The new Core Ultra 9 285K from Intel may struggle to outperform its predecessor

Intel Arrow Lake processors are here, with the Core Ultra 9 285K standing at the top of the lineup as the best current central processing unit from Intel. However, the chip faces a lot of competition not only from AMD but also from the latest generation update of Raptor Lake from Intel. Even Intel itself cannot deny in terms of performance that the Core Ultra 9 285K and Core i9-14900K are not too far apart.

Although performance improvements may be slight (or even non-existent) at times, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K brings some interesting changes. Here is a summary of how the Core Ultra 9 285K and Core i9-14900K stack up against each other.

Pricing and Availability

Core Ultra 9 285K and Core i9-14900K are separated by about a year.

The Core i9-14900K, part of the Raptor Lake Refresh lineup and the 14th generation processor, was officially released on October 17, 2023. At the same time, the Core Ultra 9 285K was announced alongside the rest of the Arrow Lake-S lineup in October. 10th, 2024, and will be available in markets on October 24.

Both processors were launched at the same recommended price list (MSRP) of $590. However, after a year, you will find that the Core i9-14900K has undergone many price reductions and is now much cheaper. You can get it for less than that. When the Core Ultra 9 285K is made available for sale, we expect it to be around the MSRP for a while, but it may help to lower the price of the Core i9-14900K even further.

Specifications

When looking at the specifications, it seems that these two processors are almost the same – and if one were to choose a winner, Core i9-14900K might seem like the better deal. It has more threads, but that is because Intel has finally killed Hyper-Threading. It also boasts a higher clock speed.

The Core Ultra 9 285K retains the same basic configuration as its predecessor, with eight P cores and 16 E cores. The lack of threads is a big issue, as after over a decade, Intel no longer uses multi-threading in desktop central processing units. This sets this generation apart not only from Intel’s previous products but also from AMD, which uses SMT in its latest Zen 5 processors. In fact, the flagship Ryzen 9 9950X processor has only 16 cores, but it also comes with 32 threads.

The decrease in maximum turbo clock speed is not surprising, as it seems that Intel is aiming for efficiency with this generation rather than striving for massive performance gains. On the other hand, the base P core clock speeds are much higher in the Core Ultra 9 285K compared to the Core i9-14900K. The latest CPU operates at 3.7 GHz, while the older chip runs at 3.2 GHz. The same can be said for the E cores: the Core Ultra 9 285K offers a base frequency of 3.2 GHz and a maximum clock speed of 4.6 GHz, while its predecessor clocks in at 2.4 GHz and 4.4 GHz, respectively.

Although Intel has talked a lot about the efficiency of Arrow Lake-S – which we will discuss below – the central processing unit practically maintains the same TDP as the previous generation unit.

Another key change in the specifications is that Intel is moving away from the LGA1700 socket and transitioning to LGA1851. This means new motherboards, but also a significant difference in memory support, as the Core Ultra 9 285K abandons DDR4 memory and only supports up to 192 GB of DDR5-6400 memory. Meanwhile, the Raptor Lake chip can run both DDR4 or DDR5.

Finally, the Arrow Lake processor boasts some bragging rights as it features the first Neural Processing Unit (NPU) present in a desktop central processing unit. The NPU in the Core Ultra 9 285K is designed for AI workloads, operating at just 13 TOPS. This is much less than what the Lunar Lake CPUs had to do to qualify for the Copilot+ program. However, on a desktop computer, AI workloads are typically handled by the graphics processing unit, making the NPU a great feature but not a game-changer somehow.

Efficiency

The major selling point for the Core Ultra 9 285K, along with the rest of the Core Ultra 200-S lineup, lies in its efficiency. While we have not tested it ourselves yet, Intel has spoken extensively about the coolness and efficiency of the new CPUs and has provided some benchmarks to prove it. The company’s main claim is that Arrow Lake-S, with the Core Ultra 9 285K leading the charge, can deliver the same performance at half the power draw. Let’s take a closer look.

Firstly, Intel talks about how the Core Ultra 9 285K competes with the Core i9-14900K in productivity tests, including Procyon Office Productivity and the single-core Cinebench 2024 test. Based on these benchmarks, Intel claims reductions in package power ranging from 42% to 58%.

Intel also claims that it delivers the same performance not only as the Core i9-14900K but also as the Ryzen 9 9950X while consuming only half the power -125W instead of 250W in the Cinebench multi-core test.

