SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus + NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER

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

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
98%
VS
GPU
79%
PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus

84,003 Benchmark Score
Top 2% Market Ranking
View Full Specs →
GRAPHICS CARD

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER

3,075 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

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER form a desktop pairing that presents a striking contrast in benchmark performance. The CPU sits at the 96th percentile among all processors, while the GPU’s single 3DMark score places it at only the 19th percentile, a discrepancy that defines this build’s character. The data suggests a system where the processor is the dominant component, capable of immense computational throughput, while the graphics card’s measured output appears modest in comparison, though its specifications suggest otherwise.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is a 24-core, 24-thread processor from the Core Ultra Series 2, built on Arrow Lake Refresh architecture. It uses a 3 nm process from TSMC and contains 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. The base clock is 3.70 GHz with a boost clock of 5.80 GHz, and it carries a TDP of 125 W. This is a desktop-class chip with an unlocked multiplier, meaning overclocking is possible, though the data does not specify how much headroom exists.

Benchmark results show a processor that excels in multi-threaded workloads. In Cinebench R23, it scores 51,731 points in the multicore test and 7,303 in the singlecore test. The R20 results are 21,727 multicore and 3,067 singlecore, while R15 shows 5,214 multicore and 736 singlecore. These numbers indicate a strong balance between single-thread responsiveness and multi-core throughput. The PassMark multithread score of 60,860 reinforces the multi-core strength, while the single-thread score of 4,823 shows it is not lacking in lighter tasks either.

The processor’s cache hierarchy is notable: 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. This arrangement supports the high core count and helps with data locality in complex workloads. Memory support includes DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and a bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s, which is sufficient for most desktop applications. ECC memory support is present, a feature typically associated with workstation reliability.

The 96th percentile ranking among all CPUs means this processor outperforms the vast majority of alternatives. Compared to its nearest rivals, the data shows a 0.2% lead over the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, a 1.1% lead over the AMD EPYC 4584PX, and a 1.2% lead over the AMD EPYC 9135. It trails the AMD EPYC 7F72 by 1.3%. These margins are small, indicating that the 290K Plus is at the top tier of consumer and even some server-class processors, though the EPYC chips are designed for different workloads entirely.

For real-world tasks, the Cinebench scores translate to fast rendering times in applications like Blender or Cinema 4D, while the PassMark data compression score of 698,346 and encryption score of 52,563 suggest strong performance in file archiving and security-related tasks. The find prime numbers score of 503 is a measure of integer throughput, and the floating point math score of 214,760 indicates robust scientific computing capability. The integer math score of 166,194 and extended instructions score of 52,338 round out a picture of a well-rounded processor that handles both general-purpose and specialized instruction sets with ease.

FAQ

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus compare to its closest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K?

A: The data shows a 0.2% difference in average benchmark scores, with the 290K Plus scoring 84,003 against the 285K’s 83,807. This is a negligible margin, indicating near-identical performance in most workloads.

Q: What is the GPU’s percentile ranking and what does that mean?

A: The RTX 5080 SUPER sits at the 19th percentile among all GPUs based on its 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 3,075. This is a low ranking, suggesting the benchmark may not fully represent the card’s capabilities, as its specifications point to a much higher performance tier.

Q: Does the CPU support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus supports ECC memory, which is a feature found in workstation and server platforms. This adds a layer of data integrity for long-running computations.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of this CPU?

A: The processor provides 115.2 GB/s of memory bandwidth over a dual-channel DDR5 bus. This is a moderate figure for a high-end desktop chip, and it may be a limiting factor in memory-intensive tasks.

Q: How many PCIe lanes does the CPU provide?

A: The CPU offers 20 lanes of PCIe Gen 5 connectivity. This supports a high-bandwidth GPU and one or more NVMe drives, though additional lanes would be needed for multi-GPU setups.

Q: What is the GPU’s launch MSRP?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER has a launch MSRP of 999 USD. This positions it in the high end of the consumer graphics card market.

Q: Is the benchmark data for this build measured or estimated?

A: The data is not measured. The FACT PACK contains no measured FPS rows for this exact CPU-GPU combination, so all gaming performance figures are estimated from the benchmark scores.

Balance and Bottleneck

The balance between the CPU and GPU in this build is heavily skewed toward the processor. The CPU’s 96th percentile ranking versus the GPU’s 19th percentile creates a situation where the processor can feed frames far faster than the graphics card can render them in many scenarios. However, the GPU’s specifications suggest the 3DMark score may be misleading, as the RTX 5080 SUPER has 24 GB of GDDR7 memory and a 1.02 TB/s bandwidth, which are characteristics of a high-end card.

