Intel Core Ultra 9 285K

[wNotyarD]

Really man? The entire graph header has information.
Higher resolution graphs are the next few pages in the review.

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K Review

Finally! Intel's new Arrow Lake architecture is launched. The new CPUs are full of design changes, like removal of Hyper-Threading, new Lion Cove P-Cores, an improved Thread Director and more. In our review we got surprising results that were both impressive and disappointing.

www.techpowerup.com

Alright, now please read what I said once more:

I don't know if you tested the whole gaming suite (at all resolutions) under 24H2, @W1zzard, but if you did I think it would be interesting for the results to be consolidated in the Relative Performance and Average FPS graphs.

The consolidated Relative Performance and Average FPS as they are published now, for every resolution, do not have bars for the Core Ultra processors under 24H2. That's why I wondered if W1zz tested them CPU's under 24H2 in every scenario, and if positive, if possible for their averages to be included in the graphs.

 

[ShrimpBrime]

Alright, now please read what I said once more:


The consolidated Relative Performance and Average FPS as they are published now, for every resolution, do not have bars for the Core Ultra processors under 24H2. That's why I wondered if W1zz tested them CPU's under 24H2 in every scenario, and if positive, if possible for their averages to be included in the graphs.

Yeah, my bad, I just edited my last post. I better understand your question now. To answer that, I think because of the number of benchmarks, it would be difficult to do entire bench suites for one particular game let alone all of them. Just so many to cover and time is a thing. (My speculative guess anyhow)

I'm on 24H2 already, and when you see graphs that show this information, it looks really bad. 285K slower than i7 in gaming on 23H2 as it is. That 24H2 testing makes the cpu look horrible. I wouldn't even want to see more of that kind of punishment!

24H2 isn't pushed everywhere yet. It's still in work out problems and bugs phase. And so is the Intel Core Ultra CPUs unfortunately.

 

[Vya Domus]

Or in other words, ARL natively supports two USB4/TB4 ports, each running at the maximum 40Gbps, without having to sacrifice any PCIe lanes at all. It's basically free for board manufacturers to add these ports without eating into other board functionality.

It doesn't matter, most people have no need or use for 40Gbps USB4 either.

 

[N/A]

24H2 isn't pushed everywhere yet. It's still in work out problems and bugs phase. And so is the Intel Core Ultra CPUs unfortunately.

A simple Inf update should point to the OS, so that it starts distinguishing between P and E that are now snuck inbetween.
That said the CPU tile is broken beyond repair, core to core and memory latency are in the gutter. Memory controller in the SOC a bad idea. The whole thing.

 

[Assimilator]

It doesn't matter, most people have no need or use for 40Gbps USB4 either.

Bro really went on a technology forum to tell us we don't need new technology.

 

[gffermari]

X3D is L3 cache, which Intel does have.

Can't say I understand the logic, if there's a hardware feature that makes things go faster when the output is the same, that's entirely fair.

Was it unfair that the Intel Pentium 4 extreme edition was the first consumer CPU to include an L3 cache and thus invalidate it's results? No.

I wrote ''kinda'' unfair because it's acceptable for a 3D to underperform in productivity tasks. While we expect the ''normal'' 2xx and 9xxx series CPUs to perform well in any situation.
Obviously we can compare this CPU to any other but we have to take into account sometimes if any of the CPUs we compare, are targeted to specific needs.

For me, it's apparent that the new arch just does not work as it should but it will. I don't think the 285K will ever surpass the 14900K but the issues will be fixed and the performance recover in most of the benchmarks.

 

[Mr_Engineer]

The new Intel Ultra 200S series is a drastic change in both compute tile layout and the move to a new TSMC Process.

There will probably be some BIOS/Drivers/Windows updates that will yield better performance in the coming months. The same as was the case with Zen 5.

 

[mkppo]

5800X3D still good enough for gaming. NEXT!

That CPU will go along with the Athlon 64 and Sandy bridge as one of the greatest CPU's to have ever been made. It's like any pleb with a AM4 motherboard can buy one and enjoy top tier gaming performance 7 years after the platform's launch. Incredible

 

[Jonny5isalivetm5]

Might be interesting to test a Raptor at a locked power limit vs Ultra lake ?

 

[EatingDirt]

A statement that could only be made by someone ignorant of the fact that Thunderbolt 4 is implicitly USB4 compatible. Or in other words, ARL natively supports two USB4/TB4 ports, each running at the maximum 40Gbps, without having to sacrifice any PCIe lanes at all. It's basically free for board manufacturers to add these ports without eating into other board functionality.

In contrast, Zen 5 only gets USB4 (no TB4) with the bolt-on ASM4124, which offers one 40Gbps USB4 ports and one slower 20Gbps one. It also consumes four valuable PCIe 5.0 lanes from the CPU, on a platform that is already lane-staved. Not only does this force board manufacturers to pay for ASM4124, it also forces them to cut four lanes' worth of functionality, and manufacturers hate being forced to compromise.

