J’ai testé le Core Ultra 9 285K contre le Ryzen 7 7800X3D – et c’est moche.

The new Intel Core Ultra 9 285K processor has finally arrived, promising enhanced performance with significantly lower power requirements, at least according to Intel. However, as you can read in my review of the Core Ultra 9 285K, Intel’s performance claims are not as rosy as they seem, especially when compared to what is arguably the best gaming processor you can buy: AMD’s Ryzen 7 7800X3D.

Both processors were put to the test side by side, looking at performance across productivity applications and games, as well as heat and efficiency. These CPUs target different users, but there are still many interesting comparisons we can delve into between them.

Specifications

The Core Ultra 9 285K and Ryzen 7 7800X3D are radically different CPUs, as evident when comparing their specifications directly. While it’s generally not a good idea to compare specifications between CPUs in the same class, the gap in specifications here is large enough for us to provide some interesting insights. The main difference between these CPUs is the number of cores.

The Ryzen 7 7800X3D is a clear winner in this regard. It comes with eight Zen 4 cores and a total of 16 threads, capable of boosting up to 5 GHz. This is not the most interesting thing about this CPU. It’s the 104MB of cache packed above the CPU die, divided between 8MB of L2 cache and 96MB of L3 cache thanks to AMD’s 3D V-Cache packaging technology.

The Core Ultra 9 285K may not have the impressive 3D V-Cache memory, but it still has some tricks up its sleeve. It’s a 24-core CPU, but unlike the Ryzen 7 7800X3D, it doesn’t come with simultaneous multi-threading indicators. Each core has only one thread. Additionally, Intel uses its hybrid design, combining the Lion Cove P-core design with the Skymont E-core design. According to Intel, the electronic cores are the main performance drivers here, unlike the Core i9-14900K, where the electronic cores were relatively weak.

With more cores and higher clock speeds, it’s not surprising that the Core Ultra 9 285K has much higher power requirements. I’ll address efficiency directly in this comparison, but I can tell you now that under full load, the Core Ultra 9 285K already consumes double (or more) the power compared to the Ryzen 7 7800X3D – despite usually having much better performance.

Pricing

Core Ultra 9 285K and Ryzen 7 7800X3D force you to consider prices because depending on the purpose you use your computer for, you could save a significant amount of money. The Core Ultra 9 285K is the latest flagship CPU from Intel, so you’ll spend $589 if you want to get it now. The price will decrease over time – the Core i9-14900K is around $450 annually after its launch – but until we see the next generation from Intel, expect to spend over $500.

At $450, Ryzen 7 7800X3D is much cheaper, although I’ve seen some odd price fluctuations with this CPU over the past few months. Just a few weeks before writing this comparison, Ryzen 7 7800X3D was selling out everywhere, and prior to that, it could be found for around $320. Now, at the time of writing, you’ll find it between $450 and $500, but I expect the price to drop very soon.

AMD has announced that the next-gen 3D V-Cache CPU will be available on November 7, so depending on when you’re reading this, be sure to check the price of the Ryzen 7 7800X3D. If the new CPU is out by then, I expect the price to drop to around $350 to $400.

Even with its higher price, Ryzen 7 7800X3D is much cheaper than the Core Ultra 9 285K – at least $139 cheaper, and nearly $239 cheaper if the price of Ryzen 7 7800X3D drops.

Productivity Performance

Here is some quick evidence that Core Ultra 9 285K and Ryzen 7 7800X3D are in entirely different weight classes. As you can see from the Cinebench R24 results above, the Core Ultra 9 285K is much faster than the Ryzen 7 7800X3D – it’s not even close. Intel claims that this CPU is particularly strong in Cinebench ray tracing workloads, but even if it loses 10% to 15% of the performance to the Core Ultra 9 285K, it will still be miles ahead of Ryzen 7 7800X3D.

