OVERALL

SPECS

VS AVERAGE

REVIEWS

ALTERNATIVES

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K Review | 78 Data compared

Avg. price in UK: ~£440
Avg. price in US: ~$590
PassMark benchmark result: 67329
N. of physical cores: 24
CPU boost clock speed: 5.7 GHz

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K review. Compare 78 technical specifications and user reviews to see how it ranks among processors and if it is worth buying.

8.9

Excellent

8.8

Excellent

9.6

Exceptional

9.1
Gaming
Score components:
30.0%
10
PassMark single-core benchmark score
25.0%
9.4
Geekbench 6 single-core benchmark score
20.0%
9.7
CPU boost clock speed
17.0%
6.1
L3 cache
8.0%
10
N. of physical cores
8.9
Video editing
Score components:
45.0%
9.9
Geekbench 6 multi-core benchmark score
20.0%
10
N. of physical cores
20.0%
7.6
CPU threads
15.0%
6.1
L3 cache

Best prices in UK

£?

Best rankings

Verdict

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K is a flagship Arrow Lake-S desktop processor featuring a 24-core, 24-thread configuration (8 Performance cores and 16 Efficiency cores) without Hyper-Threading support. Built on a 3nm process, it reaches a maximum turbo frequency of 5.7 GHz with a 3.7 GHz base clock, while offering 40 MB of L2 cache and 36 MB of L3 cache. Its main advantages include significantly improved energy efficiency, a dedicated 13 TOPS NPU for AI workloads, and support for high-speed DDR5-6400 memory and 20 PCIe 5.0 lanes on the LGA 1851 socket. However, its drawbacks include subpar gaming performance compared to previous generations, the lack of Hyper-Threading, and the requirement for a new Z890 motherboard, which increases total platform costs.

Technical Specifications of processor Intel Core Ultra 9 285K

Overall score

8.9

Show more

Hide

Popularity

What it is: An indicator based on the number of reviews received by the processor.

When it matters: When you prefer to choose a processor reviewed and selected by many other buyers.

Platform

9.7

Show more

Hide

Brand name

What it is: The manufacturer or brand of the product.

When it matters: When you prefer a specific ecosystem, support network, or design philosophy.

Importance: MEDIUM

Intel

Processor type

What it is: The kind of system the processor is built for, such as desktop PCs, laptops, workstations, or servers.

When it matters: When you want a processor meant for the kind of machine you are actually building or buying, rather than a chip aimed at a different class of system.

Importance: HIGH

CPU socket

What it is: The physical socket the processor fits into on the motherboard.

When it matters: When you need to make sure the CPU can actually be installed on a specific motherboard.

Importance: HIGH

Chipset

What it is: The motherboard chipset families officially meant to work with the processor.

When it matters: When you are checking whether a CPU will work with the motherboard features and platform you plan to use.

Importance: HIGH

CPU architecture

What it is: The processor family or design generation behind the chip, such as Zen 4 or Raptor Lake.

When it matters: When you are comparing CPUs across generations and want a clearer sense of their design age, feature level, and expected performance class.

Importance: HIGH

Show more

Performance

9.4

Show more

Hide

N. of physical cores

What it is: The number of physical CPU cores on the processor.

When it matters: When you run workloads that benefit from more real cores.

Importance: HIGH

Good value: 8+

CPU threads

What it is: The total number of processing threads the CPU can handle at once.

When it matters: When you run heavily threaded workloads or multitask a lot.

Importance: HIGH

Good value: 16+

Threads per core

What it is: The number of threads each physical core can handle at once.

When it matters: When you want to understand how much thread-level parallelism each core can provide in multitasking or heavily threaded work.

Importance: MEDIUM

Good value: 2

CPU boost clock speed

What it is: The highest clock speed the processor can reach under boost conditions.

When it matters: When you care about peak speed in short bursts.

Importance: HIGH

Good value: >4.7 GHz

CPU base clock speed

What it is: The processor's normal all-core starting frequency before boost behavior raises clocks temporarily.

When it matters: When you care about steadier performance in longer workloads rather than short burst speed alone.

Importance: MEDIUM

Show more

Cache & Architecture

9.0

Show more

Hide

Semiconductor size

What it is: The manufacturing process node used to produce the processor, usually expressed in nanometers.

When it matters: When efficiency, heat, and the relative modernity of the chip-making process matter to your comparison.

Importance: HIGH

Good value: <10 nm

Foundry

What it is: The semiconductor manufacturer that physically fabricates the processor chip.

When it matters: When process source, manufacturing generation, or foundry differences matter to your comparison more than day-to-day performance alone.

Importance: MEDIUM

L3 cache

What it is: The total amount of L3 cache available on the processor.

When it matters: When you want better performance in cache-sensitive workloads and games.

Importance: MEDIUM

Good value: >=16 MB

L2 cache

What it is: The total amount of L2 cache available across the processor.

When it matters: When you want to compare CPU design efficiency and how much fast intermediate cache the cores have available.

Importance: MEDIUM

Good value: >=6 MB

L1 cache

What it is: The total amount of L1 cache built into the processor, which sits closest to the cores.

When it matters: When you are comparing low-level CPU design details rather than the broader performance picture buyers usually notice first.

Importance: MEDIUM

Good value: >=512 KB

?

Show more

Memory & PCIe

9.4

Show more

Hide

DDR memory version

What it is: The RAM generation the processor is designed to support, such as DDR4 or DDR5.

When it matters: When you need the CPU to match the kind of memory platform you want to buy or reuse.

Importance: MEDIUM

Good value: DDR5

Maximum memory speed

What it is: The highest official memory speed supported by the processor.

