I ’ve never seen a processor as radically different as the Core Ultra 9 285K. It ’s a consummate passing for Intel , from design to features , all focus on a young vision of highly effective screen background central processor . And it actually return on that vision . Even compared to thebest processors , the Core Ultra 9 285 K pulls off thing that seem like magic compared to the CPUs we ’ve seen for the past X or more .
Calling the Core Ultra 9 285 K anything but impressive is gravely selling it short . Intel has improve efficiency , it ’s delivered carrying into action improvements , and it seems to have gotten its instability contend under ascendancy .
But you ’ve read the headline ; you ’ve ascertain the account . As impressive as the Core Ultra 9 285 K is , it ends up being a sturdy C.P.U. to really advocate you go out and purchase .
Intel Core Ultra 200S at a glance
At first coup d’oeil , the lineup of Core Ultra 200S processor — formerly known as Arrow Lake — does n’t look much unlike than 12th- , 13th- , or 14th - gen processor . center counts are the same , with the same split between performance ( P ) and efficient ( vitamin E ) sum , and the CPU have the same rated power draw poker . Clock speeds have shift slightly down , but not by much . The eyeglasses really sell the tale suddenly here , however .
The Core Ultra 9 285 K , and the entire mountain chain of chips , is a ultra departure . First and foremost , Intelkilled Hyper - Threading here . One heart and soul now equal just one thread , putting to rest a recitation of post two threads on each core that Intel ( and AMD ) has maintain for decades . That immediately puts the Core Ultra 9 285 K at a screw thread disadvantage liken to theRyzen 9 9950X , have in mind it require more sinewy individual essence to make up the yarn disparity in heavy wind workloads .
And indeed , these individual core are more hefty . The Core Ultra 9 285 K still has P - gist and E - nucleus , but unlike theCore i9 - 12900 K , which debuted Intel ’s hybrid architecture , the phosphorus - substance are n’t the chief driver of operation — the E - center are . That ’s a strange fracture . The E - cores drive the bedrock performance , while the phosphorus - cores step in for vivid workloads that need a lot of upper on , say , one or two threads . This architectural change brings a wad of improvements to efficiency , as I ’ll dig into with my benchmarks below .
The frame-up here is really monovular to Intel ’s mobileLunar Lake CPUs , just juiced up with more cores , in high spirits clock upper , more memory cache , and high might limits . The eastward - cores utilise the Skymont design , which Intel says comes with a 2 % advance in IPC ( instructions per clock ) over the Raptor Cove P - core design have in 13th - gen and 14th - gen chips . The P - cores use the Lion Cove intent . Based on the crossover , you’re able to mean of Arrow Lake as using P - gist and P+-cores , or something along those lines . Skymont is the main performance driver , rather than some weaker extra gist that can step in for intemperately threaded workloads .
Another big leaving comes in the manufacturing process . This is the first screen background CPU that Intel did n’t fabricate itself . The Core Ultra 9 285 K is build on TSMC ’s N3B node , as Intel dump its plans to progress on the 20A node it announced years ago .
Finally , the Core Ultra 200S range of a function comes with an on - circuit card 13 pinnacle NPU , though I suspect it wo n’t be passing relevant in a desktop for at least a few years , particularly if you already have a discrete GPU .
Test configurations and a note on compatibility
As with all of my CPU review , I stuck with almost identical test benches across Arrow Lake , Zen 5 and Zen 4 , and Intel ’s previous - gen Raptor Lake central processing unit , only swap out the CPU and motherboard between the various platforms . I ’m using an RTX 4080 and a kit of DDR5 - 6000 memory to keep apart the performance of the processor as much as possible . However , Arrow Lake Saratoga chip stick out much high DDR5 speeds than Raptor Lake processors , which are now possible thanks to CUDIMMs . I ’ve include a few tests below with degraded memory to show the differences .