I stand by my statement that ARL is massively superior to Zen 4 and 5 in terms of platform connectivity. If there are any Z890 boards with dual x16 slots (something literally not possible on Zen 4/5 because of its garbage IO) then I will almost certainly be upgrading to ARL, performance be damned. Hell, even an x16 + x8 combo might convince me (this is theoretically possible on Zen 4/5 but nobody does it because of the way lanes are emitted by the chipset, again, another shit design choice).

AMD needs to wake the fuck up and stop stiffing consumers on IO. I paid a thousand quid for this half-decade-old Threadripper system to get decent IO because AMD's "latest and greatest" won't provide it (not can't, won't, because it was a deliberate decision), and if Intel can give me that IO in a modern platform for less than what I paid for this old one, they will have my money.


Goal post moving, that's what.

Why do you need so many high-speed USB ports? What are you plugging into these ports? Like I said earlier, PCIE 5.0 has its uses for some people, and TB4 has its uses for some people. I personally use a grand total of 4-5 USB ports. 1. Mouse 2. Keyboard 3. USB DAC 4. Controller 5. Wheel/Pedal set. None of these saturate even a 2.0 port, even combined they might not even saturate one 2.0 port.

Just curious on why exactly you would sacrifice performance for having what is essentially a few more high-speed USB ports? Not saying you're wrong, just curious on your use case.

For you, maybe the LGA 1851 platform is superior to the AM5 platform, but for some, those extra PCIE 5.0 lanes may be more useful than TB4. So for you LGA1851 may be objectively better, but for someone else the extra PCIE 5.0 lanes may be objectively better.

 

[amit_talkin]

Alright, my setup will last for another generation

And here I replaced my Ryzen 3600 which I bought in 2019, to 5700x3d and hoping this will last more 3 years along with my 1080Ti
hehe.

 

[_roman_]

In contrast, Zen 5 only gets USB4 (no TB4) with the bolt-on ASM4124, which offers one 40Gbps USB4 ports and one slower 20Gbps one. It also consumes four valuable PCIe 5.0 lanes from the CPU, on a platform that is already lane-staved. Not only does this force board manufacturers to pay for ASM4124, it also forces them to cut four lanes' worth of functionality, and manufacturers hate being forced to compromise.

It depends on the mainboard

Personal ASUS Example to make it more clear:
My ASUS X670-P Prime Mainboard uses a Gen4 PCIE Slot for a 100€ add in card "USB4 PCIE GEN4 CARD (90MC0CE0-M0EAY0) " which provides than USB 4 with the "asmedia® USB4® ASM4242 Controller"

USB4 PCIe Gen4 Card - Online store｜Motherboards｜ASUS USA

ASUS USB4 PCIe Gen4 Card delivers PCIe® 4.0 x4, two USB4® ports and two DisplayPort™ 1.4 in ports. USB4® provides up to 40 Gbps and up to 60W of Power Delivery.

www.asus.com

As far as I know Ryzen 9000 processors do work on X670 Mainboards.

I do not know how long AMD intends to sell those X670/E or single chip B650/E Mainboards

Note: MSI has a similar solution with other add in card. Gigabyte I think also.

 

[damric]

Bro really went on a technology forum to tell us we don't need new technology.

To be fair, the only uses I have for USB are mice and keyboards, and the occasional BIOS update. For that it doesn't matter if it's USB 4 or USB 2.

I do agree with you about the PCIe Slots on AMD though. They regressed since AM3, though I think that has to do with them trying to kill off multiple graphics cards on desktops. For me I still bench old CFX and SLI configs and they are stuck running x8 x8 on newer platforms.

 

[Macro Device]

Would be fun to witness a Zen 2 situation there with the first LGA1851 gen being meh at best and the second being a real success. We'll see next year. Totally a skip this time.

 

[R0H1T]

Except for the socket you mean? I swear Intel changes them more often than I do my socks

 

[Macro Device]

I swear Intel changes them more often than I do my socks

My socks usually don't survive more than 5 months and Intel change sockets about once per 2 to 3 years. They will most definitely slot Ultra 300 series in the same LGA1851. If that will be on the new or just a fixed arch and provides much more performance then it's a win. If that's in line with Skylake to Kaby Lake then... Wake-up call is too long overdue.

 

[TumbleGeorge]

Why do you need so many high-speed USB ports? What are you plugging into these ports? Like I said earlier, PCIE 5.0 has its uses for some people, and TB4 has its uses for some people. I personally use a grand total of 4-5 USB ports. 1. Mouse 2. Keyboard 3. USB DAC 4. Controller 5. Wheel/Pedal set. None of these saturate even a 2.0 port, even combined they might not even saturate one 2.0 port.

I bet if I had 5 hands and a USB hub to plug into a USB 2.0 port I could test if you're right. But I don't have anything listed in stock except the five hands.