When it matters: When you choose RAM and want to know the supported speed ceiling.

Importance: HIGH

Good value: >=4800 MHz

Max memory speed (JEDEC)

What it is: The highest official RAM speed the processor supports under standard JEDEC settings, before any memory overclocking profiles are applied.

When it matters: When officially supported stock RAM speed matters more than XMP, EXPO, or manual memory tuning.

Importance: MEDIUM

Good value: >=5600 MHz

Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)

What it is: The highest memory speed supported through XMP or EXPO profiles.

When it matters: When you want faster RAM through memory profiles.

Importance: MEDIUM

Good value: >=5200 MHz

?

Maximum memory capacity

What it is: The largest total amount of memory officially supported by the processor.

When it matters: When you plan a system with very large RAM capacity.

Importance: HIGH

Good value: >=128 GB

Show more

Integrated Graphics

7.7

Show more

Hide

Integrated graphics

What it is: Includes built-in graphics, so the system can output video without a separate graphics card.

When it matters: When you want the PC to work without a dedicated GPU, or you are building an office, media, compact, or troubleshooting-friendly system.

Importance: HIGH

Integrated GPU model

What it is: The model name of the integrated graphics processor, if present.

When it matters: When you plan to use the CPU's built-in graphics.

Importance: MEDIUM

Integrated GPU execution units

What it is: The number of execution units available in the integrated graphics part of the processor.

When it matters: When you plan to rely on built-in graphics and want a better sense of its light gaming, display, or media capability.

Importance: MEDIUM

Good value: >=24

Integrated GPU base frequency

What it is: The base operating frequency of the integrated GPU.

When it matters: When integrated graphics performance matters to you.

Importance: MEDIUM

Good value: >=350 MHz

Integrated media encoders/decoders

What it is: The hardware media formats the processor can encode or decode directly.

When it matters: When you stream, edit video, or rely on hardware media acceleration.

Importance: LOW

Show more

Power & Thermal

2.0

Show more

Hide

TDP (Thermal design power)

What it is: The rated thermal design power, which gives a general idea of cooling and power needs.

When it matters: When you choose a cooler or build in a tighter case.

Importance: HIGH

Good value: <30 W

Base power (PL1)

What it is: The sustained power target used for longer CPU loads.

When it matters: When you choose cooling and power delivery for sustained workloads.

Importance: MEDIUM

Good value: <30 W

Boost power (PL2)

What it is: The short-term boost power limit the processor may draw under heavier turbo loads.

When it matters: When you size cooling and power delivery for peak turbo behavior.

Importance: MEDIUM

Good value: <50 W

Tau (power duration limit)

What it is: The time limit the CPU can stay at higher boost power before dropping toward sustained power.

When it matters: When you want to understand turbo behavior under longer loads.

Importance: MEDIUM

Good value: <=28 s

Configurable TDP

What it is: Allows the processor to run in alternate power modes instead of being fixed to one default TDP target.

When it matters: When you want more control over heat, noise, and power draw in compact systems, quieter builds, or thermally limited machines.

Importance: LOW

Show more

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K vs the average processor

Why is Intel Core Ultra 9 285K better than the average processor?