For the Arrow Lake terrace , I used the high - end Asus ROG Maximus Z890 Hero motherboard , which is absolutely packed to the rim with feature . I actually test two different motherboards — the aforementioned Asus instrument panel and the MSI MEG Z890 Unify - X. I ran into several issues with getting the platform to boot properly across both motherboards , but the Asus display board is what eventually got the test bench stable . I do n’t suspect most people will have these problems , as it was some combination of a die SSD and pre - release BIOS variant , but it ’s of import to notice notwithstanding .
disregardless , the Core Ultra 9 285 K put in the Modern LGA 1851 socket . Physically , it ’s the same size as the LGA 1700 socket that Intel used on 12th- to 14th - gen CPU , but the Core Ultra 200S reach is n’t rearwards compatible . gratefully , exist LGA 1700 coolers will fit out on the Modern LGA 1851 socket without issue . The MSI MAG CoreLiquid i360 tank I used came with an offset angle bracket specifically for LGA 1851 .
Aspreviously account on , the hotspot positioning on Arrow Lake chips is high up on the processor , so an offset ice chest like the one I used targets the hot area more straight off . Any LGA 1700 cooler will wreak , but you ’ll need to check with the brand name of your ice chest to see if an offset bracket is available to get the best operation .
Productivity performance
I said up top that the Core Ultra 9 285 K was impressive , and I stand by that . Look no further than Cinebench R24 for substantiation . This is the catgut checkout of CPU reviews — the first test you run away to ensure everything is maneuver the way it should — and Intel was n’t mess around . Arrow Lake isfast .
In fact , it ’s 15 % faster than the Ryzen 9 9950X and 20 % faster than theCore i9 - 14900Kin multi - core operation . And call up , the Core Ultra 9 285 K has access to 24 threads , not the 32 available to the other two Saratoga chip .
Intel specifically said that the Core Ultra 9 285 K bear witness bighearted gains in a ray - traced renderer like Cinebench , and sure enough , Geekbench 6 flattens the differences between the CPUs a morsel . Here , we ’re actually seeing a slight step-down in individual - core stop number compared to the Ryzen 9 9950X and Core i9 - 14900 K , but it ’s not huge . And even with less impressive results overall , the Core Ultra 9 285 K still lands at the top of multi - core performance — and even more so if you have a rapid kit of memory to pair the processor with .
Cinebench and Geekbench create the most impressive results for the Core Ultra 9 285 atomic number 19 , but as you pop digging into other benchmarks , the operation range from competitive to downright disappointing .
At the competitive end , we have transcoding in Handbrake , where the Core Ultra 9 285 K was just a touch slower than the Ryzen 9 9950X in an x265 picture transcode . It ’s technically a personnel casualty , but I ’m willing to call this identical execution consider the generational advance on display .
The Ryzen 9 9950X is really the tough competition for the Core Ultra 9 285 K , too . As you’re able to see in Blender , the generational improvement in rendering applications are sure present — there ’s a immense uplift over the Core i9 - 14900K. However , AMD ’s new Ryzen 9 9950X still comes out on top , and in some of the rendering examination , by quite a significant gross profit .
Another degree against the Core Ultra 9 285 K is the lack of AVX-512 support . This is n’t relevant to the immense majority of users , but if you have an diligence that can leverage AVX-512 pedagogy , the performance lift up with aboriginal support on AMD ’s latest Zen 5 processor is quite dramatic . Y - Cruncher is a great instance of that . Once again , Intel is render a monolithic generational improvement , but it ’s really no contest when you bring the 512 - bit datum path available to Zen 5 C.P.U. into the folding .
Short of the modified applications of AVX-512 , this is really impressive performance . So , why is the processor so slow in Adobe Premiere Pro and Photoshop ? Premiere Pro is bad enough , with the Core Ultra 9 285 thou falling short of every CPU I essay short of the 12 - meat Ryzen 9 9900X. Photoshop is somehow even regretful , with the Core Ultra 9 285 K showing the lowest solvent out of the test cortege . It ’s not good when theCore i9 - 13900KandRyzen 9 7950X — two Old components — are offering intelligibly well performance .
I hear you — Jake , something must be wrong with your testing . I assumed the same thing . I tried two different motherboards , different remembering kits , overclocked and stock context , and no power limits . I even testedtwo differentCore Ultra 9 285 grand good example , and I share this data like a shot with Intel . This is all fresh data , too — all of the results you see in this critical review were collected within Clarence Day of each other . And yet , test after test , variable change after varying modification , the same resultant role showed up time and again .
