU performance ratio

Well Balanced

CPU

97%

GPU

79%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K

83,807 Benchmark Score

Top 3% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010

2,893 Benchmark Score

Top 21% 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.

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 285K and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010 is an unusual pairing: a top-tier 24-core desktop processor matched with an entry-level 4 GB graphics card. The data shows a CPU that sits at the 96th percentile among all tested processors, while the GPU lands at only the 18th percentile. This guide interprets the benchmark results for real workloads, covering compute, rendering, gaming estimates, and which component will dominate in each scenario. No measured FPS data exists for this exact combination, so all gaming frame rates discussed are estimates derived from the CPU and GPU benchmark scores.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K is a desktop processor from the Core Ultra Series 2, built on the Arrow Lake architecture (Arrow Lake-S) using a 3 nm process from TSMC. It packs 24 cores and 24 threads, with no hyperthreading — each core is a physical core. The base clock is 3.70 GHz, and the boost clock reaches 5.70 GHz. The TDP is rated at 125 W, and it uses the Intel Socket 1851. The processor integrates Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units, providing a basic display output capability, though the dedicated GPU in this build handles all graphics work.

Cache layout is generous: 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. Memory support is DDR5 on a dual-channel bus, with a theoretical bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. ECC memory is supported, which matters for workstation reliability. The CPU provides PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the processor itself. The multiplier is unlocked, meaning overclocking is possible for users who want to push beyond the stock 5.70 GHz boost. The processor was released on 2024-10-23 with a launch MSRP of $589.

Benchmark results place this CPU in the top tier. In Cinebench R23, the multi-core score is 42522, while the single-core score is 2377. The multi-core figure indicates exceptional sustained throughput for heavily threaded workloads — rendering, compilation, and simulation. The single-core score of 2377 is strong but not class-leading; it reflects the architecture’s balance between frequency and per-core efficiency. Geekbench scores are 26702 multi-core and 2870 single-core, confirming the same pattern.

PassMark results add depth. Multi-thread score is 67260, which is high, but the individual sub-tests reveal specific strengths: integer math scores 172379, floating point math scores 224324, and extended instructions score 62277. Data compression scores 790052, and data encryption scores 57745. Random string sorting hits 94927. These numbers suggest the CPU handles encryption, compression, and mathematical workloads with ease — typical for a high-end desktop part. The find prime numbers score of 541 and physics score of 3938 are lower relative to the other sub-tests, indicating that some single-threaded or latency-sensitive tasks do not scale as well as pure throughput tasks.

The average benchmark score is 83807, and the CPU’s percentile versus all CPUs is 96. Nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus (average score 84003, delta -0.2%), meaning the 285K is essentially tied with it. The AMD EPYC 4584PX scores 83090 (delta +0.9%), and the AMD EPYC 9135 scores 82980 (delta +1%). The AMD EPYC 7F72 scores 85072 (delta -1.5%). These deltas are all within a couple of percent, so the 285K is competitively placed against high-end server and desktop parts, though it is not the absolute fastest in every scenario.

For real workloads, the 24-core configuration with 24 threads is ideal for parallel tasks like video encoding, 3D rendering, and code compilation. The 36 MB L3 cache helps with data reuse in large datasets. The single-core performance is sufficient for everyday responsiveness and lightly threaded applications, but the CPU’s identity is clearly multi-core horsepower.

Benchmark Performance

The combined picture from the benchmark scores is starkly lopsided. The CPU’s average benchmark score is 83807, placing it at the 96th percentile among all CPUs. The GPU’s average benchmark score is 2893, from a single 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, placing it at the 18th percentile among all GPUs. The combined percentile for this build is 57, reflecting the mismatch: the CPU is elite, the GPU is entry-level, and the system as a whole sits in the lower-middle range for gaming and GPU-accelerated tasks.

The CPU’s Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 42522 is roughly 18x its single-core score of 2377, which is typical for a high-core-count part. In Geekbench, the multi-core score of 26702 is about 9.3x the single-core score of 2870. These ratios indicate excellent scaling across cores, provided the workload can use them.

The GPU’s 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2893 places it near the GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB (score 2907, delta -0.5%) and the RTX 4060 Ti 8 GB (score 2913, delta -0.7%). It is also close to the NVIDIA RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell SFF (score 2910, delta -0.6%) and the NVIDIA Quadro P600 (score 2923, delta -1%). These rivals are all within 1% of the RTX 4010 in this specific test, which is surprising given the RTX 4010’s low VRAM and narrow memory bus — the Steel Nomad test may not stress memory capacity heavily. However, the 18th percentile rank means most other GPUs score higher.