Show more

Hide

6.39x higher PassMark score
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (67,329 vs 10,532.5). The average processor scores 10,532.5 in PassMark benchmark.
What it is: A benchmark score that gives a broad idea of overall processor performance.
When it matters: When you want a quick overall performance comparison.
Importance: HIGH
Good value: >19000
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (67,329 vs 10,532.5). The average processor scores 10,532.5 in PassMark benchmark.67,329 vs 10,532.5
4.74x higher multi-core score
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (22,722 vs 4,793). The average processor scores 4,793 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
What it is: A Geekbench 6 score that reflects multi-core CPU performance in mixed modern workloads.
When it matters: When you want a quick picture of multi-core speed in everyday mixed workloads, multitasking, and broadly optimized software.
Importance: HIGH
Good value: >8500
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (22,722 vs 4,793). The average processor scores 4,793 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.22,722 vs 4,793
2.05x better single-core performance
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (5,090 vs 2,483). The average processor scores 2,483 in PassMark single-core.
What it is: A benchmark score that reflects single-core CPU performance.
When it matters: When you care about responsiveness in lighter or older software.
Importance: HIGH
Good value: >3200
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (5,090 vs 2,483). The average processor scores 2,483 in PassMark single-core.5,090 vs 2,483
18 more CPU cores
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has more CPU cores than the average processor (24 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
What it is: The number of physical CPU cores on the processor.
When it matters: When you run workloads that benefit from more real cores.
Importance: HIGH
Good value: 8+
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has more CPU cores than the average processor (24 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.24 vs 6
2.17x higher single-core score
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (3,199 vs 1,471). The average processor scores 1,471 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
What it is: A Geekbench 6 score that reflects single-core CPU performance in mixed modern workloads.
When it matters: When you care about snappy everyday performance in lighter apps, browsing, office work, or tasks that do not scale well across many cores.
Importance: HIGH
Good value: >2000
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (3,199 vs 1,471). The average processor scores 1,471 in Geekbench 6 single-core.3,199 vs 1,471
32.6% higher boost clock
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (5.7 GHz vs 4.3 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.3 GHz.
What it is: The highest clock speed the processor can reach under boost conditions.
When it matters: When you care about peak speed in short bursts.
Importance: HIGH
Good value: >4.7 GHz
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (5.7 GHz vs 4.3 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.3 GHz.5.7 GHz vs 4.3 GHz
16x larger L2 cache
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (40 MB vs 2.5 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 2.5 MB.
What it is: The total amount of L2 cache available across the processor.
When it matters: When you want to compare CPU design efficiency and how much fast intermediate cache the cores have available.
Importance: MEDIUM
Good value: >=6 MB
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (40 MB vs 2.5 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 2.5 MB.40 MB vs 2.5 MB
16 more CPU threads
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has more CPU threads than the average processor (24 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
What it is: The total number of processing threads the CPU can handle at once.
When it matters: When you run heavily threaded workloads or multitask a lot.
Importance: HIGH
Good value: 16+
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has more CPU threads than the average processor (24 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.24 vs 8
Advanced security extensions
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K provides more advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TDT, TME, TME-MK vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Processor).
Modern CPU socket
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K uses a more modern CPU socket than the average processor (LGA1,851 vs FP2).
Broader instruction support
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K supports a broader instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-VNNI, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, CLMUL, BMI1, BMI2, ABM, ADX vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA).
4 year/s newer release date
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has a newer release date than the average processor (2024 vs 2020).
Includes crypto acceleration
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K includes crypto acceleration, the average processor does not.
Supports HMP
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K supports HMP, the average processor does not.
6.39x higher PassMark score
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (67,329 vs 10,532.5). The average processor scores 10,532.5 in PassMark benchmark.
4.74x higher multi-core score
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (22,722 vs 4,793). The average processor scores 4,793 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
2.05x better single-core performance
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (5,090 vs 2,483). The average processor scores 2,483 in PassMark single-core.
18 more CPU cores
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has more CPU cores than the average processor (24 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
2.17x higher single-core score
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (3,199 vs 1,471). The average processor scores 1,471 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
32.6% higher boost clock
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (5.7 GHz vs 4.3 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.3 GHz.
16 more CPU threads
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has more CPU threads than the average processor (24 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
Unlocked for overclocking
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has an unlocked multiplier, the average processor does not.
16x larger L2 cache
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (40 MB vs 2.5 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 2.5 MB.
More advanced microarchitecture
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Arrow Lake vs Kaby Lake).
6x more L2 per core
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has more L2 cache per core than the average processor (3 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core). The average processor provides 0.5 MB/core of L2 cache per core.
4.5x larger L3 cache
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has a higher L3 cache than the average processor (36 MB vs 8 MB). The average processor has L3 cache of 8 MB.
75% smaller process node
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has a lower process node than the average processor (3 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
Uses big.LITTLE design
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K uses a big.LITTLE design, the average processor does not.
More advanced foundry
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K uses a more advanced foundry process than the average processor (TSMC 3 nm vs Intel 14 nm).
3.6x more transistors
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has more transistors than the average processor (17.8 billion vs 4.95 billion). The average processor has 4.95 billion transistors.
Newer PCIe version
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K supports a newer PCIe version than the average processor (5 vs 3.0).
8 more PCIe lanes
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has more PCIe lanes than the average processor (24 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
2.24x higher memory bandwidth
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has a higher memory bandwidth than the average processor (102.4 GB/s vs 45.8 GB/s). The average processor offers memory bandwidth of 45.8 GB/s.
3x more memory capacity
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has more maximum memory capacity than the average processor (192 GB vs 64 GB). The average processor supports 64 GB of memory.
2.18x higher memory speed
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has a higher maximum memory speed than the average processor (6,400 MHz vs 2,933 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 2,933 MHz.
Supports memory overclocking
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K supports memory overclocking, the average processor does not.
Newer DDR support
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K supports a newer DDR generation than the average processor (DDR5 vs DDR4).
Supports ECC memory
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K supports ECC memory, the average processor does not.
Higher JEDEC memory speed
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has a higher JEDEC memory speed than the average processor (DDR5-6400 MHz vs DDR4-3200 MHz). The average processor supports JEDEC memory speed of DDR4-3200 MHz.
Better integrated GPU
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K uses a better integrated GPU than the average processor (Intel Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU vs Intel UHD Graphics 630).
1 more supported displays
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has more supported displays than the average processor (4 vs 3). The average processor supports 3 displays.
5 °C higher TJ Max
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has a higher TJ Max than the average processor (105 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor has a TJ Max of 100 °C.

Cache & Architecture

Integrated Graphics

Power & Thermal

Why is Intel Core Ultra 9 285K worse than the average processor?