Lastly, Intel points to improved performance per watt in gaming scenarios by comparing system power draw. This not only refers to the CPU but also to everything else, like the Z780 motherboard used to test the Core i9-14900K and the Intel 800 series board paired with the Core Ultra 9 285K.

In many titles, the Core Ultra 9 285K managed to deliver almost the same frame rates as the Core i9-14900K. This includes games like Metro Exodus and The Black Myth: Wu Kong. In Total War: Pharaoh, the Arrow Lake CPU maintained the same frames per second (fps) while reducing system power by 58W. The biggest gains can be seen in Wangan Midnight: Spec II, where the Core Ultra 9 285K pulls ahead by 4% with a massive 165W system power reduction.

In addition to the system power reduction, Intel also claims that the new CPU runs up to 15 degrees Celsius cooler than the Core i9-14900K.

These numbers are promising for the Arrow Lake chip, but it is important not to take them at face value. We will need to test it ourselves and see how well the new chip can keep up with its predecessor at a lower power draw.

Performance

Aside from efficiency, Intel has also provided a large number of benchmarks in gaming and productivity scenarios. The results are somewhat mixed, and unfortunately, Intel chose its competitor Ryzen 9 9950X for comparison in most of these tests. However, we have compared the Ryzen 9 9950X with the Core i9-14900K in our in-depth benchmarks, so that should give you a good idea of how the two CPUs stack up. As a reference, we found that the 9950X is approximately 10% faster in productivity but lags behind in the gaming benchmarks we conducted.

As for the Core Ultra 9 285K, Intel claims improvements up to 28% in Total War: Pharaoh – but the harsh truth is that most titles are quite even – this game being the only major victory for Intel. The CPU falls behind AMD in Cyberpunk 2077 and Red Dead Redemption 2, even with Intel APO enabled, so that might tip the scales in Intel’s favor as well.

Intel also pits the Core Ultra 9 285K against the latest generation Ryzen 9 7950X3D. It is challenging to beat AMD’s 3D V-Cache, and that’s why we see a significant 21% drop in Cyberpunk 2077 – but this drop largely remains even if Intel were to compare the Core i9-14900K to the 7950X3D. Intel also claims a single win against the 7950X3D in Civilization VI with a record 15% extra frame per second.

Given that Ryzen 9 9950X is generally slower in games than the Core i9-14900K, we expect the Core Ultra 9 285K and its predecessor will eventually end up on equal footing. We will have to test it carefully once the CPU is available for testing.

The content creation tells a different story. Intel’s Arrow Lake CPU outperforms the Ryzen 9 7950X3D in some tests, with a 21% victory in Cinebench. However, if this is a comparison with the 9950X, the outcome is likely to be very different.

And going back to the Core i9-14900K, Intel touts gains of up to 15% in multi-threaded performance compared to the Raptor Lake Refresh chip. Intel also compares the Core Ultra 9 285K with the 9950X again here, with a win of up to 19% in 3DMark and 18% in Cinebench multi-core test.

Additionally, Intel showcased some optimized display times – an important aspect for content creators. Unfortunately, as these comparisons were done again with the Ryzen 9 9950X, it’s hard to imagine how the CPU will compete with the Core i9-14900K here. Intel had huge wins and minimal losses, but again, we will need to draw our conclusions once we test the chip.

Tough Sell

The leading Arrow Lake-S lineup from Intel is both lucky and unfortunate. It is lucky because it arrived amidst very average competition, as AMD’s Zen 5 CPUs also did not offer much of an improvement in generations compared to their predecessors. However, it is unfortunate because it certainly does not represent the significant improvement that people were hoping for.

Instead of striving for higher performance, Intel chose to target efficiency. While this is a good approach, with an enthusiast central processing unit, efficiency may not play as big of a role as with a lower-end chip. Most people do not buy a $600 processor to save on electricity bills or to buy a budget cooler; they want performance gains, which the Core Ultra 9 285K may not offer a lot of.

However, the main reason for the difficulty in selling the Core Ultra 9 285K is that the Core i9-14900K is now significantly cheaper than it was when first released. Although both chips have the same MSRP, the Core i9-14900K is $150 cheaper.

If our criteria are in line with what Intel has shown us so far, it is unlikely that the Core Ultra 9 285K is worth a $150 premium. Once we test it ourselves, we will be able to tell you more about its performance.