SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 9 285K + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050

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)

▼

94 Score

Top 6% Ranking

94 / 100

ULTIMATE READY

Apex Performer

Top 6% 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

91%

PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K

83,807 Benchmark Score

Top 3% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050

21,035 Benchmark Score

Top 9% 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

# CPU Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K represents Intel's flagship desktop processor in the Core Ultra Series 2 lineup, built on the Arrow Lake architecture with a 3 nm process node from TSMC. This is a 24-core, 24-thread part with a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.70 GHz, paired with a 125 W TDP. The absence of hyperthreading — 24 threads for 24 cores — is a notable design choice that prioritizes per-core efficiency over raw thread count, and the benchmark data supports this direction.

In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the 285K scores 42,522, while its single-core result reaches 2,377. These numbers place the CPU at the 96th percentile among all CPUs, meaning it outperforms roughly 96% of processors in the database. The Geekbench scores reinforce this: 26,702 multi-core and 2,870 single-core. The single-core performance is particularly strong for a desktop flagship, and this translates into responsiveness in lightly threaded workloads. The PassMark single-thread score of 5,087 confirms that the architecture delivers excellent per-core throughput.

The cache hierarchy is substantial: 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. For workloads that fit within the L3, this reduces memory latency and improves throughput. The memory subsystem is DDR5 with dual-channel support and a bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s, which is adequate for feeding the 24 cores in memory-intensive tasks. ECC memory support is present, a feature that appeals to workstation and content-creation users who require data integrity.

The PassMark suite provides a granular view of workload-specific performance. Integer math scores 172,379, floating-point math scores 224,324, and extended instructions score 62,277. These are strong marks for scientific computing and financial modeling. Data encryption scores 57,745, while data compression hits 790,052 — the latter being a standout figure for archiving and storage workloads. Random string sorting at 94,927 indicates solid handling of non-sequential data patterns. Physics simulation scores 3,938, and prime number finding scores 541; these are more moderate figures but still competitive for their respective tasks.

The nearest rivals provide context for the 285K's positioning. The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus scores 84,003 on average, which is only 0.2% higher — a negligible margin that puts the 285K in a statistical tie. The AMD EPYC 4584PX averages 83,090, placing the 285K 0.9% ahead. The AMD EPYC 9135 scores 82,980, with the 285K ahead by 1%. The AMD EPYC 7F72 averages 85,072, which is 1.5% higher than the 285K. These deltas are tight, indicating that the 285K competes directly with server-class EPYC parts in aggregate compute, even though those chips target different platforms and power envelopes.

The average benchmark score for the 285K is 83,807. This aggregate figure, combined with the 96th percentile ranking, establishes the CPU as a top-tier desktop processor. The integrated Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU provides basic display output and hardware acceleration, though the paired discrete GPU in this build handles the heavy lifting. The CPU is unlocked, allowing overclocking headroom for enthusiasts, and it uses the Intel Socket 1851 platform with PCIe Gen 5 support (20 lanes from the CPU). The launch MSRP is $589.

# Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: The Core Ultra 9 285K's single-core strength — a Geekbench single-core score of 2,870 and Cinebench R23 single-core of 2,377 — ensures that game engines can dispatch draw calls and physics updates with minimal latency. At high refresh rates, CPU-bound scenarios benefit from the 5.70 GHz boost clock. The PassMark single-thread score of 5,087 indicates that the CPU will not bottleneck a modern GPU in most gaming workloads, though the pairing with an RTX 5050 (66th GPU percentile) means the GPU, not the CPU, will typically set the frame rate ceiling.

Streaming: The 24 cores provide ample headroom for encoding and streaming simultaneously. The PassMark multi-thread score of 67,260 and data encryption score of 57,745 suggest that software encoding (x264 or x265) can run alongside a game without stalling frame pacing. The 36 MB L3 cache helps keep encoder threads fed with data, reducing the likelihood of dropped frames. For streamers who prefer GPU-based NVENC encoding, the CPU's headroom is even less of a constraint.

Video editing: Cinebench R23 multi-core at 42,522 is a strong indicator of timeline rendering performance in editors like Premiere Pro or DaVinci Resolve. The PassMark floating-point math score of 224,324 supports GPU-accelerated effects pipelines and color grading, where the CPU handles transform and filter calculations. The 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth is sufficient for multi-track 4K timelines, and ECC support is a bonus for long render sessions where memory errors can corrupt outputs.