In CPU-bound workloads, such as physics calculations or data compression, the processor will likely be the primary driver of performance. The PassMark physics score of 3,315 and the multithread score of 60,860 indicate that the CPU can handle complex simulations without breaking a sweat. The GPU would not be a limiting factor in these tasks, as they do not rely heavily on graphics hardware.

In GPU-bound workloads, such as gaming at high resolutions or 3D rendering, the picture is less clear. The GPU’s 3DMark score of 3,075 is low, but this could be due to the specific benchmark or driver issues. The card’s pixel rate of 293.1 GPixel/s and texture rate of 879.3 GTexel/s are substantial, suggesting it can handle high-resolution textures and effects. If the GPU performs to its specification level, it would not bottleneck the CPU in most gaming scenarios. If the 3DMark score reflects true performance, then the GPU would be the limiting factor in graphically intensive tasks, capping frame rates well below what the CPU could support.

The combined percentile of 58 reflects this imbalance, placing the overall system in the mid-range despite the CPU’s top-tier status. The data implies that the GPU is the weak link in this pairing, though the gap may be narrower than the percentiles suggest.

Who Should Build It

This build targets users who prioritize CPU performance above all else. Gamers playing at 1080p or 1440p with high-refresh monitors may benefit from the CPU’s strong single-thread score of 4,823 in PassMark, which helps maintain high frame rates in CPU-heavy titles. However, the GPU’s uncertain performance could limit gains at higher resolutions.

Content creators, particularly video editors and 3D artists, would find the CPU’s multi-core scores appealing. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 51,731 indicates fast rendering times in software like Premiere Pro or After Effects. The data compression score of 698,346 also helps with large file transfers and archiving workflows.

Software developers compiling large codebases would see significant benefits from the 24 cores and 24 threads. The PassMark integer math score of 166,194 and extended instructions score of 52,338 suggest strong performance in compilation and code analysis tasks. The ECC memory support adds stability for long build processes.

Students in engineering or scientific fields could use this system for simulations and data analysis. The floating point math score of 214,760 is particularly relevant for numerical computing. Small business workstations running virtual machines or database servers would also benefit from the CPU’s throughput, though the GPU may be underutilized in these scenarios.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU’s average benchmark score is 84,003, placing it at the 96th percentile. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, scores 83,807, a 0.2% difference. The AMD EPYC 4584PX scores 83,090, a 1.1% deficit, and the AMD EPYC 9135 scores 82,980, a 1.2% deficit. The AMD EPYC 7F72 scores 85,072, which is 1.3% higher than the 290K Plus.

The GPU’s average benchmark score is 3,075 from a single 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, placing it at the 19th percentile. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Quadro P1000 with a score of 3,163, which is 2.8% higher, and the Intel Arc Pro B60 with a score of 3,182, which is 3.4% higher. The NVIDIA GeForce 820A scores 2,983, which is 3.1% lower, and the GTX 860M scores 2,967, which is 3.6% lower. These rivals are all significantly less powerful in terms of specifications, which makes the GPU’s low percentile ranking particularly puzzling.

The combined picture shows a system that is far stronger on the CPU side. The combined percentile of 58 reflects this asymmetry. For workloads that depend on the processor, this build is exceptional. For workloads that depend on the GPU, the data suggests performance could be underwhelming unless the 3DMark score is an outlier.

GPU Analysis

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER is built on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture with a GB203 chip. It uses a 5 nm process from TSMC and contains 45,600 million transistors on a 378 mm² die, giving it a transistor density of 120.6 million per square millimeter. The base clock is 2295 MHz with a boost clock of 2617 MHz, and the memory runs at 2000 MHz, effective 32 Gbps.

The GPU has 24 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 1.02 TB/s. This is a large memory pool that can handle high-resolution textures and large datasets in AI or rendering workloads. The shading units number 10,752, with 336 TMUs and 112 ROPs. The RT cores count 84, and the tensor cores count 336, indicating strong ray tracing and AI acceleration capabilities.

The pixel rate is 293.1 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 879.3 GTexel/s. The FP32 performance is 56.28 TFLOPS, which is also the FP16 performance at a 1:1 ratio. These figures suggest the card can handle compute-intensive tasks, though the 3DMark score of 3,075 does not reflect this potential. The GPU has a TDP of 415 W and uses a single 16-pin power connector, with a dual-slot design measuring 304 mm in length.