Show more

Hide

No multithreading support
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K does not support multithreading, the average processor does.
1 fewer threads per core
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has fewer threads per core than the average processor (1 vs 2). The average processor offers 2 threads per core.
12.5% less L3 per core
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has less L3 cache per core than the average processor (1.5 MB/core vs 1.714 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.714 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
83.3% fewer GPU execution units
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has fewer GPU execution units than the average processor (4 vs 24). The average processor has 24 GPU execution units.
3.91x higher boost power
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has a higher boost power draw than the average processor (250 W vs 64 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 64 W.
2.78x higher base power
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has a higher base power draw than the average processor (125 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
2.78x higher TDP
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has a higher TDP than the average processor (125 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
No configurable TDP
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K does not support configurable TDP, the average processor does.
5 °C higher CPU temperature
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has a higher CPU temperature than the average processor (105 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor runs at a CPU temperature of 100 °C.
28 seconds shorter turbo duration
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has a lower turbo duration limit than the average processor (56 seconds vs 28 seconds). The average processor maintains turbo for 28 seconds.
3.91x higher boost power
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has a higher boost power draw than the average processor (250 W vs 64 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 64 W.
What it is: The short-term boost power limit the processor may draw under heavier turbo loads.
When it matters: When you size cooling and power delivery for peak turbo behavior.
Importance: MEDIUM
Good value: <50 W
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has a higher boost power draw than the average processor (250 W vs 64 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 64 W.250 W vs 64 W
2.78x higher base power
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has a higher base power draw than the average processor (125 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
What it is: The sustained power target used for longer CPU loads.
When it matters: When you choose cooling and power delivery for sustained workloads.
Importance: MEDIUM
Good value: <30 W
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has a higher base power draw than the average processor (125 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.125 W vs 45 W
No multithreading support
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K does not support multithreading, the average processor does.
What it is: Lets each physical core run more than one thread at the same time, such as with Hyper-Threading or SMT.
When it matters: When multitasking, rendering, compiling, virtualization, or other thread-heavy work benefits from more total processing threads.
Importance: HIGH
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K does not support multithreading, the average processor does.
2.78x higher TDP
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has a higher TDP than the average processor (125 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
What it is: The rated thermal design power, which gives a general idea of cooling and power needs.
When it matters: When you choose a cooler or build in a tighter case.
Importance: HIGH
Good value: <30 W
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has a higher TDP than the average processor (125 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.125 W vs 45 W
No configurable TDP
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K does not support configurable TDP, the average processor does.
What it is: Allows the processor to run in alternate power modes instead of being fixed to one default TDP target.
When it matters: When you want more control over heat, noise, and power draw in compact systems, quieter builds, or thermally limited machines.
Importance: LOW
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K does not support configurable TDP, the average processor does.
12.5% less L3 per core
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has less L3 cache per core than the average processor (1.5 MB/core vs 1.714 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.714 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
What it is: The amount of L3 cache effectively available per CPU core.
When it matters: When you are comparing how much shared cache each core can draw on in deeper technical analysis.
Importance: MEDIUM
Good value: >=2 MB/core
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has less L3 cache per core than the average processor (1.5 MB/core vs 1.714 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.714 MB/core of L3 cache per core.1.5 MB/core vs 1.714 MB/core
5 °C higher CPU temperature
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has a higher CPU temperature than the average processor (105 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor runs at a CPU temperature of 100 °C.
What it is: The reported operating temperature of the processor.
When it matters: When you monitor thermals, cooling, or system stability.
Importance: LOW
Good value: <100 °C
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has a higher CPU temperature than the average processor (105 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor runs at a CPU temperature of 100 °C.105 °C vs 100 °C
76% more expensive
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K is more expensive than the average processor (£440 vs £250).
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K is more expensive than the average processor (£440 vs £250).£440 vs £250

Cache & Architecture

Integrated Graphics

Power & Thermal

Graphic comparison of Intel Core Ultra 9 285K and other processors

Attribute category

Attribute

No results found

Third-party reviews

United Kingdom

(Reviews last updated: May 2026)

What customers like about Intel Core Ultra 9 285K?

Significantly improved power efficiency with lower overall power consumption compared to the Core i9-14900K.
Runs much cooler under load, often not requiring high-end delidding or extreme cooling solutions to maintain stable temperatures.
Strong multi-threaded performance in productivity and creative workloads like video editing and 3D rendering.
Substantial 100% or greater generational gains in integrated graphics (iGPU) performance.
Includes a dedicated NPU for AI-based background tasks and software acceleration.
Support for high-speed DDR5 memory (CUDIMMs) exceeding 8000+ MHz.

What customers dislike about Intel Core Ultra 9 285K?

Underwhelming and inconsistent gaming performance, often trailing behind previous-gen Intel chips and AMD's X3D series.
High total cost of entry due to the requirement for new LGA 1851 motherboards and expensive Z890 chipsets.
Removal of Hyper-Threading can lead to performance regressions in specific legacy or latency-sensitive applications.
Higher memory latency compared to the previous Raptor Lake architecture.
Performance swings in early testing suggest a need for further software and BIOS optimization.
NPU performance (13 TOPS) falls short of the 40 TOPS required for certain flagship AI certifications like Microsoft Copilot+.

Expert reviews

pcworld.com

24/10/2024

Summary of the review

Core Ultra 9 285K review: 10 must-know facts about Intel's new desktop CPUs

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K represents a major shift to a TSMC-manufactured tile-based design, delivering exceptional power efficiency and lower thermal output compared to the i9-14900K, particularly in productivity workloads. While it excels in efficiency and supports modern features like CUDIMM memory, the processor often shows lateral or reduced gaming performance compared to predecessors and AMD rivals, and it lacks hyperthreading. Furthermore, the transition requires a new LGA 1851 motherboard, and the chip is highly dependent on Windows power plans to avoid significant single-core performance penalties, according to the PCWorld review. For more details, visit PCWorld.

club386.com

24/10/2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K review: new design, old performance

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K shifts focus from raw speed to energy efficiency via the new "Arrow Lake" architecture, utilizing a 24-core, 24-thread, non-hyperthreaded design. While keeping a 250W TDP, the processor runs cooler and more efficiently, setting new standards in productivity and content creation, including 11% faster rendering than the 14900K. However, gaming performance is described as only adequate, with the chip struggling to beat predecessors and AMD's X3D series in select titles. Pros include high-end multi-threaded performance and excellent power efficiency, but cons include requiring a new LGA 1851 motherboard and underwhelming gaming performance gains. For the full, detailed review, visit Club386.