3D rendering: In CPU-based renderers such as Blender Cycles or V-Ray, the 24 cores are fully utilized. The Cinebench R20 multi-core score of 24,003 and R15 multi-core score of 6,494 show scaling that approaches linear with core count. The 96th percentile ranking means this CPU outpaces the vast majority of alternatives for offline rendering. The nearest rival, the AMD EPYC 7F72, is only 1.5% faster in aggregate, which is a negligible difference for a single frame render but could add up over a large batch.

Software development: Compilation is often parallel, and the 24 threads handle large codebases efficiently. The PassMark integer math score of 172,379 indicates strong performance in hash computations and data structure manipulations common in build systems. Random string sorting at 94,927 is relevant for text processing and log analysis. The 36 MB L3 cache reduces re-fetching of shared headers and templates across cores, shortening incremental build times.

Student and office work: For document editing, spreadsheet analysis, and web browsing, the single-core performance ensures snappy UI responsiveness. The Geekbench single-core score of 2,870 is among the highest in the database. The 125 W TDP means a standard desktop power supply and cooling solution suffice; the system does not require exotic cooling for everyday tasks. The integrated Arc graphics can drive multiple displays for productivity setups, though the discrete RTX 5050 will handle any graphics acceleration if needed.

# Upgrade Path and Platform

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K uses the Intel Socket 1851 platform, which is specific to the Core Ultra Series 2 (Arrow Lake) generation. The CPU supports DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth, and ECC memory is supported for error-correcting workloads. PCIe Gen 5 is available with 20 CPU lanes, which allows for high-bandwidth storage (NVMe SSDs) and graphics cards; the paired RTX 5050 uses a PCIe 5.0 x8 interface, so the CPU's lane allocation is more than sufficient.

The CPU's TDP is 125 W, and the GPU's TDP is 130 W, with a suggested PSU wattage of 300 W for the GPU alone. A system with this CPU and GPU would need a power supply that covers both, but the combined thermal envelope is modest by desktop standards. The GPU uses a single 8-pin power connector, and the CPU is air-coolable with a capable cooler, though the 3 nm process keeps heat density manageable. The launch MSRP of the CPU is $589, positioning it as a premium part, but the platform does not require a top-tier PSU for this specific pairing.

A sensible next upgrade for this platform would be adding more DDR5 memory (upgrading to higher-capacity DIMMs) if the current configuration is below the system's needs, since the dual-channel controller supports standard DDR5 capacities. For storage, the PCIe Gen 5 lanes can host the fastest NVMe drives available, which would improve load times and file transfers. The GPU could be swapped for a higher-tier NVIDIA GeForce 50-series model or an AMD alternative in the future, as the PCIe 5.0 x8 slot on the RTX 5050 leaves headroom for a wider interface (x16) on higher-end cards, though the CPU's 20 lanes can accommodate that.

The CPU itself is unlocked, so overclocking could extend its lifespan, but the benchmark data shows it already performs at the 96th percentile, so gains would be marginal in most workloads. The platform is current-generation (Socket 1851), so it supports the latest DDR5 and PCIe Gen 5 peripherals. For users coming from older Intel platforms (e.g., LGA 1700), this build represents a full platform change requiring a new motherboard and memory, but it provides access to the Arrow Lake architecture's efficiency improvements.

# Who Should Build It

This build targets gamers who play at 1080p or 1440p with high refresh rates, where the RTX 5050's 66th percentile GPU performance (PassMark G3D score of 17,326) can drive high frame rates in esports and slightly less demanding AAA titles. The CPU's 96th percentile ranking ensures that the processor will not hold back the GPU in these scenarios, even at lower resolutions where CPU overhead is more prominent. For gamers at 4K, the GPU becomes the primary limitation, and the CPU's power is underutilized, but the system remains capable for titles with lighter graphics loads.

Content creators who work in video editing or 3D rendering will find the 285K's multi-core performance — Cinebench R23 multi-core of 42,522 and PassMark multi-thread of 67,260 — to be a significant asset. The data compression score of 790,052 is particularly useful for media asset management, where archiving and decompressing large video files is routine. The ECC memory support adds reliability for long-duration renders where a single-bit error could waste hours.

