OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Processors Methodology v3.0
Processors Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Processors Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Processors Methodology v3.0

Intel Core Ultra 9 185H review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£800PassMark multi-core score:29171N. of physical cores:16CPU boost clock speed:5.1 GHzCPU socket:FCBGA2049TDP (Thermal design power):45 W

Intel Core Ultra 9 185H Review: Compare 74 technical specifications, 5 expert and video reviews and 1 best-of list to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

8.0/10

Overall score

Score
8.0/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 96% of models
Score components

40%

8.3

Technical score

25%

8.0

Reviews score

25%

8.0

List score

10%

?

Sentiment scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.0, the mark of a weaker model in this category

★Better than 96% of processors
7.5

Value for money

Value for money
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 60% of models
Score components

70%

8.0

Overall score

30%

6.3

Price

▲Better than 60%
8.3

Technical score

Technical score
8.3/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 92% of models
Score components

60%

8.6

Performance

18%

8.0

Architecture

10%

8.3

Memory & PCIe

7%

6.7

Power & Thermal

4%

8.3

Platform

1%

8.5

Integrated graphics

★Better than 92%
8.0

Reviews score

Reviews score
8.0/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 72% of models

80%

7.9

Average grade

20%

8.2

Popularity

Grades by review (5)
5 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
▲Better than 72%
8.0

List score

List score
8.0/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (1)
List score: in 1 of 85 lists (1%)
▲Better than 89%
  • No image
No image
Where to buy
    N/A~ £800
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What reviewers say about the Intel Core Ultra 9 185H

Based on 0 · 5

Reviewers mostly praise its wide range of ports and connectivity, with few other strengths or complaints coming up.
Praised
Pick a topic to see who said what
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of processor Intel Core Ultra 9 185H

Technical score
Technical score
8.3/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 92% of models
Score components:

60%

8.6

Performance

18%

8.0

Architecture

10%

8.3

Memory & PCIe

7%

6.7

Power & Thermal

4%

8.3

Platform

1%

8.5

Integrated graphics

8.3
Reviews score
8.0
List score
8.0
Value for money
Value for money
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 60% of models
Score components:

70%

8.0

Overall score

30%

6.3

Price

7.5
Processor type
mobile
This processor belongs to the mobile processor class, which is more advanced than that of 6.9% of processors and equal to that of 47.7% of processors.
mobile workstation
CPU socket
FCBGA2049
This processor uses the FCBGA2049 CPU socket, which is older than that of 67.9% of processors and equal to that of 1.7% of processors.
Chipset
N/A
CPU architecture
x86-64
This processor uses the x86-64 architecture, which is more advanced than that of 1.8% of processors and equal to that of 98.2% of processors.
Instruction sets
MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-VNNI, FMA3, AES, SHA
This processor supports MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-VNNI, FMA3, AES, SHA instruction sets, which is broader support than 53.7% of processors and equal to that of 0.2% of processors.
Show more
N. of physical cores
16
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 16 CPU cores, which is more than 90% of processors and equal to 4.6% of processors.
CPU threads
22
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 22 CPU threads, which is more than 89.3% of processors and equal to 0.3% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
5.1 GHz
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 5.1 GHz which is higher than that of 84.5% of processors and equal to that of 4.3% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
6x 2.3 GHz & 8x 1.8 GHz & 2x 1.0 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 6x2.3 GHz & 8x1.8 GHz & 2x1.0 GHz which is higher than that of 83.9% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
29,171
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor scores 29,171 in PassMark, which is higher than 85.1% of processors.
Show more
Semiconductor size
?
Foundry
Intel 4
This processor is built on the Intel 4 foundry process, which is more advanced than that of 94.2% of processors and equal to that of 1.4% of processors.
L3 cache
24 MB
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 24 MB which is larger than that of 80.1% of processors and equal to that of 5.9% of processors.
L2 cache
18 MB
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 18 MB which is larger than that of 91.5% of processors and equal to that of 0.5% of processors.
L1 cache
1,632 KB
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 1,632 KB which is larger than that of 95% of processors and equal to that of 0.2% of processors.
Show more
DDR memory version
DDR5/LPDDR5/LPDDR5X
This processor supports DDR DDR5/LPDDR5/LPDDR5X, which is newer than that of 94.1% of processors and equal to that of 1.2% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
7,467 MHz
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 7,467 MHz, which is higher than that of 90.8% of processors and equal to 1.4% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
LPDDR5X-7467 MHz
This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to LPDDR5X-7467 MHz, which is higher than that of 92.1% of processors and equal to 0.9% of processors.
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
N/A
Maximum memory capacity
96 GB
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
This processor supports up to 96 GB of memory, which is more than 53.4% of processors and equal to 5.8% of processors.
Show more
Integrated graphics
yes
This processor includes integrated graphics. 14.7% of processors offer this.
Intel Arc Graphics
Integrated GPU model
Intel Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 128EU
This processor uses the Intel Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 128EU integrated GPU, which is more advanced than that in 86% of processors and equal to that in 0.3% of processors.
Integrated GPU execution units
128
Market range: <6 – >64
This processor has 128 GPU execution units, which is more than 99.1% of processors and equal to 0.6% of processors.
Integrated GPU base frequency
300 MHz
Market range: <300 MHz – >800 MHz
This processor has an integrated GPU clock of 300 MHz which is lower than that of 57.8% of processors and equal to that of 38.4% of processors.
Integrated media encoders/decoders
H.264 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode/encode)
This processor supports H.264 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode/encode) media codecs, which is broader support than 68.8% of processors and equal to 0.2% of processors.
Show more
TDP (Thermal design power)
45 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 45 W which is lower than that of 41.9% of processors and equal to that of 10.8% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
45 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 45 W which is lower than that of 41.9% of processors and equal to that of 11% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
115 W
Market range: <25 W – >150 W
This processor has a boost power of 115 W which is higher than that of 68.1% of processors and equal to that of 6.6% of processors.
Tau (power duration limit)
28 seconds
Market range: <8 seconds – >28 seconds
This processor has a turbo duration of 28 seconds which is longer than that of 4.4% of processors and equal to that of 85.3% of processors.
Configurable TDP
yes
This processor supports configurable TDP. 46.4% of processors offer this.
Show more

Intel Core Ultra 9 185H vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
  • 10 more CPU cores
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (16 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    16 vs 6
  • 2.54x higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (29,171 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    29,171 vs 11,469
  • 2.27x higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (11,833 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    11,833 vs 5,209
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Meteor Lake vs Kaby Lake).
    Meteor Lake vs Kaby Lake
  • 14 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (22 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    22 vs 8
  • 43.6% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,674 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    3,674 vs 2,558
  • 6x larger L2 cache
    This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (18 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    18 MB vs 3 MB
  • 15.9% higher boost clock
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (5.1 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    5.1 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • 19.4% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.0/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ▲ Better than 72% of models