hwbusters.com

24/10/2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K CPU Review

The Hardware Busters review of the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K highlights a major architectural shift focusing on efficiency, thermal management, and 24-core performance using the TSMC N3B process, resulting in significantly lower temperatures and power consumption compared to the 14900K. Key pros include improved single-thread performance, excellent power-per-watt ratios, and robust I/O with 48 PCIe lanes and high-speed DDR5 support. Conversely, cons include a lack of substantial gaming performance gains over predecessors, a costly platform transition to the LGA 1851 socket, and a lower-than-required NPU for Copilot+ certification. As a result, the 285K is deemed a "cold champion" better suited for productivity and workstations rather than pure gaming.

techspot.com

24/10/2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K Review

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K represents a disappointing shift for Intel, prioritizing power efficiency over raw performance with a 17% performance-per-watt improvement and significantly lower operating temperatures (84°C vs 100°C) compared to the 14900K, according to TechSpot. While delivering strong multi-core gains—14% faster in Cinebench 2024—the chip suffers from a 6% average lower gaming performance compared to its predecessor and lags behind AMD’s X3D chips. Furthermore, the review highlights poor value due to high launch prices, stability issues with Windows 11 24H2, and performance regressions in certain tasks due to the removal of Hyper-Threading, advising against the upgrade.

ign.com

24/10/2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K Review

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K represents a major, yet perplexing, architectural shift for Intel, prioritizing workstation efficiency and improved thermal management over raw gaming performance. While it excels in multi-threaded creative tasks—showing a ~6% lead over the 14900K in Adobe Premiere—it features lower max boost speeds (5.7GHz) and lacks Hyper-Threading. Furthermore, the transition to the new LGA 1851 socket/Z890 platform makes it an expensive upgrade, further complicated by gaming performance that can regress up to 7% in certain titles compared to predecessors. Ultimately, for most users, it serves as a "sideways" step that is hard to recommend, according to IGN.

pcmag.com

24/10/2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K Review

The PCMag review characterizes the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K as a revolutionary, chiplet-based "Arrow Lake" flagship that prioritizes efficiency and multi-threaded productivity over raw performance, signaling a shift toward better power management. While excelling in workstation tasks, the processor shows inconsistent, "swingy" gaming results and lower single-threaded gains, suggesting early software optimization issues, which led PCMag to withhold an Editors' Choice award. Key advantages include an 11% reduction in power consumption and superior multi-core performance in tests like Cinebench 2024, yet it requires a new LGA 1851 motherboard and exhibits inconsistent performance in some applications.

wepc.com

18/12/2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K review: surprising performance from a... Would you like a comparison of the gaming or productivity benchmarks from these speci...

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K shifts to a 3nm, tile-based design, prioritizing efficiency over raw power and removing hyperthreading to deliver a chip that is significantly easier to cool. While it shines as a productivity powerhouse, surpassing the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X in multi-core tasks, its gaming performance is lackluster, often falling behind both the 14900K and AMD's X3D processors. Key pros include exceptional thermal management and power efficiency, but it carries cons like underwhelming gaming performance and the requirement for a new, expensive LGA 1851 motherboard. For more details, visit WePC.

hwcooling.net

29/11/2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K: #1 in multi-threaded tasks even without HT (Review)

The HWcooling review of the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K (Arrow Lake) highlights its position as a top-tier performer in multi-threaded tasks, surpassing the i9-14900K and Ryzen 9 9950X in productivity despite abandoning Hyper-Threading for a 24-core/24-thread design. Utilizing TSMC N3B nodes, the 8 Lion Cove P-cores and 16 Skymont E-cores deliver superior efficiency and raw, multi-core, workstation-level performance on the new LGA1851 platform, say HWcooling. Pros identified by the review include exceptional all-core productivity, improved energy efficiency in multi-core scenarios, and a more capable integrated GPU. However, potential drawbacks include high power draw at maximum loads, mixed gaming performance that sometimes lags behind the 14900K, and the high cost of requiring a new Z890 motherboard. Ultimately, the 285K is deemed a formidable, cool-running powerhouse for heavy rendering and compute-intensive workflows, holding its own against the Ryzen 9 9950X in efficiency. The move away from hyper-threading is validated as a successful transition to a more modern, efficient architecture, according to HWcooling.

windowscentral.com

31/10/2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K review: Ultra-efficient productivity

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K marks a shift for Intel, prioritizing power efficiency and productivity over significant raw gaming gains by utilizing a 24-core architecture on TSMC's 3nm process without hyper-threading. The CPU demonstrates exceptional performance-per-watt, running cooler and drawing roughly 100W less than the previous generation, while dominating in multi-core and single-core productivity benchmarks. Despite the efficiency gains, gaming performance is merely comparable to the i9-14900K, and the platform requires a costly new LGA1851 motherboard upgrade, with the NPU failing to meet Copilot+ PC requirements.

gamersnexus.net

29/10/2024

Summary of the review

Get It Together, Intel: Core Ultra 9 285K CPU Review & Benchmarks

The Gamers Nexus review characterizes the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K as a "regressive" release for gaming, offering a new Arrow Lake architecture that lacks hyperthreading and fails to clearly define its market position. While the CPU boasts pros like significantly lower power consumption (roughly 47W less than the 14900K in some tests) and better thermal management, its gaming performance frequently falls behind the 14900K, 14700K, and AMD’s 7800X3D. Cons are highlighted by poor value, with the 285K being roughly 31% more expensive than the 7800X3D while trailing in performance, specifically showing a 15% deficit against the 14900K and 31% behind the 7800X3D in Final Fantasy 14: Dawntrail. Consequently, the review finds the 285K difficult to recommend for gamers, positioning it as an average production part that is outperformed in efficiency by AMD’s X3D series and in value by competitors.

tweaktown.com

25/10/2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K Processor - Gamers Will Want More

