Intel Core Ultra 9 285 vs AMD Ryzen 5 8400F
86
out 100
VS
56
out 100
Compared 2 processors: Intel Core Ultra 9 285, vs AMD Ryzen 5 8400F. Below are specs, tests, pros and cons for each device
Review
Single-Thread Perf.
Single-Core Benchmark Score
Multi-Thread Perf.
Multi-Core Benchmark Score
Energy Efficiency
Chip Power Efficiency
Integrated Graphics
iGPU Performance in Games & 3D
Tests & specs
Specs & test comparisonBenchmarks
| Integer Math | n/a | 74.3 GOps/s |
| Floating-Point Math | n/a | 46.1 GOps/s |
| Prime Number Search | n/a | 91 M primes/s |
| Random String Sort | n/a | 34.6 M strings/s |
| Data Encryption | n/a | 16.7 GB/s |
| Data Compression | n/a | 288.5 MB/s |
| Physics | n/a | 1374 frames/s |
| Extended Instructions | n/a | 222 M matrices/s |
| File Compression | 1500 MB/s | 1320 MB/s |
| Clang Compilation | 234.5 KLines/s | 84.7 KLines/s |
| HTML5 Browser | 453.4 pages/s | 256.7 pages/s |
| PDF Rendering | 585.9 MP/sec | 282 MP/sec |
| Text Processing | 358.6 pages/s | 271.8 pages/s |
| Background Blur | 87 frames/s | 60.5 frames/s |
| Photo Processing | 147.8 frames/s | 97.2 frames/s |
| Ray Tracing | 47.9 MP/sec | 18.3 MP/sec |
Blender
Performance/Watt
| Geekbench 6 Multi / W | 332.9 PPW | 185.5 PPW |
| PassMark CPU / W | n/a | 376.6 PPW |
| Cinebench 2024 / W | 30.4 PPW | 12.1 PPW |
| Blender / W | n/a | 2.83 PPW |
General Info
| Manufacturer | Intel | AMD |
| Announced | December, 18, 2024 | May, 14, 2024 |
| Type | PC use | PC use |
| Architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 |
| Codename | Arrow Lake | Zen 4 (Phoenix) |
| Model number | 285 | n/a |
| Integrated GPU | Arc Graphics | No |
Processor
| Cores | 8 | 6 |
| Threads | 8 | 12 |
| Frequency | 2.5 GHz | 4.2 GHz |
| Max Frequency (Turbo) | 5.6 GHz | 4.7 GHz |
| Cores | 16 | n/a |
| Threads | 16 | n/a |
| Frequency | 1.9 GHz | n/a |
| Max Frequency (Turbo) | 4.6 GHz | n/a |
| Cores count | 24 | 6 |
| Threads count | 24 | 12 |
| Bus frequency | 100 MHz | 100 MHz |
| Multiplier | 25x | 42x |
| L1 cache | 192 KB/core | 64 KB/core |
| L2 cache | 3000 KB/core | 1000 KB/core |
| L3 Cache | 36 MB total | 16 MB total |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | Yes |
Package
| Transistor count | n/a | 25 billion |
| Process tech. | 3 nm | 4 nm |
| Power (TDP) | 65 W | 45-65 W |
| Max TDP (Boost) | 182 W | n/a |
| Socket | FCLGA-1851 | AM5 |
| Critical temp. | 105 °C | 95 °C |
Memory Support
| Memory Type | DDR5-6400 | DDR5-5200 |
| Max Size | 256 GB | 256 GB |
| Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC support | Yes | No |
Other
| PCIe Version | 5.0 | 4.0 |
| Max PCIe Lanes | 24 | 20 |
| Tech | - Compute: ABM, ADX, AVX-VNNI, BMI1, BMI2, CLMUL, DLBoost 3.0, F16C, SHA - Performance: CFET, EIST, TBMT 3.0, TBT 2.0, TVB, Thread Director - Virtualization: VT-d, VT-rp, VT-x - Security: MBEC, RDRAND, SIPP, TDT, TXT, XD bit, vPro |
n/a |
Results
After analyzing the data, we consider Intel Core Ultra 9 285 the clear winner in this comparison.
Survey
Total Votes: 0