You would assume that the performance vantage across all of my other tests would translate into apps like Premiere Pro and Photoshop , but they just do n’t . And that ’s largely been my experience with the Core Ultra 9 285K. There are a fate of impressive things Intel is doing here , some of which has big execution implications . But when the synthetic rubber receive the road , the Core Ultra 9 285 K is n’t rigorously faster than its last - gen counterparts . There ’s no place that ’s more clear than gambling .
Gaming performance
I did n’t have high expectations for gaming functioning on the Core Ultra 9 285K.Intel ’s posit goalwith the processor was to merely maintain play performance , not improve it . establish on 10 games I tested , the Core Ultra 9 285 K is on - par to slightly slower than the last - gen Core i9 - 14900 K , and it gets utterly beat out byAMD ’s Ryzen 7 7800X3D.
Let ’s get some well-to-do game out of the way first . Most games are limited byyour graphics carte , even at 1080p , and that confine factor only becomes more pronounced as you climb to higher resolutions and artwork preferences . At 1080p High configurations , there is very lilliputian movement inReturnal , Assassin ’s Creed Mirage , andBlack Myth : Wukong . There are difference of opinion , with the Core i9 - 14900 K beating the Core Ultra 9 285 cat valium inMirageandBlack Myth , but we ’re talking about a few material body at most . This is identical performance , at least for the gen - on - gen compare .
mordant Myth : Wukongcenters in on the trend throughout my gambling tests , though — it ’s really futile to compare gaming execution with the Ryzen 7 7800X3D around . It ’s just the fastest gaming central processor you’re able to buy , and in most games , it ’s not even unaired . Look atRed Dead Redemption 2as an example . This is a game I would normally toss into the graphically - intensive pail , and you may see a pretty flat short letter in functioning across the processor I examine — except for the Ryzen 7 7800X3D.
Nevermind the fact that the Core Ultra 9 285 K is thrum by its last - gen replication - part and the Ryzen 9 9950X. If you desire secure gambling performance , none of these CPUs really make common sense .
Things are a little more interesting elsewhere . The Ryzen 7 7800X3D still leads the battalion , unsurprisingly , but the Core Ultra 9 285 K showed some odd performance . InF1 2022,the processor was slower than both the Core i9 - 13900 K and Core i9 - 14900K. However , when match with flying DDR5 memory , it actually showed a slight lead .
Similarly , inFinal Fantasy XIV Dawntrail , the Core Ultra 9 285 K jumped from a flimsy deprivation to the Core i9 - 14900 kB to a slight lead with quick computer memory . In bothF1 2022andFinal Fantasy XIV , AMD ’s Ryzen 9 9950X is debauched , and the Ryzen 7 7800X3D tops the charts , so although it ’s an interesting exercise to bet at store scalability on the Core Ultra 9 285 chiliad , it does n’t make much of a difference when it number to gain a buying decision .
The only game where the Core Ultra 9 285 K top the chart wasHitman 3,though you could call it a win by trifle consider how exit the top three chip are — and the fact that the Core Ultra 9 285 K needed much faster computer memory to even beat its last - gen opposite number .
There are some gen - on - gen improvements , which you could see inAshes of the SingularityandTiny Tina ’s Wonderlands . The AMD competitor is really the problem here ; by simply maintaining gambling public presentation , Intel has essentially conceded gaming performance wholesale to AMD this generation .
To show all of my workplace , you’re able to see result forCyberpunk 2077above . The trend is moderately clear here regardless , but it ’s deserving showing all of the game I try — it took me a long time , you get laid ?
Temperatures and power
Intel may not have better gambling performance on the Core Ultra 9 285 yard , but its goal was to meliorate efficiency . And true to its word , there are some big improvements in temperature and power draw . The chart above really narrate the whole floor here . While fork over exchangeable performance , the Core Ultra 9 285 K is often drawing 50 % less world power , and sometimes it ’s even more effective . I saw the numbers fly by on filmdom during benchmarking , but I ’m still get back seeing them put up next to each other on a graph .
But that pestiferous Ryzen 7 7800X3D. telling as Intel ’s improvements in efficiency are here , the Ryzen 7 7800X3D is delivering much higher performance at an even scummy might attracter . It ’s another example of the disconnection with the Core Ultra 9 285K. you could see that Intel pulled off a lot of telling thing , but it rarely shifts the buying decision .
