SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus + NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000

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

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
98%
VS
GPU
91%
PROCESSOR

Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus

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

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000

21,629 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

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is a desktop processor built on the Arrow Lake Refresh architecture, and it pairs with the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 in this configuration. The data shows a stark performance asymmetry: the CPU ranks in the 96th percentile against all CPUs, while the GPU sits in the 67th percentile against all GPUs. This is a build where the processor vastly outclasses the graphics card, making it a workstation-oriented pairing rather than a balanced gaming rig. The benchmark results indicate that this system is engineered for compute-heavy tasks that leverage the 24-core CPU, while the Quadro RTX 5000 handles professional graphics workloads with its 16 GB of GDDR6 memory.

CPU Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is a 24-core, 24-thread processor based on the Arrow Lake Refresh generation, built on a 3 nm process node by TSMC. It features a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.80 GHz, with a 125 W TDP. The chip supports DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, offering 115.2 GB/s of memory bandwidth, and it includes ECC memory support, which is a critical feature for workstation stability. The processor integrates Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units, and it connects via PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU.

Benchmark scores paint a clear picture of a high-end multi-core monster. In Cinebench R23, the processor scores 51,731 points in multi-core and 7,303 points in single-core. The multi-core result is 30% higher than the single-core result when normalized, indicating exceptional scaling across its 24 cores. The Passmark multithread score of 60,860 reinforces this, while the single-thread score of 4,823 shows robust per-core performance. Data compression and encryption workloads are particularly strong: the Passmark data compression score of 698,346 and data encryption score of 52,563 suggest that the CPU handles archival, database, and security tasks with ease. Floating-point math scores 214,760, while integer math scores 166,194, which points to a balanced ALU/FPU design that suits scientific computing and financial modeling.

The processor sits in the 96th percentile against all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 84,003. Its nearest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, scores 83,807, a delta of just 0.2% — meaning the 290K Plus is effectively tied with its predecessor, offering no meaningful generational uplift. The AMD EPYC 4584PX scores 83,090, which is 1.1% lower, and the EPYC 9135 scores 82,980, 1.2% lower. Interestingly, the AMD EPYC 7F72 scores 85,072, which is 1.3% higher than the 290K Plus, indicating that this Intel chip is not the absolute top performer in its segment. For real workloads, the data suggests that this CPU excels in multi-threaded rendering, video encoding, and compilation tasks where all 24 cores can be saturated, while single-threaded tasks like legacy software or light scripting will still perform admirably but not at the absolute top tier.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: The CPU’s single-thread score of 4,823 in Passmark and 7,303 in Cinebench R23 are strong, but with the Quadro RTX 5000’s 67th percentile ranking, this build is not suited for high-refresh 1080p or 1440p gaming. The GPU will bottleneck the CPU in most titles, so expect frame rates limited by the graphics card rather than the processor.

Streaming: The 24-core CPU with a Passmark multithread score of 60,860 can handle simultaneous game encoding and streaming workloads without breaking a sweat. The data shows that the processor has ample headroom for x264 or x265 encoding, but the GPU’s older Turing architecture lacks the dedicated encoder efficiency of newer cards, so software encoding on the CPU is the better path.

Video editing: The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 51,731 indicates that this CPU can handle 4K video editing timelines with multiple effects layers. The Passmark data compression score of 698,346 also suggests fast project file archiving and media management. However, the GPU’s 16 GB of GDDR6 memory and 11.15 TFLOPS of FP32 performance will accelerate preview rendering, but the 67th percentile ranking means it is not a top-tier accelerator for GPU-accelerated effects.

3D rendering: This is the strongest scenario. The CPU’s 24 cores deliver a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 51,731, which is 0.2% faster than the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K. For CPU-based renderers like V-Ray or Arnold, the data shows exceptional performance. The GPU’s 11.15 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 448.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth provide supplementary power, but the CPU will be the primary workhorse.

Software development: The Passmark integer math score of 166,194 and multithread score of 60,860 indicate that compilation tasks, unit testing, and parallel builds will be swift. The extended instructions score of 52,338 suggests strong SIMD performance for code that leverages AVX-512 or similar instruction sets. The ECC memory support is a boon for long-running build servers.

Student and office work: The single-thread performance of 4,823 in Passmark is more than sufficient for word processing, spreadsheets, and web browsing. The integrated Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units can drive multiple displays, though the discrete GPU is also present. The dual-channel 115.2 GB/s memory bandwidth is ample for these lighter tasks, and the 96th percentile CPU ranking means this build will never feel sluggish in everyday use, though it is overkill for this scenario.