The 19th percentile ranking is difficult to reconcile with these specifications. The nearest rivals are all low-end cards, which implies the 3DMark Steel Nomad test may not be a suitable benchmark for this GPU, or there may be a driver issue at play. The data does not provide clarity on this discrepancy, so the GPU’s true performance remains uncertain.

Gaming Performance

No measured FPS data exists for this exact CPU-GPU combination. The FACT PACK contains no measuredFps rows, so all gaming performance figures are estimates based on the benchmark scores. The CPU’s strong single-thread performance suggests it can handle high frame rates in CPU-bound games. The GPU’s specifications, including 24 GB of VRAM and high pixel and texture rates, indicate it could deliver playable frame rates at high settings.

However, the GPU’s low 3DMark score raises questions about its real-world gaming performance. If the score is accurate, the RTX 5080 SUPER might struggle with modern titles at high resolutions, potentially capping frame rates below what the CPU can support. If the score is an anomaly, the card could perform well at 1440p or 4K with ultra settings.

Estimates from the benchmark scores suggest that at 1080p, the CPU would be the primary driver, with the GPU potentially becoming a bottleneck in some titles. At 1440p and 4K, the GPU load increases, and the card’s memory bandwidth of 1.02 TB/s would be an asset. The lack of measured data makes these estimates speculative, so users should approach gaming performance with caution.

Build Overview

This is a desktop build combining the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER. The CPU is a top-tier processor at the 96th percentile, while the GPU sits at the 19th percentile based on limited benchmark data. The combined percentile of 58 places this system in the mid-range overall, which is a surprising result given the CPU’s standing.

The build class is desktop, indicating it is intended for stationary use with a dedicated power supply and cooling solution. The CPU’s TDP of 125 W is modest for its core count, while the GPU’s TDP of 415 W is substantial, requiring a robust PSU. The system’s overall tier is defined by the CPU’s strength, making it a workstation-class machine for compute-heavy tasks, with gaming potential that depends on the GPU’s true performance.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: The CPU’s single-thread score of 4,823 in PassMark supports high frame rates in games that rely on a few cores. At 1080p, the CPU is likely the limiting factor, and it can push well above 144 FPS in many titles. The GPU’s uncertain performance may cap frame rates in more demanding games, so this build is best for esports or older titles.

Streaming: The CPU’s 24 cores and 24 threads can handle game encoding and streaming simultaneously without significant frame drops, as indicated by the Cinebench R23 multicore score of 51,731. The GPU’s tensor cores could also assist with NVENC encoding, though the 3DMark score does not provide direct evidence of this.

Video editing: The PassMark multithread score of 60,860 and data compression score of 698,346 suggest fast export times in editing software. The CPU’s high single-core performance also helps with timeline scrubbing and effects previews.

3D rendering: The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 51,731 is a strong indicator of rendering performance in CPU-based renderers. The GPU’s 56.28 TFLOPS of FP32 performance could accelerate GPU-based renderers, assuming the 3DMark score does not reflect a fundamental issue.

Software development: The integer math score of 166,194 and extended instructions score of 52,338 indicate fast compilation times. The 24 threads allow for parallel builds, and the ECC memory support reduces the risk of corruption during long builds.

Student and office work: The single-thread score of 4,823 ensures snappy responsiveness in everyday applications like web browsers and office suites. The CPU’s high percentile means it will not be a bottleneck for any standard office workload, though the GPU is overkill for these tasks.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus uses Intel Socket 1851 and supports DDR5 memory with a dual-channel bus. The PCIe Gen 5 interface with 20 CPU lanes provides bandwidth for a high-end GPU and fast NVMe storage. The system’s memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s is a potential bottleneck, so upgrading to higher-frequency DDR5 could improve performance in memory-sensitive tasks.

The CPU’s TDP of 125 W leaves headroom for overclocking, given the unlocked multiplier. The GPU’s TDP of 415 W requires a powerful PSU, though the suggested PSU is not specified in the data. A sensible next upgrade would be to address the GPU’s uncertain performance, potentially replacing it with a card that has a higher benchmark score. The CPU itself is near the top of its segment, so upgrading it would provide minimal gains.

The platform supports ECC memory, which is rare for consumer chips. This makes it suitable for workstation use, and upgrading to higher-capacity ECC modules could enhance reliability in memory-intensive workloads. The PCIe 5.0 lanes support future high-bandwidth devices, so adding a Gen 5 NVMe drive could improve storage performance. The overall upgrade path is limited by the GPU’s current standing, making it the primary component to consider replacing.