For more multi-use benchmarks, take a look at Geekbench 6. The Core Ultra 9 285K still excels in multi-core performance, but the single-core delta is much smaller. Despite the significant improvement in multi-core performance, this gap is also smaller. During the test I conducted, one clear thing emerged – that the Core Ultra 9 285K is very fast in some applications, but this performance is not consistent across the board.

A prime example of this is Photoshop. You might assume that the Core Ultra 9 285K’s primary multi-core advantage would mean it obviously beats the Ryzen 7 7800X3D, but that’s not the case. In fact, Ryzen 7 7800X3D is faster in Photoshop based on the test I conducted. This is not good considering the price and specifications gap between the two CPUs. You would expect the Core Ultra 9 285K to wipe the floor with the Ryzen 7 7800X3D across all productivity applications.

In Premiere Pro, the Core Ultra 9 285K regains dominance, but it shouldn’t be too close. The Core Ultra 9 285K is not only a more powerful CPU, but it also leverages QuickSync in Premiere Pro, leading to a significant performance boost. The fact that these two CPUs are competitive in Premiere shows how the Core Ultra 9 285K’s performance can be disappointingly lackluster in some applications.

Gaming Performance

Gaming performance is where we see a more consistent difference. Ryzen 7 7800X3D crushes it. In the ten games I tested, Ryzen 7 7800X3D did not lose a single one. Sometimes it shows only a slight performance improvement, but in games like F1 2022 and Cyberpunk 2077, Ryzen 7 7800X3D delivers a transformative boost in gaming performance.

Not all games respond well to the additional cache memory found on the Ryzen 7 7800X3D. As seen in titles like Assassin’s Creed: Miraj and Legend of Black: Wukong, another factor limiting CPU performance is in most cases, your graphics card. However, other games can benefit greatly from the additional cache memory, as evidenced by Final Fantasy XIV: Endwalker and Red Dead Redemption 2.

As for the Core Ultra 9 285K, it can only hope to match the Ryzen 7 7800X3D, and in most games, it doesn’t come close. If you’re primarily focused on gaming, there’s no real competition here. Ryzen 7 7800X3D completely outperforms the Core Ultra 9 285K and is much cheaper.

Thermal and Efficiency

Another area where Ryzen 7 7800X3D leads is in efficiency. Not only does it have much lower power consumption, but it can also deliver higher gaming performance with less power consumption. You can see this practically in the graph above. Just looking at the peak power consumption during these games, Ryzen 7 7800X3D remains much more efficient under heavy workloads.

This is not to criticize Intel. As you can see from the Core i9-14900K, Intel has made huge efficiency improvements this generation and is often able to deliver similar performance with less than 100 Watts. However, it’s still more powerful than Ryzen 7 7800X3D, which rarely exceeds 50 Watts in games.

Temperature is a different story. On average, the Core Ultra 9 285K was slightly cooler than the Ryzen 7 7800X3D during gaming sessions. It’s not a big difference, but I tested using a 360mm multi-purpose liquid cooler. In a small form factor PC, these temperature differences can indeed add up, and the Core Ultra 9 285K is better equipped to handle a more thermally constrained environment.

It’s important to remember the design of the 3D V-Cache CPUs. The cache memory is stacked directly above the cores, serving as an insulating layer between the cores and the integrated heat spreader (IHS). This is why CPUs like Ryzen 7 7800X3D, and other 3D V-Cache CPUs, tend to run a little hotter and why they’re not open for overclocking.

Gaming King Reigns

There’s really no competition here if you’re a gaming enthusiast – Ryzen 7 7800X3D is the optimal choice. It’s significantly faster, cheaper, and despite its lag in productivity performance, the CPU still manages to engage in an impressively competitive battle across applications like Premiere Pro and Photoshop.

The natural counterpart to that is productivity performance. If that’s what matters to you, then the Core Ultra 9 285K is the optimal choice. However, the inconsistent performance I’ve seen with Intel’s latest CPU is worth considering. If you want good productivity performance and gaming on equal footing, I’d steer you towards Intel’s Core i9-14900K or AMD’s latest Ryzen 9 9950X instead, both available for around $450.