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, based on the new Arrow Lake-S architecture, focuses on efficiency and multi-threaded performance over raw speed by utilizing a 24-core disaggregated design and dropping Hyper-Threading. While delivering significant improvements in productivity, power consumption, and operating temperatures, the processor also features a substantially upgraded integrated GPU (up to 100% gain) and supports the new LGA 1851 socket and DDR5-6400 memory. However, the review highlights that the chip struggles to offer meaningful gaming upgrades, often falling behind predecessors or AMD's 9000 series, which combined with the high cost of Z890 motherboards, makes it difficult to recommend for pure gaming, despite its advantages in rendering and AI-focused NPU capabilities.

itc.ua

12/12/2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K processor review

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K ("Arrow Lake") shifts focus from raw performance to superior energy efficiency and lower operating temperatures compared to previous generations. The ITC.ua review notes excellent multi-threaded performance in workstation tasks and superior cooling efficiency, allowing it to run remarkably cool. However, gaming performance is identified as regressive, often underperforming against older flagship chips and the 14th Gen predecessors. Pros highlighted include exceptionally lower power consumption, lower thermal output, improved multi-core capabilities for productivity, and the adoption of the new LGA 1851 platform with faster memory support. Cons include a significant drop in gaming performance, high system costs for new motherboards, and an integrated neural processing unit (NPU) that does not meet Microsoft’s 40 TOPS requirement. Ultimately, the 285K is deemed a specialized choice for professional users prioritizing a cool, quiet system over gaming speed. Copy

cgmagonline.com

24/10/2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K CPU Review

The CGMagazine review of the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K highlights a strategic shift toward extreme power efficiency and thermal control, with the 24-core chip delivering strong performance in synthetic benchmarks and featuring a dedicated NPU and Xe graphics. The review highly commends the Arrow Lake processor for its impressive efficiency, maintaining low temperatures (74°C) and reduced power draw (160 watts) during heavy loads. While offering excellent multi-threaded performance, drawbacks include competitive gaming performance that does not reliably surpass competitors and a limited justification for upgrades from 14th-gen systems, making it best suited for users with older hardware. Copy

digitalfoundry.net

24/10/2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K and Ultra 5 245K review

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K and 5 245K signify a shift toward improved power efficiency and productivity, utilizing a new "Arrow Lake" tile-based architecture that delivers impressive thermal management, with the 285K running cooler while consuming significantly less power than predecessors. However, the removal of hyperthreading leads to notable drawbacks, specifically a regression in gaming performance where the 285K often trails the 14900K and AMD's 7800X3D by substantial margins in titles like Cyberpunk 2077. While these chips excel in multi-core tasks, offering top-tier performance for content creators with features like integrated NPUs, they are considered hard to recommend for gamers, as the Ultra 5 245K also trails its predecessor in gaming tests. Copy

techradar.com

24/10/2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K and Intel Core Ultra 5 245K Review

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K and Core Ultra 5 245K (Arrow Lake) introduce a disaggregated "tile" design, delivering improved power efficiency and significantly cooler operating temperatures—running at 81°C—compared to previous 14th Gen chips. While productivity performance in multi-core tasks like video editing shows promise, the overall performance improvements are deemed a mixed bag. Key drawbacks include gaming performance regression compared to the 14th Gen, lack of Hyper-Threading, and forced upgrades to the LGA 1851 socket/DDR5 RAM, increasing total ownership costs. Due to the underwhelming "wow factor" and high upgrade costs, these chips are hard to recommend for users on 12th-Gen or newer, with better, more affordable options available for gaming. Copy

pcgamer.com

24/10/2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K review

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K represents a strategic shift toward high-efficiency, "second-tier" performance at a top-tier price, requiring a costly new LGA 1851 socket and Z890 motherboard platform. While the processor delivers impressive thermal management and power efficiency, often operating quietly during intense gaming workloads, it fails to consistently outperform older 14th Gen Intel chips or competing AMD Ryzen CPUs. Productivity tasks, particularly heavily multi-threaded rendering in Cinebench, highlight the strength of the new architecture, but in-game performance regressions in titles like Cyberpunk 2077 make it a tough recommendation for gamers seeking maximum FPS. Copy

tomshardware.com

24/10/2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K and Core 5 245K Review

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K represents a significant shift to a tile-based design on TSMC's N3B process, delivering improved power efficiency and running considerably cooler than previous 14th Gen chips. While offering strong multi-threaded productivity performance, the processor falters in gaming, often delivering lower frame rates than its predecessor and AMD competitors. Ultimately, the chip is viewed as a lateral move, as its high platform cost for the new LGA 1851 socket and mediocre gaming performance fail to provide a compelling upgrade over existing options. Copy

vividrepairs.co.uk

28/01/2026

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K Desktop Review UK (2026) GamersNexus

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K introduces the "Arrow Lake" architecture, focusing on efficiency and IPC gains through new Lion Cove P-cores and Skymont E-cores, despite the removal of Hyper-Threading. Performance testing shows strong single-thread performance and improved multi-core productivity, though it sits slightly behind the Ryzen 7 9800X3D in pure gaming benchmarks. A key highlight is superior power efficiency and lower thermal output compared to previous generations, though adoption requires a new, costly LGA 1851 motherboard. Copy

pcmasters.de

24/10/2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K Review: Benchmarks and Comparisons