 

[R0H1T]

My socks usually don't survive more than 5 months and Intel change sockets about once per 2 to 3 years. They will most definitely slot Ultra 300 series in the same LGA1851. If that will be on the new or just a fixed arch and provides much more performance then it's a win. If that's in line with Skylake to Kaby Lake then... Wake-up call is too long overdue.

More like at least once every 2 years. Didn't they have what 3(?) sockets from Skylake to RKL & some of them updated/changed almost back to back in consecutive years just to go from 4-10 cores?

 

[Macro Device]

More like at least once very 2 years. Didn't they have what 3(?) sockets from Skylake to RKL & some of them updated/changed almost back to back in consecutive years?

2011 to 2012: LGA1155
2013 to 2014: LGA1150
2015 to 2017: LGA1151
Late 2017 to 2019: LGA1151, 2.0 (technically compatible but Intel made it tricky to run 8th and 9th gen CPUs on old LGA1151 motherboards)
2020 to 2021: LGA1200
Late 2021 to 2024: LGA1700
Late 2024 onwards: LGA1851

 

[Darmok N Jalad]

My socks usually don't survive more than 5 months and Intel change sockets about once per 2 to 3 years. They will most definitely slot Ultra 300 series in the same LGA1851. If that will be on the new or just a fixed arch and provides much more performance then it's a win. If that's in line with Skylake to Kaby Lake then... Wake-up call is too long overdue.

It’s actually not a guarantee that 300 series will use the same socket. Meteor Lake-S never made it to production, and it was believed to use this socket too. That means Arrow Lake-S is the second generation of CPUs targeting the socket. Based on history, it’s 2 gens per socket, making the platform an even bigger gamble. The only thing that might give the socket new life is an Arrow Lake refresh, but I bet there’s already a new socket in the works for 300 series.

 

[wNotyarD]

My socks usually don't survive more than 5 months and Intel change sockets about once per 2 to 3 years. They will most definitely slot Ultra 300 series in the same LGA1851. If that will be on the new or just a fixed arch and provides much more performance then it's a win. If that's in line with Skylake to Kaby Lake then... Wake-up call is too long overdue.

Not so sure about that. There's already rumours that Arrow Lake Refresh is canned and nothing else will come for LGA1851 (and that's after there was no Ultra 100 series for desktop LGAs). Everything points for Nova Lake to be in a new socket.

 

[Macro Device]

Ah, forgot about that nonsense. Now LGA1851 only feels acceptable if you're worried about HT vulnerabilities. Last gen both from Intel and AMD is much better bang per buck in 95+ % cases.

 

[igormp]

If there are any Z890 boards with dual x16 slots (something literally not possible on Zen 4/5 because of its garbage IO) then I will almost certainly be upgrading to ARL, performance be damned. Hell, even an x16 + x8 combo might convince me (this is theoretically possible on Zen 4/5 but nobody does it because of the way lanes are emitted by the chipset, again, another shit design choice).

But 2x x16 at full throttle is not possible on Z890 either.
The CPU only has 20 PCIe 5.0 lanes and 4 PCIe 4.0 lanes, total of 24. You could either run an AIC at x16 and two other at x4.
The chipset does have an impressive 24 PCIe 4.0 lanes, but that's coming from an x8 4.0 uplink, so you'll be bottlenecked by that anyway.

You could in theory do x16 out of the CPU + x8 saturating the chipset, but no manufacturer so far has done that. Max you'll see is x8/x8 5.0 on the CPU + x4 4.0 through the chipset, with a ton of NVMe slots available. AMD has a similar offering, but with way fewer NVMe slots.

For scientific and workstation tasks Intel is still doing good compared to AMD in this consumer segment

As long as you don't need AVX-512.

 

[R0H1T]

2015 to 2017: LGA1151
Late 2017 to 2019: LGA1151, 2.0 (technically compatible but Intel made it tricky to run 8th and 9th gen CPUs on old LGA1151 motherboards)

Ok so not socket but chipset limitation, the xx1x mobos couldn't work with Coffee Lake nor would xx2x based ones.

They pulled something similar(?) from z370-390 as well.

 

[evernessince]

I wrote ''kinda'' unfair because it's acceptable for a 3D to underperform in productivity tasks. While we expect the ''normal'' 2xx and 9xxx series CPUs to perform well in any situation.
Obviously we can compare this CPU to any other but we have to take into account sometimes if any of the CPUs we compare, are targeted to specific needs.

For me, it's apparent that the new arch just does not work as it should but it will. I don't think the 285K will ever surpass the 14900K but the issues will be fixed and the performance recover in most of the benchmarks.

I'm not sure it'll recover it some aspects. The new architecture has the same memory latency issue that Zen 1 had. Wendel from Level1Techs showed it getting 80 - 100 ms of memory latency during testing.