I Tested Core Ultra 9 285K vs Ryzen 7 7800X3D – The Results Are Not Pretty

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 widely considered 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 plenty of interesting comparisons we can delve into between them.

Specifications

The Core Ultra 9 285K and Ryzen 7 7800X3D are drastically different CPUs, a fact that becomes clear when comparing their specifications directly. While it’s generally not a good idea to compare specs between two CPUs in the same category, the gap in specs here is so large that we can offer some interesting observations. The main difference between these CPUs is the number of cores.

Ryzen 7 7800X3D is a clear winner in this regard. It comes with eight Zen 4 cores and a total of 16 threads, able to boost up to 5 GHz. This is not what makes the CPU interesting. It’s the 104 MB cache packed on top of the CPU die, split between 8 MB of L2 cache and 96 MB of L3 cache thanks to AMD’s 3D V-Cache packaging technology.

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

With more cores and higher clock speeds, it’s no surprise 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 typically offering much better performance.

Pricing

Both the Core Ultra 9 285K and Ryzen 7 7800X3D force you to consider pricing, as depending on the purpose you use your PC for, you can save a significant amount of money. The Core Ultra 9 285K is the latest, the flagship chip from Intel’s latest lineup, so you’ll spend 589 USD if you want to get it now. The price will drop over time – the Core i9-14900K is around 450 USD annually after launch – but until we see the next generation from Intel, you can expect to spend over 500 USD.

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

AMD has confirmed that the next-gen 3D V-Cache CPU will arrive 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 comes out by then, I expect the price to drop to around 350 USD to 400 USD.

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

Productivity Performance

Here’s some quick evidence that the 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 – not even close. Intel claims that this CPU is particularly strong in Cinebench ray tracing workload, but even if the Core Ultra 9 285K loses 10% or 15% of its performance, it will still be miles ahead of the Ryzen 7 7800X3D.

For more multi-use benchmarks, take a look at Geekbench 6. While the Core Ultra 9 285K still excels in multi-core performance, 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 thing became clear — the Core Ultra 9 285K is extremely fast in some applications, but this performance doesn’t translate everywhere.

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

In Premiere Pro, the Core Ultra 9 285K regains a dominant position, but it shouldn’t be too close. The Core Ultra 9 285K is not just a more powerful CPU, but it also has access to QuickSync in Premiere Pro, significantly speeding up performance. The fact that these two CPUs compete in Premiere illustrates how the Core Ultra 9 285K’s performance can be underwhelming 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, the Ryzen 7 7800X3D did not lose any of them. Sometimes there’s just a slight performance improvement, but in games like F1 2022 and Cyberpunk 2077, the Ryzen 7 7800X3D provides a transformative boost in gaming performance.

Not all games respond well to the extra cache memory on the Ryzen 7 7800X3D. As seen from titles like Assassin’s Creed Valhalla and Dark Souls: Wukong, another factor limits the CPU’s performance – in most cases, it’s your graphics card. However, other games can benefit greatly from the additional cache memory, as demonstrated by Final Fantasy XIV Endwalker and Red Dead Redemption 2.

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

Thermal and Efficiency

Another area where Ryzen 7 7800X3D shines is efficiency. It not only has much lower power requirements, but it can also deliver higher gaming performance with lower energy consumption. You can see that practically in the above graph. Just looking at peak power consumption during these games, Ryzen 7 7800X3D remains much more efficient under heavy workloads.

This is not to criticize Intel. As seen from the Core i9-14900K, Intel has made huge efficiency improvements this generation, often being able to deliver similar performance with less than 100 watts. However, it’s still more powerful than the 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 huge difference, but I tested using a 360mm multi-purpose liquid cooler. In a smaller form factor PC, these temperature differences can already add up, and the Core Ultra 9 285K is better set up to handle a more thermally restrictive environment.

It’s important to remember the design of the 3D V-Cache CPUs. The cache memory is stacked directly above the cores, acting as an insulating layer between the cores and the Integrated Heat Spreader (IHS). This is why CPUs like the Ryzen 7 7800X3D, and other 3D V-Cache CPUs, tend to run a little warmer and why they are not opened up for overclocking.

Gaming King Reigns Supreme

There’s no real competition here if you’re a gaming enthusiast, as the Ryzen 7 7800X3D is the optimal choice. It’s much faster, cheaper, and despite lagging in productivity performance, the CPU still puts up an impressively fierce battle in 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 best solution. 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 the Intel Core i9-14900K or the latest Ryzen 9 9950X from AMD instead, which is available for about 450 USD.