Although the Core Ultra 9 285 K run through more top executive , it run cooler overall . It does n’t seem like much here , but it ’s important to remember that I was benchmarking with a 360 mm all - in - one liquid cooler that ’s more than equal to of keeping these CPUs cool . Scale down to a small form factor personal computer , and the temperature reward of the Core Ultra 9 285 K could make a grown difference .
Gaming is really where the big efficiency improvements are . As you’re able to see from the chart above , the Core Ultra 9 285 K is more efficient in heavy work load like Cinebench and Handbrake , though it ’s still entirely comfortable going above 200 watts when it needs to . What ’s outstanding here is that the Core Ultra 9 285 K is cater a light operation improvement while suck up downcast power — unlike gaming , you ’re not trading performance for good efficiency .
The translation into temperature is n’t as stark in productivity applications , but once again , those differences would become more pronounced the more thermally cumber the environment is .
What about instability?
It ’s impossible to speak about the Core Ultra 9 285 K outside of the context of use of Intel ’s late desktop struggles . The Core i9 - 14900 K and Core i9 - 13900 K faceddire instability problems , which Intel has only late solved . Will we see the same issues with the Core Ultra 9 285 K ? Intel says no , but I do n’t have a watch crystal ball .
Here ’s what I can severalise you — Intel is clearly on top of any unstableness concerns with the Core Ultra 9 285K. One coup d’oeil in the BIOS of a Z890 motherboard , and it becomes profusely vindicated that Intel does n’t need to restate past mistake . Both motherboards I looked at were run with default power setting , and they were both understandably judge to show that they were Intel ’s default preferences .
In addition , the company let me know that it ’s opened some more stern note of communication with its motherboard partners propel onwards . That should mean more consistency across different motherboard modeling , and it should mean that unstableness trouble , if they do show up , wo n’t be a widespread or long - persistent . But honestly , I say “ should ” because I do n’t know . Intel has all of the pieces in spot , and my guess is that the Core Ultra 9 285 K wo n’t have instability problems . That ’s something that ’s impossible to test for a mean solar day - one review , though . Only clock time will say .
Should you buy the Core Ultra 9 285K?
Part of me is captivate with the Core Ultra 9 285K. I see the huge efficiency improvements ; I see the voodoo that Intel has pulled off with 24 thread . More than anything , I see a company that ’s willing to strip all of its kernel dogma , from in - sign of the zodiac manufacturing to Hyper - Threading , to deliver a radically unlike C.P.U. that ’s not just more of the same . Say what you desire about the Core Ultra 9 285 chiliad — there ’s no deny that it ’s impressive .
But telling does n’t always mean expert . I hope Intel can continue establish from the Core Ultra 9 285 K to deliver highly effective constituent , and based on my testing , it seems like even one multiplication down the route we ’ll see an offering from Intel that ’s seriously especial . From where I ’m stand today , however , I ca n’t urge the Core Ultra 9 285 M outright .
First , for gamers , there ’s really not much for you here . Yes , the Core Ultra 9 285 K is right smart more efficient than the Core i9 - 14900 K , but it ’s not any faster . More significantly , the Ryzen 7 7800X3D exists , and the Ryzen 7 9800X3D is on the direction . Intel really gave up on the gaming scrap before the Core Ultra 9 285 K ever released , and if your stress is gaming , AMD ’s 3D V - Cache CPUs are still the way to go .
On the productiveness end , the Core Ultra 9 285 K and Ryzen 9 9950X barter botch . However , I saw much more consistent performance out of the AMD micro chip . It ’s potential Intel still has software improvements it can surrender down the route to gain the upper hand , and I ’d love to see them . That could earn this chip shot the commend badge it just barely lost . But for now , the Ryzen 9 9950X arrive at more sense than the Core Ultra 9 285K.
I do n’t need to brush aside the Core Ultra 9 285 K completely . There ’s surely a manipulation causa here if you have a small cast divisor PC , for example , and want a remainder of good productivity and gaming performance . The Core Ultra 9 285 potassium slots into that arrangement perfectly . But for everyone else , there are good choice .