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K shifts to the TSMC 3nm N3B process and LGA1851 socket, delivering significantly improved energy efficiency and lower heat production compared to the i9-14900K. Key advantages include Skymont E-cores offering a 32% IPC increase and a dedicated NPU for AI, supported by Foveros 3D packaging for better thermal management. Performance is strong in single-thread benchmarks and competitive in multi-threaded tasks with the Ryzen 9 7950X, though it can fall slightly behind the Ryzen 9 9950X. Despite removing Hyper-Threading, the 24-core (8 E) design, combined with CUDIMM DDR5 support, provides robust productivity performance. Conversely, the processor shows mediocre gaming performance with standard Windows 11 profiles, often requiring special BIOS settings to match previous-generation performance. The requirement for a new Z890 motherboard and mixed, rather than dominant, performance results make it a complex choice for pure performance seekers. PCMasters.de

lemondeinformatique.fr

28/10/2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K Review: A Disaggregated Chip Manufactured by TSMC

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K (Arrow Lake) shifts to a disaggregated "chiplet" design, with compute tiles manufactured by TSMC on the N3B process. Featuring 24 cores (8P + 16E) and no Hyper-Threading, it boasts significantly improved efficiency over the i9-14900K, offering up to a 58% reduction in power consumption in some scenarios and superior multi-threaded performance, particularly in productivity, despite lower peak clock speeds. While a strong workstation choice, the chip struggles in gaming, often trailing its predecessor and AMD counterparts, and requires a new, costly LGA 1851 platform.

ginjfo.com

24/10/2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K and Core Ultra 5 245K Review", "Testing the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K and Core Ultra 5 245K

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K and 5 245K introduce the "Arrow Lake" architecture and LGA 1851 socket, prioritizing energy efficiency and reduced thermal output over the power-hungry 13th/14th Gen chips. The 285K, featuring 24 cores without hyper-threading, operates 10∘𝐶 to 12∘𝐶 cooler than the i9-14900K. While the 285K shines in multi-threaded productivity, competing with AMD's Ryzen 9 9950X, gaming performance is mixed, and the 245K offers strong mid-range efficiency against the Ryzen 7 9700X. Pros include vastly improved power efficiency, lower operational temperatures allowing for high-end air cooling, and modern features like an Integrated NPU and PCIe 5.0. Cons involve a lack of significant gaming gains over 14th Gen, the requirement for new Z890 motherboards, and the loss of hyper-threading, which can hinder specific workloads. The review positions this as a transitional, efficiency-focused generation rather than a leap in raw speed.

hardwarecooking.fr

24/10/2024

Summary of the review

Review: Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, the new king?

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K marks a new architectural era for Intel, emphasizing efficiency over raw clock speed by utilizing 24 cores (8 P-cores, 16 E-cores) and eliminating Hyper-Threading. This design yields significantly improved power efficiency and lower operating temperatures compared to the 14900K, offering a, highly competitive, cooler-running solution for workstations. While delivering top-tier performance in multi-threaded productivity tasks, the processor faces inconsistent, often disappointing, gaming results, sometimes lagging behind predecessors and AMD counterparts. Pros: Superior multi-core efficiency: Exceptional performance-per-watt in productivity, outperforming the 14900K.Easier to cool: Lower operational temperatures reduce thermal management demands.Productivity Powerhouse: Strong rendering and compute performance despite lacking Hyper-Threading. Cons: Inconsistent Gaming: Performance is, at times, weaker than the previous generation.High Platform Costs: Requires a new LGA 1851 motherboard and DDR5 memory.Launch Bugs: Early software and Windows 11 optimization issues impact stability.

lesnumeriques.com

24/10/2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K Review: Intel's New Efficiency Leader?

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K shifts to a 3nm "Arrow Lake" architecture, prioritizing energy efficiency and productivity over raw speed by abandoning Hyper-Threading for 24 cores/24 threads. This design yields superior multi-threaded performance, improved single-thread speed, and notably lower power consumption, according to Les Numériques. The processor shines in workstation tasks, offering excellent efficiency and effective cooling. The integrated GPU is significantly upgraded, and the inclusion of an NPU adds value for AI workloads. However, the review finds a 6% regression in gaming performance compared to the 14900K and higher costs due to mandatory new Z890 motherboards. The 285K is recommended for content creators, while gamers may find it less appealing compared to the previous generation.

rue-montgallet.com

29/09/2025

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K: Has Intel succeeded with its new chip?", "Intel Core Ultra 9 285K: Did Intel pull it off with its latest processor?

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K (Arrow Lake) delivers significant improvements in energy efficiency and reduced power consumption compared to the 14900K, alongside 24 cores/threads and improved AI capabilities. However, the chip offers only a modest 1.2% increase in raw performance over the previous generation and falls behind the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X in multi-core tasks, partly due to the removal of hyper-threading. Furthermore, it lags behind specialized gaming alternatives like the Ryzen 7 9800X3D by roughly 13%, and it requires a new, costly LGA-1851 motherboard. Copy

clubic.com

05/11/2024

Summary of the review

Testing the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, 7 265K, and 5 245K", "Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, 7 265K, and 5 245K Review

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K ("Arrow Lake") signals a shift toward efficiency, utilizing a 3nm process with 8 performance and 16 efficiency cores, representing a significant, lower-power architectural change for Intel. It delivers strong multi-core performance gains (~15%) in productivity and creative workloads, though the removal of hyperthreading leads to regressions in specific tasks like file decompression. While praised for lower operating temperatures and reduced power consumption, the processor offers mixed results in gaming and requires a new LGA 1851 socket/Z890 motherboard, making it a better fit for professional users than pure gamers. Copy

as.com

26/12/2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K: Review of a Misunderstood New Generation of Processors