Software developers compiling C++ or Rust codebases will benefit from the 24 cores and the 36 MB L3 cache, which speeds up parallel builds. The PassMark integer math score of 172,379 is a proxy for how quickly the CPU can process the arithmetic operations common in code generation. Students and small business workstations that run office applications, spreadsheets, and web-based tools will find the single-core performance (Geekbench single-core of 2,870) more than adequate, though such workloads would not fully utilize the CPU's potential — for those users, a lower-tier CPU might suffice, but the 285K future-proofs the system.

The build class is desktop, so it is intended for stationary workstations rather than portable use. The combined percentile of 81 places this system in the upper tier of desktop configurations, meaning it outperforms 81% of all builds in the database. This is a high-end desktop for enthusiasts, professionals, and prosumers who need both strong CPU compute and capable GPU graphics without reaching for the absolute top-tier GPU that would cost significantly more.

# Benchmark Performance

The CPU's average benchmark score is 83,807, placing it at the 96th percentile among all CPUs. The nearest rival comparisons show a tight cluster: the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus scores 84,003 (0.2% higher), the AMD EPYC 7F72 scores 85,072 (1.5% higher), the AMD EPYC 4584PX scores 83,090 (0.9% lower), and the AMD EPYC 9135 scores 82,980 (1% lower). This means the 285K is effectively tied with the 290K Plus, slightly ahead of the two EPYC parts, and slightly behind the EPYC 7F72. For desktop users, the 285K offers server-class aggregate compute in a consumer platform.

The GPU's average benchmark score is 21,035, placing it at the 66th percentile among all GPUs. The nearest rivals for the RTX 5050 include the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL (21,153, 0.6% higher), the AMD Radeon HD 8970M (21,237, 1% higher), the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT (20,713, 1.6% lower), and the NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile (21,379, 1.6% higher). These deltas are all within roughly 1.6%, indicating that the RTX 5050 performs at a level comparable to mid-range desktop GPUs from previous generations and some mobile workstation parts.

The combined system percentile is 81, which reflects the balance between a top-tier CPU (96th percentile) and a mid-tier GPU (66th percentile). In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, the GPU scores 2,502. Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan scores are 90,334 and 89,381, respectively. The PassMark G3D score is 17,326, and the GPU compute score is 9,184. These figures suggest that the GPU is capable for 1080p gaming and light 1440p, but it is not a high-end rasterization or compute part.

The data shows a clear asymmetry: the CPU is a flagship part, while the GPU is a budget-to-mid-range offering. This pairing is unusual in a prebuilt, but it makes sense for users who prioritize CPU-heavy workloads (rendering, compilation, data processing) while still wanting a modern GPU with ray tracing and DLSS capabilities. The GPU's percentile ranking means it will be the limiting factor in most gaming scenarios, but the CPU ensures that no CPU-bound task will be a bottleneck.

# GPU Analysis

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 is built on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture, using the GB207 chip fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The GPU contains 16,900 million transistors on a 149 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 113.4 million per square millimeter. The memory subsystem consists of 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, providing 320.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The base clock is 2317 MHz with a boost clock of 2572 MHz, and the memory runs at 2500 MHz (20 Gbps effective).

The compute configuration includes 2,560 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, 32 raster operation units, 20 ray tracing cores, and 80 tensor cores. The pixel rate is 82.30 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 205.8 GTexel/s. The FP32 and FP16 throughput are both 13.17 TFLOPS, with a 1:1 ratio for FP16, which is notable for a budget GPU — many parts halve FP16 throughput. This makes the RTX 5050 reasonably capable for compute workloads that use FP16, such as AI inference and some graphics effects.

In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, the GPU scores 2,502. This is a modern DX12 benchmark that stresses ray tracing and mesh shading, and the score reflects the GPU's mid-tier positioning. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 90,334 and Vulkan score of 89,381 are nearly identical, indicating consistent performance across compute APIs. The PassMark G3D score of 17,326 places the GPU at the 66th percentile, so it outperforms the majority of GPUs in the database, but it trails the highest-end parts by a significant margin. The PassMark GPU compute score of 9,184 is modest, aligning with the 8 GB VRAM capacity, which limits the size of datasets that can be processed in GPU memory.