    80%

    7.9

    Average grade

    20%

    8.2

    Popularity

    Grades by review (5)
    5 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    8.0 vs 6.7
  • More extensive crypto acceleration
    This processor offers more extensive crypto acceleration than the average processor (AES, SHA, RSA/PKA vs AES, SHA).
    AES, SHA, RSA/PKA vs AES, SHA
  • Supports heterogeneous scheduling
    This processor uses heterogeneous multi-processing, while the average processor does not. 24.8% of processors use it.
  • 3 years newer release date
    This processor has a newer release date than the average processor (2023 vs 2020).
    December 2023
    2023 vs 2020
  • 10 more CPU cores
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (16 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    16 vs 6
  • 2.54x higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (29,171 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    29,171 vs 11,469
  • 2.27x higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (11,833 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    11,833 vs 5,209
  • 14 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (22 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    22 vs 8
  • 43.6% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,674 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    3,674 vs 2,558
  • 15.9% higher boost clock
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (5.1 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    5.1 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • 44.4% higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (2,217 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    2,217 vs 1,535
  • Higher base clock
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (6x2.3 GHz & 8x1.8 GHz & 2x1 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    6x2.3 GHz & 8x1.8 GHz & 2x1.0 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • 2 wider front-end design
    This processor has a higher front-end width than the average processor (6 vs 4). The average processor uses front-end width of 4.
    P-core 6, E-core 6
    6 vs 4
  • 4x higher bus transfer rate
    This processor has a higher bus transfer rate than the average processor (32 GT/s vs 8 GT/s). The average processor offers bus transfer rate of 8 GT/s.
    32 GT/s vs 8 GT/s
  • 11 higher clock multiplier
    This processor has a higher clock multiplier than the average processor (39 vs 28). The average processor has a clock multiplier of 28.
    39 vs 28
  • More advanced Turbo Core
    This processor has a more advanced Turbo Core version than the average processor (3 vs 2).
    Turbo Boost Max 3
    3 vs 2
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Meteor Lake vs Kaby Lake).
    Meteor Lake vs Kaby Lake
  • 6x larger L2 cache
    This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (18 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    18 MB vs 3 MB
  • 4x more L2 per core
    This processor has more L2 cache per core than the average processor (2 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core). The average processor provides 0.5 MB/core of L2 cache per core.
    E-core cluster: 4 MB shared by 4 cores
    2 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
  • 4.25x larger L1 cache
    This processor has a higher L1 cache than the average processor (1,632 KB vs 384 KB). The average processor has L1 cache of 384 KB.
    1,632 KB vs 384 KB
  • More advanced foundry
    This processor uses a more advanced foundry process than the average processor (Intel 4 vs Intel 14 nm).
    Intel 4 vs Intel 14 nm
  • Mixed big and small cores
    This processor uses a big.LITTLE design, while the average processor does not. 22.6% of processors use one.
    P-cores + E-cores + LP E-cores
  • 58.8% smaller die size
    This processor has a lower die size than the average processor (73 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    73 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • 2.67x larger L3 cache
    This processor has a higher L3 cache than the average processor (24 MB vs 9 MB). The average processor has L3 cache of 9 MB.
    24 MB vs 9 MB
  • 12 more PCIe lanes
    This processor has more PCIe lanes than the average processor (28 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
    28 vs 16
  • Newer PCIe version
    This processor supports a newer PCIe version than the average processor (5 vs 3).
    5 vs 3
  • Newer DDR support
    This processor supports a newer DDR generation than the average processor (DDR5/LPDDR5/LPDDR5X vs DDR4).
    DDR5/LPDDR5/LPDDR5X vs DDR4
  • 2.33x higher memory speed
    This processor has a higher maximum memory speed than the average processor (7,467 MHz vs 3,200 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 3,200 MHz.
    7,467 MHz vs 3,200 MHz
  • 91% higher memory bandwidth
    This processor has a higher memory bandwidth than the average processor (89.6 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s). The average processor offers memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s.
    89.6 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s
  • Higher JEDEC memory speed
    This processor has a higher JEDEC memory speed than the average processor (LPDDR5X-7467 MHz vs DDR4-3200 MHz). The average processor supports JEDEC memory speed of DDR4-3200 MHz.
    LPDDR5X-7467 MHz vs DDR4-3,200 MHz
  • 50% more memory capacity
    This processor has more maximum memory capacity than the average processor (96 GB vs 64 GB). The average processor supports 64 GB of memory.
    96 GB vs 64 GB
  • Better integrated GPU
    This processor uses a better integrated GPU than the average processor (Intel Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 128EU vs Intel UHD Graphics 630).
    Intel Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 128EU vs Intel UHD Graphics 630
  • 5.33x more GPU execution units
    This processor has more GPU execution units than the average processor (128 vs 24). The average processor has 24 GPU execution units.
    128 vs 24
  • 1 more supported displays
    This processor has more supported displays than the average processor (4 vs 3). The average processor supports 3 displays.
    4 vs 3
  • 10 °C higher temperature limit
    This processor has a higher temperature limit than the average processor (110 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor can run up to 100 °C.
    110 °C vs 100 °C
  • 79.7% higher boost power
    This processor has a higher boost power draw than the average processor (115 W vs 64 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 64 W.
    115 W vs 64 W
  • 18.9% less L3 per core
    This processor has less L3 cache per core than the average processor (1.5 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    1.5 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • 10 °C higher CPU temperature
    This processor has a higher CPU temperature than the average processor (110 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor runs at a CPU temperature of 100 °C.
    110 °C vs 100 °C
  • 3.2x more expensive
    Intel Core Ultra 9 185H is more expensive than the average processor (£800 vs £250).
    £800 vs £250
  • Narrower media codec support
    This processor supports fewer media codecs than the average processor (H.264 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode/encode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)).
    H.264 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode/encode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-VNNI, FMA3, AES, SHA vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-VNNI, FMA3, AES, SHA vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
  • 3.2x more expensive
    Intel Core Ultra 9 185H is more expensive than the average processor (£800 vs £250).
    £800 vs £250
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-VNNI, FMA3, AES, SHA vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-VNNI, FMA3, AES, SHA vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • 18.9% less L3 per core
    This processor has less L3 cache per core than the average processor (1.5 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    1.5 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
  • Narrower media codec support
    This processor supports fewer media codecs than the average processor (H.264 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode/encode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)).
    H.264 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode/encode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)
  • 79.7% higher boost power
    This processor has a higher boost power draw than the average processor (115 W vs 64 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 64 W.
    115 W vs 64 W
  • 10 °C higher CPU temperature
    This processor has a higher CPU temperature than the average processor (110 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor runs at a CPU temperature of 100 °C.
    110 °C vs 100 °C

