SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus + NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile Refresh

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

86 / 100
HIGH-END

Power Build

Top 14% 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
74%

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

PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus

79,574 Benchmark Score
Top 3% Market Ranking
View Full Specs →
GRAPHICS CARD

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile Refresh

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.

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

Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus paired with the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile Refresh is a laptop configuration that sits at a notable crossroads in mobile computing. The CPU is a top-tier performer, ranking in the 95th percentile against all processors, while the GPU is a capable but aging professional workstation part that lands exactly in the 50th percentile of all GPUs. This pairing creates a system where the processor is the dominant component, capable of handling the most demanding multi-threaded workloads, but the graphics card will throttle the experience in GPU-bound scenarios like high-resolution gaming and complex 3D rendering. The data shows a clear asymmetry in performance class that defines this build's identity as a workstation for CPU-intensive tasks rather than a balanced gaming rig.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus is a 24-core, 24-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake-HX Refresh architecture, built on a 3nm TSMC process node with 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. It has a base clock of 2.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz, with a TDP of 55W. Its cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and a shared 36 MB of L3 cache. This processor is unlocked, allowing for overclocking, and supports DDR5 memory on a dual-channel bus with a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. It also supports ECC memory and features integrated Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units.

Benchmark results confirm the CPU's high-end positioning. In Cinebench R23, it scores 39,684 points in multi-core and 2,356 points in single-core. The multi-core score is particularly strong, placing it in the 95th percentile of all CPUs, meaning it outperforms 95% of all processors tested. Its average benchmark score of 79,574 is remarkably close to its nearest rivals: the Intel Core i9-14900KF scores 79,371 (a 0.3% difference), the AMD EPYC 7413 scores 80,041 (a -0.6% difference), and the Intel Core i9-14900K scores 79,097 (a 0.6% difference). This indicates the Ultra 9 290HX Plus trades blows with desktop-class flagship processors from the previous generation, making it an exceptional mobile CPU.

The PassMark suite provides further insight into workload suitability. The multi-thread score is 59,439, and the integer math score is 164,839, while floating-point math reaches 201,773. Data compression scores 658,724, and data encryption reaches 50,008. The single-thread score of 4,951 shows strong per-core performance, which is crucial for lightly-threaded applications. For real workloads, this means the CPU can handle massive parallel tasks like video encoding, code compilation, and scientific simulations with ease, while still offering snappy responsiveness in everyday tasks. The Cinebench R20 multi-core score of 21,198 and single-core score of 2,992 reinforce this trend, showing consistent scaling across benchmark versions. The 24 threads are all physical, with no hyper-threading, which is a design choice that favors efficiency and thermal management in a laptop form factor, yet the raw core count still delivers near-desktop performance.

Balance and Bottleneck

The performance asymmetry between the CPU and GPU is stark. The CPU sits in the 95th percentile of all CPUs, while the GPU sits in the 50th percentile of all GPUs. This creates a clear bottleneck scenario where the GPU is the limiting factor in graphics-intensive workloads. For gaming, the GPU will cap frame rates long before the CPU can be fully utilized. The CPU's Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 39,684 indicates it has ample headroom for physics calculations, game logic, and AI-driven NPCs, but the GPU's 50th-percentile ranking means it will struggle to push high frame rates at demanding settings.

There are no measured FPS rows for this exact CPU+GPU combination in the FACT PACK, so all FPS discussion must be framed as estimated from the benchmark scores. Based on the CPU's 95th-percentile score and the GPU's 50th-percentile score, the system will exhibit a significant GPU bottleneck in most modern games. The CPU can process frames as fast as the GPU can render them, but the GPU's rendering speed will dictate the final output. This is not necessarily a bad thing for workstation tasks—the CPU's dominance is an asset for multi-threaded productivity—but it means gamers will see performance limited by the Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile Refresh.

The bottleneck shifts in CPU-bound workloads. In tasks like data compression, where the CPU scores 658,724 in PassMark, or integer math at 164,839, the GPU is irrelevant and the CPU's full potential is realized. The thermal and power envelope is also a factor: the CPU has a TDP of 55W, while the GPU has a TDP of 110W. This suggests the GPU draws more power, which could lead to thermal throttling in a laptop chassis if not properly cooled. The data indicates that users should expect the GPU to be the limiting factor for gaming and 3D rendering, while the CPU will dominate in productivity and compute-heavy workloads.

FAQ

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus compare to the Intel Core i9-14900KF?

A: The Ultra 9 290HX Plus has an average benchmark score of 79,574, which is 0.3% higher than the i9-14900KF's score of 79,371. This puts them in essentially the same performance tier, making the Ultra 9 a viable mobile alternative to a desktop flagship.