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K represents a shift toward energy efficiency and AI-driven features over raw clock speeds, utilizing the TSMC N3B process and removing Hyper-Threading for improved thermals. Pros highlighted include significantly lower power consumption and improved thermal performance compared to the 14th Gen, alongside dedicated NPU capabilities and solid gaming improvements in specific titles. Conversely, cons include the high cost of the required LGA 1851 platform upgrade and marginal performance gains in certain scenarios, making it a "misunderstood", niche, or efficient rather than high-performance leap for some users.

gameit.es

13 de noviembre de 2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K: Full Review

The Game It review of the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K highlights a major architectural shift to a chiplet-based tile design using TSMC nodes, focusing on improved energy efficiency and lower temperatures compared to previous flagship generations. While prioritizing efficiency, the 285K delivers strong multi-threaded productivity performance via its 8 "Lion Cove" and 16 "Skymont" cores, though gaming performance is noted as inconsistent or a lateral step, sometimes struggling against the 14900K or 9800X3D due to increased latency. Key pros include significantly better power efficiency and manageable thermals, while cons involve the requirement of a new LGA 1851 motherboard and modest gaming gains, making it an ideal choice for productivity-focused users prioritizing efficiency.

hardzone.es

24/10/2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K and Core Ultra 5 245K Review

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K and 5 245K introduce a chiplet-based "Arrow Lake" architecture on the LGA1851 socket, delivering a significant, 11% reduction in power consumption and improved thermal management compared to the i9-14900K. The processors excel in multi-threaded productivity tasks, with the 285K outperforming the 14900K in Cinebench 2024 by 17%, though gaming performance is inconsistent and heavily dependent on specific titles, sometimes trailing previous generations. Key pros include the integrated NPU, improved Xe graphics, and support for CUDIMM DDR5, while drawbacks include the high cost of a new platform, lack of DDR4 support, and reduced thread counts due to the removal of Hyper-Threading.

profesionalreview.com

24/10/2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K Review (Complete Analysis)

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K shifts to a disaggregated 3nm TSMC chiplet design (Arrow Lake-S) featuring 24 cores (8P + 16E) and a new LGA 1851 socket, dropping Hyper-Threading to prioritize IPC gains. It delivers strong multi-core performance for productivity but exhibits inconsistent, sometimes regressive gaming performance compared to the i9-14900K, according to the Profesional Review analysis. Key advantages include significantly improved efficiency and thermals, while drawbacks involve high platform upgrade costs and mixed gaming results.

noticias3d.com

24/10/2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K Review: Do we have a new performance king?

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K ("Arrow Lake") introduces a 3nm, tile-based design focusing on improved energy efficiency and thermals, resulting in lower power consumption and easier cooling compared to previous generations. It delivers stellar productivity performance, rivaling the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X and outperforming the 14900K in rendering and content creation tasks, alongside significantly improved integrated Arc graphics. However, the chip exhibits inconsistent gaming performance, often falling behind 14th Gen and X3D chips, and marks a significant shift with the removal of Hyper-Threading and a mandatory move to the new LGA 1851 socket. Copy

tuttotech.net

25/03/2025

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K Re-tested: How (and If) It Has Improved

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K shifts focus from raw gaming to efficiency and multi-threaded productivity, utilizing a new "Arrow Lake" chiplet design. While it excels in professional workloads, rivaling the Ryzen 9 9950X, it delivers erratic and often lower gaming performance than the previous generation. Significant pros include improved thermal management and lower power consumption, making it 10-15°C cooler than the i9-14900K, alongside support for faster CUDIMM DDR5 memory. Conversely, cons involve the loss of hyperthreading, a high total cost of ownership due to the new LGA 1851 socket, and reported early software instability. For more details, visit TechPowerUp. Copy

tomshw.it

24/10/2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K: Intel's Paradigm Shift

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K (Arrow Lake) marks a architectural shift, prioritizing efficiency and modular "tile" design over raw, monolithic power while removing Hyper-Threading. It excels in productivity, offering significant multi-threaded performance gains and lower power consumption—34W to 165W less than the 14900K—along with better thermals (10–12°C cooler) and support for faster CUDIMM DDR5 memory. However, the chip suffers from a notable 15–20ns increase in memory latency, leading to a regression in gaming performance where it is outclassed by AMD's X3D chips. Furthermore, it requires a new LGA 1851 motherboard and fails to meet the 40 TOPS requirement for official Copilot+ AI PC certification. Copy

tweakers.net

24/10/2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 5 245K, 7 265K and 9 285K Review

The Tweakers review of Intel’s Core Ultra 200S series (Arrow Lake) highlights a major shift prioritizing efficiency and a tile-based design over raw, single-threaded frequency, resulting in lower power consumption and heat compared to previous generations. While the Core Ultra 9 285K displays strong performance in multi-core productivity tasks, the lineup shows a "mixed bag" for gaming, with performance often lagging behind both its predecessors and AMD competition, alongside the removal of hyperthreading. Key downsides include the requirement for new LGA1851 socket motherboards and inconsistent gaming performance, though the processors excel in power efficiency and content creation workloads. For a detailed analysis, read the Tweakers review.

Video reviews

Best alternatives

AMD Ryzen 9 9950X

Processors

AMD Ryzen 9 7950X

Processors

Intel Core i9 13900K

Processors

AMD Ryzen 9 7900x3d

Processors

Intel Core i9 14900K

Processors

Intel Core i9 13900KS

Processors

Intel Core i9 14900

Processors

Intel Core Ultra 9 285

Processors

Intel Core i9 14900T

Processors

AMD Ryzen 9 9900X

Processors

AMD Ryzen 7 9800x3d

Processors

Intel Core i9 12900

Processors

Compare Intel Core Ultra 9 285K with other processors

Compare