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

9.0
Tech Guy Beau
≈ estimated
06/04/2024
Hands-on review · integrated Arc graphics gaming tests
Verdict
Intel Core Ultra 9 185H has strong integrated graphics for 1200p gaming at medium settings, though its power draw climbs high.
Overview video
Not graded

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Intel Core Ultra 9 185H

  • Excellent power efficiency and performance-per-watt for mobile use
  • Strong integrated Intel Arc graphics, capable of handling modern games like Baldur's Gate 3 at 1200p
  • Effective dedicated AI Boost NPU for accelerating AI-driven tasks and background effects
  • Solid multi-core performance for productivity tasks like coding, photo editing, and 3D modeling
  • Improved battery life compared to high-power HX-series desktop-replacement processors

What customers don't like about Intel Core Ultra 9 185H

  • Raw single-core and multi-core performance lags behind high-end desktop-class CPUs like the i9-14900HX
  • Prone to high heat generation and thermal throttling in thin-and-light laptop designs
  • Fans can become significantly loud during high-performance gaming or intensive workloads
  • Higher price point compared to similar offerings from AMD or Intel's own Ultra 7 series
  • Occasional frame pacing and stuttering issues reported in specific gaming scenarios
  • Memory performance can be negatively impacted by default BIOS power-saving settings like SAGV

Verdict

The Intel Core Ultra 9 185H is a high-performance mobile processor from the Meteor Lake family, featuring a unique hybrid architecture with 16 cores (6 Performance, 8 Efficient, and 2 Low-Power Efficient) and 22 threads. It operates at a base clock of 2.3 GHz with a maximum turbo boost of up to 5.1 GHz, supported by 24MB of Intel Smart Cache and a configurable TDP ranging from 45W to 115W. Main pros include its integrated Intel Arc graphics (8 Xe-cores) for solid mobile gaming, a dedicated AI Boost NPU for efficient AI workloads, and support for high-speed DDR5-5600 or LPDDR5x-7467 memory. However, cons include high power consumption under heavy load which can impact battery life, significant heat generation requiring robust cooling, and multi-core performance that sometimes falls behind previous-generation high-end desktop-class HX processors.

Compare Intel Core Ultra 9 185H with other processors

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of Intel Core Ultra 9 185H and other processors

No results found