SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 9 285T + Intel Arc A310E

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

84 / 100
HIGH-END

Power Build

Top 16% of systems. Excellent for 1440p Ultra or 4K High gaming.

1440p Ultra4K High

System Balance Analysis

CPU vs GPU performance ratio
Well Balanced
CPU
94%
VS
GPU
74%
PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 9 285T

51,310 Benchmark Score
Top 6% Market Ranking
View Full Specs →
GRAPHICS CARD

Intel Arc A310E

0 Benchmark Score
Top 26% 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 285T and Intel Arc A310E form a distinctly asymmetric desktop pairing, one that combines a high-end 24-core processor with an entry-level discrete GPU. The benchmark data reveals a system where the CPU operates in the top tier of all processors, while the GPU sits at the median of all GPUs, creating a wide performance gulf that defines the character of this build. This analysis examines the platform, performance metrics, and workload implications based exclusively on the provided data.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285T is built for the Intel Socket 1851 platform, utilizing the Arrow Lake architecture on a 3 nm TSMC process node. The platform supports DDR5 memory through a dual-channel bus, providing a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. The CPU also supports ECC memory, a feature that is often associated with workstation-class reliability and stability, suggesting the platform can serve in environments where data integrity is critical. PCIe connectivity is handled by Gen 5 with 20 lanes available from the CPU, which offers substantial bandwidth for modern storage and expansion cards.

The CPU's thermal design point is 35 W, a remarkably low figure for a 24-core processor. This low TDP implies that the system can be cooled by a capable air cooler without requiring elaborate liquid cooling solutions, and it opens the door to compact desktop builds. The GPU, the Intel Arc A310E, has a 75 W TDP and a suggested PSU rating of 250 W. The absence of power connectors on the GPU indicates it draws power directly from the PCIe slot, simplifying cable management. The combined power draw of this system is modest, meaning a standard desktop power supply with ample headroom for the CPU and GPU is sufficient; the data suggests the 250 W PSU recommendation for the GPU is a baseline, and the total system draw remains within typical desktop limits.

A sensible next upgrade path for this platform would focus on the graphics subsystem. The CPU's performance headroom is substantial, as indicated by its high percentile ranking, leaving significant room for a more powerful GPU without creating a CPU-bound bottleneck. The PCIe Gen 5 support from the CPU ensures that any modern GPU will have adequate bandwidth. The memory support for DDR5 and ECC also means that the platform can be configured for future workloads that demand higher memory capacity or error correction, without needing a motherboard change. The platform is not overclockable, as the multiplier is locked, so upgrades would come from component swaps rather than tuning.

Benchmark Performance

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285T delivers exceptional benchmark results, positioning it in the 91st percentile of all CPUs. Its average benchmark score is 51310, placing it in close competition with several high-end rivals. The data shows a 0.6% lead over the Intel Core i9-14900T, a 1.1% lead over the Intel Core i7-13850HX, and a 1.2% lead over the AMD Ryzen 9 5900XT. Conversely, it trails the Intel Core i9-13900F by 0.8%. These narrow margins indicate that the 285T is performance-equivalent to the best of the previous generation, despite its drastically lower power envelope.

In multi-threaded workloads, the CPU scores 33573 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 14100 in Cinebench R20 multi-core. These are strong figures that reflect the capability of its 24 cores. Single-thread performance is also robust, with a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 4739 and a Cinebench R20 single-core score of 1990. The PassMark suite reinforces this picture: a multithread score of 39931, a single-thread score of 4576, and strong results in specific tasks like data compression at 384140 and floating-point math at 137923. The GPU, in contrast, has an average benchmark score of 0, indicating a lack of standardized benchmark data, and sits in the 50th percentile of all GPUs. The combined percentile for this pairing is 71, reflecting the CPU's high standing pulling up the GPU's median position.

The combined picture is one of a processor that can handle the most demanding computational tasks with ease, while the GPU is positioned for basic graphical output rather than intensive rendering. The data implies that this system’s overall performance ceiling is dictated by the GPU in graphics tasks, but the CPU will never be the limiting factor in any workload.

Gaming Performance

No measured FPS rows exist for this exact combination of the Intel Core Ultra 9 285T and Intel Arc A310E. The FACT PACK contains no measuredFps data, so all frame rate discussions are estimated from the benchmark scores. The GPU’s specifications, including 4 GB of VRAM and a 64-bit memory bus, suggest it is positioned for entry-level gaming. The 50th percentile ranking among all GPUs indicates average performance relative to the entire GPU market, but this is a broad category that includes many high-end cards.