Balance and Bottleneck

The data clearly shows that the GPU is the limiting factor in this pairing. The CPU ranks in the 96th percentile against all CPUs, with an average score of 84,003, while the GPU ranks in the 67th percentile, with an average score of 21,629. This is a 28-percentile-point gap, which indicates a severe imbalance. In gaming workloads, the GPU will be the bottleneck: the Quadro RTX 5000’s nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB, which scores 21,856 (1% higher), so this is roughly GTX 1060-class gaming performance. The CPU will sit idle waiting for the GPU to render frames, so FPS scaling will be entirely dependent on the GPU’s capabilities.

In compute workloads, the bottleneck shifts. The CPU’s Passmark multithread score of 60,860 dwarfs the GPU’s compute score of 6,525, so tasks that are CPU-bound, such as code compilation or physics simulation, will be limited by the processor. However, the GPU’s 16 GB of VRAM and 384 tensor cores make it a capable accelerator for AI inference, but its FP32 performance of 11.15 TFLOPS means it will be slower than modern workstation cards. The data suggests that this is a CPU-first system: buy it for the 24-core processor, and treat the GPU as a secondary accelerator for specific professional workloads.

The FPS scaling evidence is missing since no measured FPS data exists for this exact combination. However, given the GPU’s 67th percentile ranking and its proximity to the GTX 1060 6 GB (1% lower score), the data indicates that gaming performance will be modest at best, with the CPU never being the limiting factor in any game scenario. For productivity, the CPU’s 96th percentile ranking ensures that no CPU-bound task will be bottlenecked by the processor, but the GPU’s 67th percentile means that GPU-accelerated tasks will be the constraint.

Gaming Performance

No measured FPS rows exist for this exact CPU+GPU combination in the FACT PACK, so all frame rates discussed here are estimates derived from the benchmark scores, not measured data. The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 scores 15,616 in Passmark G3D, which places it in the 67th percentile against all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB, scores 21,856 (1% higher), so the gaming performance is expected to be comparable to a GTX 1060 6 GB. This means at 1080p with ultra settings, most modern titles will run at playable frame rates, but not at high refresh rates. For esports titles like Counter-Strike or Valorant, the CPU’s strong single-thread score of 4,823 in Passmark could push frames higher, but the GPU will still cap the output. At 1440p, the GPU’s 256-bit memory bus and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth will struggle to maintain 60 FPS in demanding AAA titles, and at 4K, the 11.15 TFLOPS of FP32 performance is insufficient for high-fidelity gaming.

The DirectX 12 score of 59 in Passmark is low, suggesting that modern DX12 games will not perform optimally. The Vulkan score of 92,309 in Geekbench is more promising, indicating better performance in Vulkan-based titles. The GPU’s 16 GB of GDDR6 memory is ample for high-resolution textures, but the raw compute power is the limiting factor. In summary, the estimated gaming experience is that of a mid-range card from 2018, suitable for 1080p gaming at medium to high settings, but not for enthusiast-level gaming. The CPU’s 5.80 GHz boost clock will not be the bottleneck; the GPU will be.

Who Should Build It

This build targets professionals who need massive CPU compute power and occasional GPU acceleration for specific tasks. The 24-core Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus, with its 96th percentile CPU ranking, is ideal for 3D rendering, video encoding, and software compilation. The data shows that the Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 51,731 is 0.2% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, making it a top-tier choice for content creators who rely on CPU-based render engines. The ECC memory support and 115.2 GB/s of memory bandwidth appeal to engineers running long-duration simulations or financial analysts processing large datasets.

The GPU, while older, still offers 16 GB of GDDR6 memory and 384 tensor cores, which are useful for AI inference and deep learning workloads that fit within its 11.15 TFLOPS FP32 budget. However, the 67th percentile GPU ranking means that gamers should avoid this build; the data clearly shows that the Quadro RTX 5000 is not a gaming card. Students and small business workstations would benefit from the CPU’s single-thread performance, but the cost of the 24-core processor is overkill for office tasks. The target user is a workstation professional who prioritizes CPU throughput over GPU performance, such as a video editor using software encoding or a developer compiling large codebases. For gamers, the estimated frame rates are too low to justify the build. For 3D artists using GPU-based renderers like Octane, this GPU will be a bottleneck, so they should look elsewhere.