Q: What is the GPU's performance percentile and what does it mean?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile Refresh is in the 50th percentile of all GPUs, meaning it performs better than half of all GPUs tested. This places it as a mid-range graphics solution, suitable for professional workloads but not for high-end gaming at maximum settings.

Q: Can this system handle modern games at high refresh rates?

A: Based on the GPU's 50th-percentile ranking, it is unlikely to sustain high refresh rates at high resolutions. The CPU is more than capable, but the GPU will be the bottleneck, so users should expect moderate frame rates at best, especially in demanding titles.

Q: Does the CPU support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus supports ECC memory, which is a critical feature for workstation reliability in data-intensive and long-running compute tasks.

Q: What is the CPU's single-thread performance like?

A: The CPU scores 2,356 in Cinebench R23 single-core and 4,951 in PassMark single-thread. These are strong numbers, indicating excellent responsiveness in applications that rely on a few fast cores, such as office productivity and web browsing.

Q: Is the GPU end-of-life?

A: Yes, the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile Refresh has a production status of "End-of-life" and was released on June 7, 2020. It is based on the older Turing architecture and uses a 12nm process node.

Q: What is the combined performance percentile of this build?

A: The combined percentile for this CPU+GPU pairing is 73, which places the system in the top 27% of all configurations. This reflects the strong CPU offset by the mid-range GPU.

Who Should Build It

This configuration is tailor-made for professionals and power users whose workloads are heavily CPU-bound. Software developers compiling large codebases will benefit from the 24 cores and the Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 39,684, which ensures rapid build times. Data scientists and researchers running simulations or processing large datasets will appreciate the PassMark multi-thread score of 59,439 and the data compression score of 658,724, which accelerate batch processing and file handling. Students in engineering or computer science fields will find the CPU's 95th-percentile ranking more than adequate for coursework, though they may find the GPU limiting for graphics-heavy projects.

Small business workstations that handle accounting, database management, or server virtualization will see a clear benefit from the CPU's 55W TDP and ECC memory support, which provides stability and reliability for 24/7 operation. Content creators who work primarily with audio processing or code-based tasks, rather than video editing, will also find this build suitable. The GPU's 16GB of VRAM and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth can still handle moderate GPU-accelerated tasks, but it is not the primary strength of this system. Gamers should look elsewhere, as the GPU's 50th-percentile ranking will not deliver the high-refresh experience that the CPU could otherwise support. This is a builder's workstation for CPU-centric workloads, not a gaming laptop.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU benchmarks are the headline here. The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus scores 39,684 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 2,356 in single-core, with a 95th-percentile ranking. In Cinebench R20, it scores 21,198 multi-core and 2,992 single-core, and in Cinebench R15, it scores 5,981 multi-core and 340 single-core. The PassMark suite shows a multi-thread score of 59,439, a single-thread score of 4,951, and an average benchmark score of 79,574. Its closest rival, the Intel Core i9-14900KF, scores 79,371, putting the Ultra 9 0.3% ahead. The AMD EPYC 7413 scores 80,041, putting the Ultra 9 0.6% behind, and the Intel Core i9-14900K scores 79,097, which the Ultra 9 beats by 0.6%. The Intel Xeon w5-2565X scores 80,671, leaving the Ultra 9 1.4% behind. These deltas are minimal, confirming that the Ultra 9 is a top-tier mobile processor that rivals desktop silicon.

The GPU benchmarks show a different story. There are no benchmark scores listed for the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile Refresh, and its average benchmark score is 0, but its percentile vs. all GPUs is 50. This indicates it performs at the median level. The GPU has 3,072 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, with 48 RT cores and 384 tensor cores. Its FP32 performance is 9.400 TFLOPS, and FP16 is 18.80 TFLOPS. The combined picture is a system with a top-tier CPU and a mid-tier GPU. The combined percentile of 73 reflects this, showing that the system is better than 73% of all builds, but the GPU prevents it from reaching the upper echelons. For a balanced performance assessment, the CPU is the star, and the GPU is the weak link.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The CPU uses the Intel BGA 2114 socket, which means it is soldered to the motherboard and is not upgradeable in the traditional sense. The platform supports DDR5 memory on a dual-channel bus with a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s, and it supports ECC memory for error correction. The CPU provides 20 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, which is ample for the latest NVMe SSDs and discrete GPUs, though the GPU in this build uses PCIe 3.0 x16. The CPU has a TDP of 55W, while the GPU has a TDP of 110W. There is no suggested PSU listed, but the combined 165W TDP suggests that a laptop's power delivery system must be robust to handle sustained loads.