Given the CPU's top-tier performance and the GPU's median standing, gaming frame rates will be entirely GPU-limited. The Arc A310E, with its 768 shading units and 3.072 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, is suited for 1080p gaming at medium to low settings in modern titles, and can handle esports titles at higher frame rates. The 4 GB VRAM capacity is a constraint for modern games with high-resolution textures, making it necessary to reduce texture quality to avoid stuttering. The memory bandwidth of 124.0 GB/s is also a limiting factor for high-resolution rendering. The CPU's performance is so far ahead that it will not bottleneck the GPU at any resolution, meaning the GPU will consistently operate at its maximum capability. For users expecting high-refresh-rate gaming at 1440p or 4K, this GPU will not meet those demands, but for casual 1080p gaming, the estimated performance is acceptable.

Who Should Build It

This desktop build targets users who require substantial CPU processing power but have modest graphical demands. The data supports its suitability for content creators who work with video encoding, software compilation, or data analysis, where the CPU's 24 cores and high multi-threaded scores are directly beneficial. The 33573 Cinebench R23 multi-core score indicates it can handle complex 3D rendering tasks, though the final output will be limited by the GPU if using GPU-accelerated renderers. Software developers will benefit from the high single-thread performance of 4739 and the fast compilation times implied by the multi-core scores.

Students and professionals in engineering or scientific fields will find the ECC memory support and high integer math score of 132433 valuable for simulations and financial modeling. Small business workstations that run virtualization or database applications will leverage the high PassMark multithread score of 39931. The GPU is sufficient for office productivity, 2D design, and driving multiple displays, as it supports four mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs. This is not a build for gamers seeking high-end visuals; it is a build for users who need a powerful CPU for compute-intensive tasks and only require basic to moderate graphics capabilities.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285T is a 24-core, 24-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, manufactured on a 3 nm process by TSMC. It has a base clock of 1.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz, a wide range that allows for both extreme power efficiency at idle and high performance under load. The CPU has a 36 MB shared L3 cache, with 192 KB of L1 cache and 3 MB of L2 cache per core. The transistor count is 17,800 million on a 243 mm² die, indicating a dense, modern design.

The benchmark scores confirm its high-end status. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 33573 is a strong indicator of its ability to handle parallel workloads, placing it in the top tier. The single-core score of 4739 is equally impressive, showing that it is not just a multi-core brute but also has excellent per-core performance. The PassMark data compression score of 384140 suggests rapid file archiving and data handling. The data encryption score of 32061 and extended instructions score of 27477 highlight its capability in security and specialized computational tasks. The floating-point math score of 137923 is significant for scientific computing. The find prime numbers score of 345 is a lower figure, but this is a specific test that can be sensitive to architecture. The physics score of 2842 is moderate, which may reflect the power-efficient design. The 91st percentile ranking among all CPUs underscores that this is a top-tier processor for any application, and its 35 W TDP makes it a remarkable engineering achievement, delivering performance comparable to much higher-power parts like the i9-14900T, as evidenced by the 0.6% delta.

GPU Analysis

The Intel Arc A310E is an entry-level discrete GPU based on the Xe-HPG architecture, manufactured on a 6 nm process. It features 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 124.0 GB/s. The GPU has 768 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 render output units. It includes 6 ray tracing cores, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing, a feature uncommon at this performance level. The clock speeds are fixed at 2000 MHz for both base and boost, with memory running at 1937 MHz, translating to 15.5 Gbps effective. The GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, ensuring compatibility with modern APIs.

With 3.072 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 6.144 TFLOPS of FP16 performance, the A310E is capable of basic 3D rendering and light creative work. The texture rate of 64.00 GTexel/s and pixel rate of 32.00 GPixel/s are modest, aligning with its entry-level status. The 50th percentile ranking among all GPUs indicates that it is squarely average, but this is a skewed perspective given the wide range of GPUs on the market. For rendering tasks, the 4 GB VRAM will be a limiting factor for complex scenes and high-resolution textures. The GPU is more suited for 2D acceleration, video playback, and light 3D workloads. The presence of ray tracing cores is a notable feature, but the raw compute power will limit ray-traced performance to very low resolutions or simple scenes. The GPU is end-of-life, with its successor being Battlemage, but it remains a functional option for basic graphical needs.

FAQ

Q: What is the performance difference between the Intel Core Ultra 9 285T and the Intel Core i9-14900T?

A: The Core Ultra 9 285T has an average benchmark score of 51310, which is 0.6% higher than the Core i9-14900T's score of 51015.

Q: Does the Intel Core Ultra 9 285T support overclocking?

A: No, the multiplier is unlocked, so overclocking is not supported on this processor.

Q: What type of memory does this platform support?

A: The CPU supports DDR5 memory through a dual-channel bus, with a total memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. It also supports ECC memory.