FAQ

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

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus has 24 cores and 24 threads, with a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.80 GHz.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K?

A: The 290K Plus has an average benchmark score of 84,003, which is 0.2% higher than the 285K’s score of 83,807.

Q: What is the GPU’s memory configuration?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 448.0 GB/s.

Q: Is this build good for gaming?

A: No measured FPS data exists for this combination, but the GPU’s 67th percentile ranking and its proximity to the GTX 1060 6 GB suggest modest gaming performance, likely suitable for 1080p at medium settings, but not high refresh rates.

Q: What is the CPU’s percentile ranking against all CPUs?

A: The CPU is in the 96th percentile against all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 84,003.

Q: Does the CPU support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus supports ECC memory, which is useful for workstation stability.

Q: What is the GPU’s FP32 performance?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 delivers 11.15 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, which is a key metric for compute workloads.

Benchmark Performance

The combined benchmark picture shows a CPU that is in the top 4% of all processors, paired with a GPU that is in the top 33% of all graphics cards. The CPU’s average benchmark score is 84,003, while the GPU’s is 21,629. The CPU’s Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 51,731 and single-core score of 7,303 demonstrate exceptional performance across both threaded and lightly-threaded workloads. The Passmark multithread score of 60,860 and single-thread score of 4,823 corroborate this. The GPU’s Passmark G3D score of 15,616 and Geekbench OpenCL score of 78,999 show that it is a competent but not class-leading card. Its nearest GPU rival, the GTX 1060 6 GB, scores 21,856, which is 1% higher, so the Quadro RTX 5000 is effectively a mid-range performer.

The GPU’s DirectX 12 score of 59 is notably low, which suggests poor performance in modern gaming APIs, while its Vulkan score of 92,309 is much stronger. The combined percentile for this build is 82, which places it in the upper tier of all desktop configurations. The data indicates that the CPU is the star of this show: it beats the AMD EPYC 4584PX by 1.1% and the EPYC 9135 by 1.2%, but trails the EPYC 7F72 by 1.3%. This is a nuanced picture: the CPU is excellent, but not the absolute fastest, and the GPU drags the overall system down to the 82nd percentile.

Build Overview

This is a desktop-class build with an Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus CPU and an NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 GPU. The CPU is a 24-core Arrow Lake Refresh processor built on a 3 nm process, and the GPU is a Turing-architecture workstation card built on a 12 nm process. The overall tier, based on the combined percentile of 82, is upper-mid-range for a complete system. The CPU’s 96th percentile ranking makes it a high-end processor, but the GPU’s 67th percentile ranking is squarely mid-range. This asymmetry defines the build: it is a workstation that prioritizes CPU compute, with the GPU serving as a secondary accelerator. The GPU is end-of-life, with a release date of 2018, while the CPU is active in production. The launch MSRP of the Quadro RTX 5000 is 2,299 USD, which reflects its professional positioning, but the build as a whole is not balanced for gaming. The data shows that this is a CPU-first system, and the GPU should be considered a legacy component that may need upgrading for modern workloads.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus uses the Intel Socket 1851, which is the platform for the Core Ultra Series 2. The CPU supports DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, with a memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s, and it supports ECC memory. For PCIe, the CPU provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes, which is essential for fast NVMe storage and future GPU connectivity. The GPU, however, uses PCIe 3.0 x16, so the CPU’s PCIe Gen 5 lanes are not fully utilized by the current graphics card. The suggested PSU for the GPU is 550 W, and the GPU has a TDP of 230 W; the CPU has a TDP of 125 W. The data suggests that the total system power draw is manageable, but the CPU is multiplier-unlocked, so overclocking could increase power requirements.

A sensible next upgrade would be to replace the GPU, as the CPU has significant headroom. The CPU’s 96th percentile ranking means it is not the bottleneck, so upgrading to a modern GPU with a higher percentile would improve both gaming and compute performance. The PCIe Gen 5 interface on the CPU is forward-compatible, so a newer GPU would not be limited by the platform. Memory is also upgradeable within the dual-channel DDR5 specification, and the ECC support is a key feature for workstation use. The CPU’s 36 MB of shared L3 cache and 3 MB of L2 cache per core are ample for most workloads. The platform is robust, but the GPU is the clear weak point, and the data indicates that any upgrade path should start there.