Intel Core i9-14900KS vs. Intel Core Ultra 9 285K

[Bobby5109]

I am building a PC that I am going to use for serious programming, compiling large source codes, running a lightweight web server, and, most importantly, running a stock trading bot (requires extremely good single-thread performance). For my use case, I think the Intel Core i9-14900KS or the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K would be the right fit because of their extremely good single-thread performance and higher clock speeds. But I am concerned about the manufacturing defects, instability, and oxidation issues that Intel had lately with their early 13th/14th generation chips. I am not sure if it also impacted the 14900KS. Intel claims to have released the microcode fixes which is supposed to work like a silver bullet, but I don't trust Intel at this point. It is also worth mentioning that I don't use Windows and I am going to use it along with Arch Linux or any other GNU/Linux distribution.

Which processor should I choose and why? Also, feel free to recommend me any processor from the team red (AMD) too.

 

[BoggledBeagle]

Buy both current generation options from AMD and Intel and TEST THEM to see, which will work better for you.

 

[Bobby5109]

I wonder if someone already did that.

 

[Bobaganoosh]

I'm not sure where the pricing settled out, but if you're looking at 14900KS, I'd also look at 14900K and 13900K because the difference between all of them was minimal. I have seen a real difference in core voltage from the new micro-code and I think one of the biggest things it helped with was motherboard companies pushing way too much voltage earlier. I already had a lower voltage running to my 13900K (bought launch-day) and I have been lucky to not see any issues. As for 285K, it draws much less power than Raptor-lake, so there's a really good improvement in temperatures there and it does great in some applications, but worse in others, so you'd have to dig into reviews or testing with the specific work you do to find out what it's worth to you. Same goes for AMD in my mind.

 

[dirtyferret]

most importantly, running a stock trading bot (requires extremely good single-thread performance)

so this is cloud based software I assume? Unless you have specific CPU reviews to look at I would guess web browsing benchmarks would be the closest thing to see how the CPU would do.

 

[BoggledBeagle]

I wonder if someone already did that.

Did what? Run your specific software in your specific way on your specific Linux distribution on your motherboard with the same BIOS and drivers you would have? The answer is NO.

 

[A Computer Guy]

I am building a PC that I am going to use for serious programming, compiling large source codes, running a lightweight web server, and, most importantly, running a stock trading bot (requires extremely good single-thread performance). For my use case, I think the Intel Core i9-14900KS or the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K would be the right fit because of their extremely good single-thread performance and higher clock speeds. But I am concerned about the manufacturing defects, instability, and oxidation issues that Intel had lately with their early 13th/14th generation chips. I am not sure if it also impacted the 14900KS. Intel claims to have released the microcode fixes which is supposed to work like a silver bullet, but I don't trust Intel at this point. It is also worth mentioning that I don't use Windows and I am going to use it along with Arch Linux or any other GNU/Linux distribution.

Which processor should I choose and why? Also, feel free to recommend me any processor from the team red (AMD) too.

I hear Linux does really great with AMD 9950x/9950x3d

https://www.phoronix.com/review/amd-ryzen-9-9950x3d-linux/2

https://www.phoronix.com/review/amd-ryzen-9-9950x3d-linux/6

 

[Dr. Dro]

The oxidation issues were already fixed by the time the 13900KS entered production. These are only present in early batches of the 13900K processor. 14th gen parts are completely immune. Instability issues were fixed by the microcode updates. In short, just update BIOS and you're good to go.

That said, between these two, the 14900KS is the faster CPU, especially in latency sensitive applications such as trading bots. As for the red camp, I would suggest the 9950X (non 3D) for this application, as it has the most aggressive clock speeds of all Ryzen chips right now. Make sure to use low latency memory if you're going with the Ryzen.

 

[Bobby5109]

The oxidation issues were already fixed by the time the 13900KS entered production. These are only present in early batches of the 13900K processor. 14th gen parts are completely immune. Instability issues were fixed by the microcode updates. In short, just update BIOS and you're good to go.

That said, between these two, the 14900KS is the faster CPU, especially in latency sensitive applications such as trading bots. As for the red camp, I would suggest the 9950X (non 3D) for this application, as it has the most aggressive clock speeds of all Ryzen chips right now. Make sure to use low latency memory if you're going with the Ryzen.

I saw benchmarks by TechPowerUp and Tom's hardware where the 285K outperformed the 14900KS in both, single-threaded and multi-threaded performance tests. On the contrary, I also saw benchmarks on NanoReview.net where the latter outperformed the former in both single-threaded and multi-threaded performance tests. Speaking of the Ryzen 9 9950X, I am not sure if it outperforms the Intel counterparts in single-thread and multi-thread workloads.

Albeit, the 285K has lower Turbo Max clock speed, when juxtaposed to the 14900KS, it has IPC (Instructions Per Cycle) improved by ~16-20% when compared to the previous generation. So they should be roughly the same, right?

 

[QyInvoLing]

In my region, 265K is ￥2000 while 285k is still ￥4000+.
Is it the same at your region? If so, buy 265K.

 

[Dr. Dro]

I saw benchmarks by TechPowerUp and Tom's hardware where the 285K outperformed the 14900KS in both, single-threaded and multi-threaded performance tests. On the contrary, I also saw benchmarks on NanoReview.net where the latter outperformed the former in both single-threaded and multi-threaded performance tests. Speaking of the Ryzen 9 9950X, I am not sure if it outperforms the Intel counterparts in single-thread and multi-thread workloads.

Albeit, the 285K has lower Turbo Max clock speed, when juxtaposed to the 14900KS, it has IPC (Instructions Per Cycle) improved by ~16-20% when compared to the previous generation. So they should be roughly the same, right?

The 285K indeed has a newer microarchitecture, but it's often plagued by latency problems, that's why its results are really hit and miss. If it works for your application (I would be surprised if it did, considered day trading is very latency sensitive, if you get in half a second late you may be losing money) - then strictly in terms of raw IPC, not even Zen 5 will beat Lion Cove P-cores right now. The big problem to account for is if you'll get hit by the inter-core latency issues in any way. If not, the 285K is on a class all its own. These are very good reads at a technical level that may help you make a decision:

Examining Intel's Arrow Lake, at the System Level

Arrow Lake is the codename for Intel's newest generation of high performance desktop CPUs.

chipsandcheese.com

Lion Cove: Intel’s P-Core Roars

Intel’s mobile CPUs have undergone massive changes over the past couple generations as Intel defends its laptop market against AMD, Qualcomm, and to a lesser extent Apple.

chipsandcheese.com

Unfortunately since it's two different sockets, you can't really just buy both CPUs and keep the one that works better