The combined picture is that this build will excel at CPU-bound tasks like rendering, encoding, and productivity, but will be severely limited in GPU-bound tasks like gaming at high resolutions, 3D modeling with large textures, or machine learning inference on the GPU. The CPU will often sit idle while the GPU is saturated, or vice versa, depending on the workload.

GPU Analysis

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010 is built on the Ampere architecture using an 8 nm process from Samsung. The chip is GA107 with 8,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die. It has 768 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. Ray tracing cores number 6, and tensor cores number 24. The base clock is 1417 MHz, and the boost clock is 1762 MHz. Memory runs at 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) on a 64-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 96.00 GB/s. The memory size is 4 GB of GDDR6.

Pixel rate is 28.19 GPixel/s, texture rate is 42.29 GTexel/s, and FP32 performance is 2.706 TFLOPS. FP16 is also 2.706 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio), meaning no dedicated half-precision boost. The GPU has a TDP of 50 W, is single-slot, and requires no power connectors — it draws power from the PCIe slot alone. The suggested PSU is 250 W, which is very low. It uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface and outputs 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a. API support includes DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The 4 GB VRAM is the glaring limitation. At 96 GB/s bandwidth, it is far below what modern games require for high-resolution textures. The 64-bit bus severely constrains memory throughput. The 6 RT cores and 24 tensor cores provide ray tracing and DLSS capability, but the low shading power and small memory pool mean these features will only work at lower settings and resolutions.

The GPU’s 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2893 is the only benchmark provided. At the 18th percentile, it ranks below most discrete GPUs. The nearest rivals — RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB, RTX 4060 Ti 8 GB, RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell SFF, and Quadro P600 — are all within 1% in this test, which suggests the RTX 4010 performs comparably to those in a specific DX12 workload, but the low VRAM will cause issues in texture-heavy scenes that the benchmark may not capture.

For rendering, the FP32 throughput of 2.706 TFLOPS is modest. Real-world 3D rendering in Blender or similar will be slow compared to any mid-range GPU. The tensor cores enable DLSS, which can help gaming frame rates, but the base performance is too low for high-refresh gaming at 1080p with quality settings. The RT cores are present, but ray tracing at playable frame rates is unlikely except at very low resolutions and settings.

FAQ

Q: What is the CPU’s multi-core performance relative to its nearest rivals?

A: The Core Ultra 9 285K scores 83807 on average, which is 0.2% behind the Core Ultra 9 290K Plus (84003) and 0.9% ahead of the AMD EPYC 4584PX (83090). It is also 1% ahead of the AMD EPYC 9135 (82980) and 1.5% behind the AMD EPYC 7F72 (85072).

Q: How much VRAM does the RTX 4010 have, and what does that mean for gaming?

A: The GPU has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth. This is very low by current standards, so games with large textures will exceed VRAM capacity, causing stuttering or reduced quality settings.

Q: Is the CPU or GPU the stronger component in this build?

A: The CPU is far stronger. It sits at the 96th percentile among CPUs with an average score of 83807, while the GPU sits at the 18th percentile with a score of 2893. The combined percentile is 57.

Q: Does the RTX 4010 support ray tracing and DLSS?

A: Yes, it has 6 ray tracing cores and 24 tensor cores. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). However, the low shading power (2.706 TFLOPS FP32) and 4 GB VRAM limit the usefulness of these features.

Q: What is the CPU’s boost clock and core count?

A: The CPU has 24 cores and 24 threads, with a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.70 GHz. It uses a 125 W TDP and supports DDR5 memory.

Q: Are there measured FPS figures for this build?

A: No. The FACT PACK contains no measuredFps data for this exact CPU+GPU combination. All FPS figures in this analysis are estimates based on benchmark scores.

Q: How does the GPU compare to the RTX 4060 Ti series?

A: In the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, the RTX 4010 scores 2893, which is 0.5% behind the RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB (2907) and 0.7% behind the RTX 4060 Ti 8 GB (2913). These are within 1%, but the RTX 4010 has far less VRAM (4 GB vs 8 or 16 GB).

Balance and Bottleneck

This build is severely imbalanced. The CPU’s average benchmark score of 83807 is roughly 29 times the GPU’s score of 2893. In any GPU-bound workload — gaming, GPU rendering, or machine learning — the GPU will be the bottleneck. The CPU will sit largely idle while the GPU struggles. In CPU-bound workloads — compilation, video encoding, physics simulation — the GPU is irrelevant, and the CPU will perform at its high percentile.

The combined percentile of 57 reflects this mismatch. For gaming, the GPU’s 18th percentile rank means it will limit frame rates far below what the CPU can feed. The CPU’s single-thread score of 5087 in PassMark is strong, so it can handle game logic and draw calls, but the GPU’s 2.706 TFLOPS and 4 GB VRAM will cap resolution and settings. At 1080p with low settings, the GPU might keep up in some titles, but at 1440p or higher, the GPU will be the clear bottleneck. Conversely, in a multi-threaded render task, the CPU will be fully utilized, and the GPU will be nearly idle.