Since the CPU is not socketed, the upgrade path is limited to the GPU and memory, assuming the laptop allows for component replacement. A sensible next upgrade would be a GPU with a higher percentile ranking, as the current 50th-percentile GPU is the primary bottleneck. However, the GPU is also soldered in most laptops, so this may not be practical. The memory can be upgraded to increase capacity, but the memory bandwidth is fixed at 102.4 GB/s. The platform itself is based on the Arrow Lake-HX Refresh architecture, which is current, so the only real upgrade would be to a system with a better GPU. The production status of the CPU is "Active" and it was released on March 16, 2026, so it is a new and current part. The GPU is "End-of-life" and was released in June 2020, so it is older. This suggests that the system's upgrade path is limited by the older GPU, and users may need to consider a new laptop to get a more balanced configuration.

GPU Analysis

The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile Refresh is based on the Turing architecture, built on a 12nm process node with 13,600 million transistors on a 545 mm² die. It has 16GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing a memory bandwidth of 448.0 GB/s. The memory clock is 1750 MHz, which translates to 14 Gbps effective. The GPU has a base clock of 1035 MHz and a boost clock of 1530 MHz. It features 3,072 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, with 48 RT cores and 384 tensor cores. The pixel rate is 97.92 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 293.8 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 9.400 TFLOPS, and FP16 performance is 18.80 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio.

The 50th-percentile ranking is a direct reflection of its capabilities. In rendering workloads, the 9.400 TFLOPS of FP32 performance is adequate for professional 3D modeling and CAD applications, but it is not competitive with modern high-end GPUs. The 16GB of VRAM is a plus for large textures and complex scenes, but the 448.0 GB/s bandwidth may limit performance in memory-intensive tasks. The RT cores and tensor cores support hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI-based features, but the Turing architecture is older, and the performance will be lower than newer generations. The GPU has no benchmark scores listed in the FACT PACK, so its performance must be inferred from its percentile and specs. For gaming, the GPU is a mid-range part, and for rendering, it is a competent but not exceptional professional solution. The GPU's power draw of 110W is higher than the CPU's 55W, indicating it is the more power-hungry component.

Build Overview

This build is a laptop-class system that pairs the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus with the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Mobile Refresh. The CPU is in the 95th percentile of all CPUs, making it one of the fastest mobile processors available. The GPU is in the 50th percentile of all GPUs, making it a mid-range part. The combined percentile is 73, placing this system in the top 27% of all configurations. The overall tier is defined by the CPU's dominance: this is a workstation-class laptop for CPU-intensive tasks, not a gaming laptop. The CPU's Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 39,684 and PassMark multi-thread score of 59,439 are the defining metrics, while the GPU's 50th-percentile ranking is a secondary consideration. The mismatch creates a system that excels at compute, compilation, and data processing but is held back in graphics-heavy workloads. The build is best described as a mobile workstation where the processor is the primary selling point, and the GPU is a supporting component for professional applications rather than gaming.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: This scenario is not well-supported. The GPU's 50th-percentile ranking means it will likely fail to deliver high frame rates at high settings. The CPU is more than capable, but the GPU is the limiting factor, so gamers should expect sub-60 FPS in many titles at 1440p or 4K.

Streaming: The CPU's 24 cores and Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 39,684 can handle encoding and streaming simultaneously without breaking a sweat. The GPU's tensor cores can assist with AI-based encoding, but the overall GPU performance is mid-range, so streamers should rely on the CPU for heavy lifting.

Video editing: This is a mixed bag. The CPU excels at rendering timelines and exporting video, with PassMark integer math at 164,839 ensuring fast processing. However, the GPU's 9.400 TFLOPS of FP32 and 16GB of VRAM will struggle with GPU-accelerated effects and high-resolution previews, making the experience slower than a more balanced system.

3D rendering: The GPU's 50th-percentile ranking and 9.400 TFLOPS of FP32 mean it is a mid-tier renderer. For CPU-based rendering, the 24 cores are superb, but GPU-based renderers will see moderate performance. The 16GB of VRAM helps with larger scenes, but the older Turing architecture limits overall speed.

Software development: This is a strong scenario. The CPU's high multi-thread score of 59,439 in PassMark and data compression score of 658,724 accelerate code compilation and version control operations. The single-thread score of 4,951 ensures fast IDE responsiveness. The GPU is irrelevant here, making this an ideal build for developers.

Student and office work: The CPU's single-thread performance is excellent for everyday tasks, and the ECC memory support adds reliability. The battery life implications of a 55W CPU and 110W GPU are not detailed, but the raw performance is more than sufficient for any academic or office workload. The GPU is overkill for this scenario, but the system's overall power is undeniable.