Q: How many display outputs does the Intel Arc A310E have?

A: The GPU features four mini-DisplayPort 2.0 outputs.

Q: What is the power consumption of the GPU?

A: The Intel Arc A310E has a TDP of 75 W, and the suggested PSU for the system is 250 W. The GPU does not require additional power connectors.

Q: Is the Intel Arc A310E capable of ray tracing?

A: Yes, it has 6 ray tracing cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, which includes hardware-accelerated ray tracing.

Q: How does the CPU's performance compare to the AMD Ryzen 9 5900XT?

A: The Core Ultra 9 285T has an average benchmark score that is 1.2% higher than the AMD Ryzen 9 5900XT.

Build Overview

This is a desktop build pairing the Intel Core Ultra 9 285T with the Intel Arc A310E. The CPU is a high-end processor from the Core Ultra Series 2, while the GPU is an entry-level, end-of-life component. The combined percentile for this pairing is 71, indicating that the system as a whole performs better than 71% of all possible CPU+GPU combinations, primarily due to the CPU's strength. The build class is desktop, implying a traditional tower form factor. The system's overall tier is defined by the CPU's top-tier status (91st percentile) and the GPU's median status (50th percentile). This is a workstation-oriented build where CPU compute is the primary focus, and the GPU is an auxiliary component for display output and light graphical acceleration. The data suggests that the CPU is a future-proof component, while the GPU is a placeholder that will likely be the first component to be upgraded.

Balance and Bottleneck

The performance balance in this system is heavily skewed toward the CPU. The Core Ultra 9 285T operates in the 91st percentile of all CPUs, while the Arc A310E sits in the 50th percentile of all GPUs. This disparity creates a clear bottleneck scenario where the GPU will limit performance in any graphics-intensive workload. In gaming, the CPU's powerful single-thread performance (4739 in Cinebench R23) will ensure that frame times are consistently low, but the GPU's 3.072 TFLOPS and 4 GB VRAM will cap the maximum frame rate and graphical settings.

In contrast, for CPU-bound tasks such as video encoding, 3D rendering with CPU-based engines, or data processing, the CPU will be the primary performer, and the GPU will have minimal impact. The GPU's 124.0 GB/s memory bandwidth and 64-bit bus are the primary bottlenecks for graphics, as they limit the amount of data that can be processed per second. The FPS scaling in games will be directly tied to the GPU's fill rate and shader count, not the CPU's capabilities. The data points to a system where the CPU is underutilized in most graphical scenarios, waiting on the GPU to deliver frames. This imbalance is not a flaw but a design choice, making the system ideal for users who prioritize CPU compute and only need basic graphics. An upgrade to a more powerful GPU would unlock the CPU's full potential in gaming and GPU-accelerated tasks, creating a more balanced system.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: This is not a recommended scenario for this build. The Arc A310E's modest pixel rate of 32.00 GPixel/s and limited 4 GB VRAM will struggle to maintain high frame rates at 1080p in demanding titles. The CPU's high single-core score of 4739 is irrelevant here, as the GPU will be the limiting factor, making high-refresh gaming at high settings unattainable.

Streaming: The CPU can handle game capture and encoding with ease, given its high multi-threaded score of 33573 in Cinebench R23. However, the GPU's performance will limit the game's visual quality and frame rate, which will also impact the stream quality. The system can stream, but the gaming experience will be entry-level.

Video editing: The CPU's 24 cores and high PassMark multithread score of 39931 provide excellent performance for video editing software that utilizes CPU-based encoding and effects. The GPU can accelerate some effects, but its 3.072 TFLOPS is not a significant accelerator. This build is well-suited for 4K video editing, with the CPU handling the heavy lifting.

3D rendering: For CPU-based renderers, the Core Ultra 9 285T is exceptional, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 33573 that will result in fast render times. For GPU-based renderers, the Arc A310E's 4 GB VRAM and 124.0 GB/s bandwidth are insufficient for complex scenes, making the GPU a poor choice for this workload. The CPU is the workhorse here.

Software development: The CPU's high single-thread and multi-thread scores, including a PassMark integer math score of 132433, make it an excellent choice for compiling code and running virtual machines. The GPU is adequate for a multi-monitor development setup, supporting four displays via its four mini-DisplayPort outputs.

Student and office work: This build is overkill for basic productivity tasks like word processing and spreadsheets. The CPU's efficiency and low 35 W TDP mean it will be silent and cool, but the GPU is more than sufficient for office applications and web browsing. The ECC memory support provides a stability benefit for long-running tasks or important documents. This is a high-performance system for a user who wants future-proofing for more demanding academic software.