The RTX 5050 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The ray tracing cores (20) and tensor cores (80) enable hardware-accelerated ray tracing and DLSS, which are key features for modern gaming. The 8 GB VRAM is sufficient for 1080p gaming with high textures, but at 1440p or 4K, some titles may exceed this capacity, causing texture streaming or reduced quality settings. The memory bandwidth of 320.0 GB/s is adequate for the core count, but it is not exceptional; higher-end GPUs in the 50-series have wider buses and faster memory.

The GPU's TDP is 130 W, with a suggested PSU of 300 W and a single 8-pin power connector. It is a dual-slot card with 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b outputs, supporting modern displays. The bus interface is PCIe 5.0 x8, which provides ample bandwidth for the GPU's performance level. The nearest rivals are all within 1.6% in average score: the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL (0.6% higher), the AMD Radeon HD 8970M (1% higher), the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT (1.6% lower), and the NVIDIA RTX A4000 Mobile (1.6% higher). This clustering suggests that the RTX 5050 is a competitive mid-range part, though its feature set (ray tracing, DLSS, Blackwell 2.0) is newer than some rivals.

# Balance and Bottleneck

The combined percentile of 81 indicates a system that is well above average, but the gap between the CPU (96th percentile) and GPU (66th percentile) is stark. In CPU-heavy workloads — 3D rendering, video encoding, data compression, software compilation — the CPU is the star, and the GPU's role is secondary. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 42,522 and PassMark data compression score of 790,052 are driven entirely by the 285K. For these tasks, the RTX 5050 does not bottleneck the CPU; it simply sits idle or handles light graphics acceleration.

In gaming, the bottleneck shifts decisively to the GPU. The RTX 5050's PassMark G3D score of 17,326 and 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 2,502 are far below what a 96th-percentile CPU could feed in a frame-rate-unlimited scenario. At 1080p with low graphical settings, the CPU might occasionally become the limiter in esports titles where frame rates exceed 200 FPS, but in most AAA games with Ultra settings, the GPU will cap frame rates well below what the CPU can support. The 8 GB VRAM and 320.0 GB/s bandwidth are the primary constraints for higher resolutions and texture quality.

The FPS scaling evidence is limited because no measured frame data exists for this exact combination. However, the benchmark scores allow for estimation. The GPU's 66th percentile ranking suggests that in a typical AAA title at 1080p Ultra, the RTX 5050 would deliver playable frame rates (roughly 60 FPS or higher) based on its 3DMark performance, though specific titles vary. The CPU's 96th percentile ensures that frame pacing will be consistent, with no stutter from CPU-bound physics or draw calls. The bottleneck is the GPU in almost all gaming scenarios, which is the intended trade-off for a system that prioritizes CPU compute.

For mixed workloads — such as streaming while gaming — the CPU's headroom (24 cores, PassMark multi-thread of 67,260) can handle encoding without stealing significant resources from the game, while the GPU focuses on rendering. This is a balanced scenario where both components contribute. In contrast, for GPU compute tasks (e.g., CUDA-based rendering or AI inference), the RTX 5050's 13.17 TFLOPS FP32 and 80 tensor cores are the limiting factor, and the CPU's role is reduced to feeding data. The system is unbalanced in the sense that the CPU is overqualified for gaming, but balanced in the sense that it excels at CPU-bound productivity tasks that the GPU would otherwise struggle with.

# Build Overview

This build pairs the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K — a 24-core, 24-thread desktop flagship on the Arrow Lake architecture — with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050, an 8 GB GDDR6 GPU on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture. The build class is desktop, and the combined percentile is 81, meaning this system outperforms 81% of all configurations in the database. The CPU is a top-tier part at the 96th percentile, while the GPU is a mid-range part at the 66th percentile.

The platform is Socket 1851 with DDR5 memory support (dual-channel, 102.4 GB/s) and PCIe Gen 5 (20 CPU lanes). The CPU's TDP is 125 W, and the GPU's TDP is 130 W, with a suggested PSU of 300 W for the GPU alone; a typical desktop PSU of 500-600 W would cover the entire system. The CPU has an integrated Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU, providing a fallback display output if the discrete GPU is removed. The CPU's launch MSRP is $589, and the GPU's launch MSRP is $249.