The memory bandwidth discrepancy is also notable. The CPU has 102.4 GB/s of DDR5 bandwidth, while the GPU has 96.00 GB/s. This is unusual — typically a discrete GPU has much higher bandwidth than system memory. Here, they are close, meaning the GPU cannot quickly access large textures, further limiting its performance in memory-intensive tasks.

Gaming Performance

No measured FPS rows exist for this exact combination, so all gaming frame rates below are estimates derived from the CPU and GPU benchmark scores. The CPU’s high single-thread score (5087 in PassMark, 2870 in Geekbench single-core) indicates it will not bottleneck modern games at any resolution. The GPU’s 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 2893 and its 18th percentile rank suggest it performs at the level of a very low-end discrete GPU.

At 1080p with low to medium settings, the RTX 4010’s 2.706 TFLOPS and 4 GB VRAM may deliver playable frame rates in older or esports titles, likely in the 30-60 FPS range depending on the game. At 1080p with high settings, the 4 GB VRAM will exceed capacity in many modern titles, causing texture pop-in and stuttering. At 1440p or 4K, the GPU will be severely inadequate, with most games dropping below 30 FPS. The CPU’s performance suggests it could drive much higher frame rates if paired with a stronger GPU, but with the RTX 4010, the GPU is the limiting factor. Ray tracing is possible via the 6 RT cores but will likely reduce frame rates to unplayable levels except at 720p or with DLSS enabled.

Who Should Build It

This build suits users who need maximum CPU performance for productivity and are willing to accept entry-level GPU capability. The CPU’s 96th percentile rank and 24 cores make it ideal for content creators who edit video, render 3D scenes, or compile large codebases. The ECC memory support and 125 W TDP also appeal to small business workstations running reliability-critical workloads. Developers will benefit from the high multi-thread scores in compilation and testing. Students in engineering or data science fields will find the CPU powerful for simulations, but the GPU will limit any GPU-accelerated tasks. Gamers at 1080p with low expectations might manage, but this is not a gaming-first build — the GPU’s 18th percentile and 4 GB VRAM are clear constraints.

Build Overview

This is a desktop build pairing the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, a 24-core Arrow Lake processor with a 5.70 GHz boost clock and a 96th percentile CPU ranking, with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010, an Ampere-based GPU with 4 GB GDDR6, 768 shading units, and an 18th percentile GPU ranking. The combined percentile is 57. The CPU is among the fastest available, while the GPU is near the bottom of the performance ladder. This build is a workstation-class CPU with a display adapter rather than a balanced gaming or rendering system.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: Not viable. The GPU’s 18th percentile and 4 GB VRAM will cap frame rates well below what the CPU could support. Estimated 1080p low-settings frame rates are in the 30-60 FPS range, far from high-refresh territory.

Streaming: The CPU’s 24 cores and high multi-thread score (42522 in Cinebench R23) handle encoding easily, but the GPU’s low performance will limit game quality. Streaming older or esports titles at low settings is possible; modern AAA games will struggle.

Video editing: The CPU excels here. Cinebench R23 multi-core of 42522 and PassMark multi-thread of 67260 speed up rendering and exports. The GPU’s 4 GB VRAM will slow effects or color grading using GPU acceleration, but CPU-based workflows are strong.

3D rendering: CPU rendering is excellent — the 24 cores and 42522 Cinebench score mean fast final-frame renders. GPU rendering is poor due to 2.706 TFLOPS and 4 GB VRAM, so use CPU render engines.

Software development: Compilation and testing benefit from the 24 cores and 36 MB L3 cache. PassMark integer math of 172379 and data compression of 790052 indicate strong build times and data handling. The GPU is irrelevant for most development tasks.

Student and office work: Overkill. The CPU’s single-thread score of 5087 in PassMark provides snappy responsiveness, but the 125 W TDP and $589 launch MSRP make this an expensive choice for word processing or spreadsheets. The GPU handles basic display output via its 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a.

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 9 285K + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010

Power Build

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010

Market Position

Game Performance Benchmarks

Cyberpunk 2077

Red Dead Redemption 2

Microsoft Flight Simulator

Control

Call of Duty: Warzone

Fortnite

Performance Insights

Strong Performance

Performance Tiers Explained

Ultimate

High-End

Mid-Range

Entry Level

Legacy

CPU Analysis

Benchmark Performance

GPU Analysis

FAQ

Balance and Bottleneck

Gaming Performance

Who Should Build It

Build Overview

Usage Scenarios

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