Intel Core Ultra 9 285K

[vato3001]

285k or 9950x hmmm

 

[tfp]

And who would be making their wafers? god

Samsung or GloFlo, and they'd get 1 to 4 working chips per wafer

 

[b1k3rdude]

Really? How about this very review. It's faster than the 7950x and 2% slower than the 9950x. In tom's hardware review there is 0.9 fps difference between the 2 - the 9950x is 0.007% (not a typo, zero zero zero seven) faster. The biggest difference is in hardwareunboxed where the difference climbs to an astronomical 2.45%!

In none of these reviews it's on the bottom of the charts. So, what are you actually talking about man?

I think the point is you have to look at all reviews, not just a single review, So that you get an over-arching picture of the perf of the CPU. This is what I meant by "all the reviews", as in I had looked at roughly a dozen etc.

• Good memory support, well over DDR5-8000 - faster ram dosent make this CPU any better, so this is irellevent.

So since posting this, some reviews have come out showing that use of CU-DIMMS does help 'in SOME' instances.

 

[trparky]

So since posting this, some reviews have come out showing that use of CU-DIMMS does help 'in SOME' instances.

Cool. However, the cost of CUDIMMs aren't... so cool. They be expensive.

 

[b1k3rdude]

In none of these reviews it's on the bottom of the charts. So, what are you actually talking about man?
I refer you to - https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/threads/intel-core-ultra-9-285k.327799/post-5373912

Cool. However, the cost of CUDIMMs aren't... so cool. They be expensive.

yeah but like all tech is will come down in price. Bu tlike most things intel its kinda pointless as its only supported by thier platform atm.

 

[trparky]

But like most things intel its kinda pointless as its only supported by their platform atm.

I think Zen 5 will support CUDIMMs with a future AGESA update.

 

[b1k3rdude]

I think Zen 5 will support CUDIMMs with a future AGESA update.

Maybe, but and someone will correct me if Im wrong, dosent the on-chip memory controller and the motherboard need to have support for the standard?

 

[trparky]

Maybe, but and someone will correct me if Im wrong, dosent the on-chip memory controller and the motherboard need to have support for the standard?

Yes, rumors are that it will be only on the 800-series boards; not 600.

 

[b1k3rdude]

Yes, rumors are that it will be only on the 800-series boards; not 600.

Well as my AM4 to AM5 upgrade will be to 870 down the line, its nice to know I can upgrade to faster ram down the line.

 

[lexluthermiester]

Yes, rumors are that it will be only on the 800-series boards; not 600.

Those are just rumors.

 

[Vicious2500]

As a guy sitting on an Intel I7 5930k from the Haswell era. I am conflicted on upgrading to Intel 12 Gen,15th Gen or wait For 16th Gen. I use my desktop for productivity and gaming.

Is there anywhere I can read up on CUDIMM vs UDIMM?

 

[lexluthermiester]

I use my desktop for productivity and gaming.

Is there anywhere I can read up on CUDIMM vs UDIMM?

If I may be so bold, the best bang for buck option right now is the 12700k. It's an exceptional CPU for a price that is most agreeable. But if you're looking for a higher end option, this very 285K is, IMPO, a good choice. You have to balance the gaming benchmark results with everything else. Set the gaming stuff aside and it is an excellent choice. And let's face reality, it's going to be a great gaming CPU too.

 

[_roman_]

As a guy sitting on an Intel I7 5930k from the Haswell era. I am conflicted on upgrading to Intel 12 Gen,15th Gen or wait For 16th Gen. I use my desktop for productivity and gaming.

16th gen does already exists. It has some gibbersh 200 numbers. (Intel Core Ultra 9 285K)

 

[lexluthermiester]

16th gen does already exists. It has some gibbersh 200 numbers. (Intel Core Ultra 9 285K)

No, that's 15th gen. Counting context is important..

 

[Carillon]

No, that's 15th gen. Counting context is important..

285k is second gen according to intel. The gen counting was started with "core i", the "core ultra" and "core 2" are not part of "core i" and should not count.

 

[wNotyarD]

285k is second gen according to intel. The gen counting was started with "core i", the "core ultra" and "core 2" are not part of "core i" and should not count.

Technically Core Ultra 1st gen is Meteor Lake, but that was mobile only and lived concurrently with Raptor Refresh, so both are 14th gen.

 

[lexluthermiester]

285k is second gen according to intel. The gen counting was started with "core i", the "core ultra" and "core 2" are not part of "core i" and should not count.

Total nonsense. The current gen follows the last gen, which was 14th. Basic math is all that is needed to reach a sensible conclusion..

 

[Vicious2500]

If I may be some bold, the best bang for buck option right now is the 12700k. It's an exceptional CPU for a price that is most agreeable. But if you're looking for a higher end option, this very 285K is, IMPO, a good choice. You have to balance the gaming benchmark results with everything else. Set the gaming stuff aside and it is an excellent choice. And let's face reality, it's going to be a great gaming CPU too.

Thanks, the 285k seems on the mark to me. Getting my upgrade list together, probably willn't upgrade for 6 months to a year.

 

[:D:D]

yeah but like all tech is will come down in price.

Like nvidia tech?

 

[ShiBDiB]

"Requires new motherboard with Socket LGA1851"

Intel has to have at least one person going "maybe we should stop switching sockets and pricing out a lot of our userbase from upgrading both the CPU and MOBO".

AMD sticking with AM4 for 8 years definitely helped their consumer sales.

 

[vato3001]

Meteor Lake is also 1851 but not for us People Outside so the 285K is the 2. Gen for 1851 LGA.
Source:

No Answer from Intel for another Release for LGA 1851 :/

 

[trparky]

Intel has to have at least one person going "maybe we should stop switching sockets and pricing out a lot of our userbase from upgrading both the CPU and MOBO".

 

[ShiBDiB]

Right? They make these constant changes to still be chasing AMD in performance lol. I don't know if the government will let Intel fail, but they've lost their "too big to fail" status and it'll be interesting to see what happens to them the next 10 years. Their YOY Quarterly growth has been bad since 2019.

 

[b1k3rdude]

Like nvidia tech?

Welp I am hoping that at some point nVidia will get prosecuted for being monopolistic and abusing its position.

 

[AnotherReader]

Chips and Cheese analyzed the 285K's cache and memory subsystem. There were several surprising findings, e.g. the relatively high latency for P core to P core transfers.

Lion Cove P-Cores however don’t do so well. Worst case latency between P-Cores can approach cross-CCD latency on AMD’s chiplet designs
...
Within Intel’s lineup, a single P-Core’s L3 bandwidth hasn’t improved over what Skylake achieved nine years ago. A Skylake core on the Core i5-6600K could read from L3 at 59.5 GB/s.

On the plus side, aggregate L3 bandwidth is fairly high and DRAM bandwidth is higher than AMD though latency is poorer.