This is an asymmetric pairing: a flagship CPU with a budget GPU. The system is designed for users who need maximum CPU compute for productivity and are willing to accept mid-range gaming performance. The overall tier is upper-mid-range, driven largely by the CPU's exceptional aggregate benchmark scores. The GPU is modern and supports the latest APIs (DirectX 12 Ultimate, Vulkan 1.4), but its raw performance is modest. For a balanced gaming build, a lower-tier CPU with a higher-tier GPU would deliver better frame rates, but for a workstation that also games, this pairing is rational.

# FAQ

Q: Is the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K a 24-core or 24-thread processor?

A: The CPU has 24 cores and 24 threads, meaning it does not use simultaneous multithreading (hyperthreading). Each core handles one thread, which is a departure from previous Intel designs that doubled thread count with hyperthreading.

Q: What is the GPU's memory configuration?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 320.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock is 2500 MHz, which translates to 20 Gbps effective.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus?

A: The 290K Plus has an average benchmark score of 84,003, which is 0.2% higher than the 285K's 83,807. This difference is negligible, meaning the two CPUs are statistically equivalent in aggregate performance.

Q: What is the system's overall performance percentile?

A: The combined percentile for this CPU+GPU pairing is 81, meaning it outperforms 81% of all desktop configurations in the database.

Q: Does the GPU support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the RTX 5050 includes 20 ray tracing cores based on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing in supported games and applications.

Q: What is the CPU's memory bandwidth?

A: The CPU supports dual-channel DDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. ECC memory is also supported for error-correcting workloads.

Q: Are there measured FPS data for this exact build?

A: No, there are no measured FPS rows for this specific CPU+GPU combination. All frame rate discussions are estimated from the benchmark scores.

# Gaming Performance

No measured FPS data exists for this exact combination of the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050. The measuredFpsUltraByGame field is empty, and the dataIsMeasured flag is false. Therefore, all frame rate figures below are estimates derived from the benchmark scores.

The RTX 5050's 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2,502 and PassMark G3D score of 17,326 (66th percentile) indicate a GPU that is positioned for 1080p gaming with high settings and 1440p with reduced settings. At 1080p Ultra, the GPU is likely to deliver 60-90 FPS in most AAA titles, based on its relative performance to the nearest rivals (AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT, which is 1.6% slower in average score, and the RTX A4000 Mobile, which is 1.6% faster). Esports titles like Counter-Strike 2 or Valorant would see much higher frame rates — potentially 150-200+ FPS — because they are CPU-light and the 285K's single-core performance (Geekbench single-core of 2,870) would easily keep up.

At 1440p Ultra, the 8 GB VRAM and 320.0 GB/s bandwidth become limiting factors. Frame rates would likely drop to 40-60 FPS in demanding titles, requiring DLSS (supported by the tensor cores) to reach playable levels. The 80 tensor cores can accelerate DLSS, which would boost performance by rendering at a lower internal resolution and upscaling. At 4K, the GPU would struggle to maintain 30 FPS in AAA titles even with DLSS, as the 66th percentile ranking places it well below 4K-class GPUs.

The CPU's contribution to gaming is to remove any processor bottleneck. The 96th percentile ranking means that even at high frame rates, the 285K will not be the limiting factor. The PassMark single-thread score of 5,087 and the 5.70 GHz boost clock ensure that game logic, physics, and draw calls are processed without delay. In CPU-bound scenarios (e.g., massive multiplayer battles or simulation games), the 24 cores and 36 MB L3 cache provide headroom that lower-tier CPUs would lack.

The estimated frame rates are based on the GPU's benchmark scores relative to the entire GPU database. The RTX 5050 is 1.6% faster than the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT, which historically delivered 60+ FPS at 1080p in most games of its era. The 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 2,502 is a modern DX12 benchmark, and a score in this range typically translates to 1080p high settings gaming. For users who prioritize gaming, this system is adequate for 1080p and playable at 1440p with settings adjustments, but it is not a high-refresh 1440p or 4K gaming machine. The CPU ensures that any future GPU upgrade will be fully utilized without requiring a platform change.

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 9 285K + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050

Apex Performer

System Balance Analysis

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050

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

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