Intel Core Ultra 9 285K vs Intel Core Ultra 7 265F
94
out 100
VS
80
out 100
Compared 2 processors: Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, vs Intel Core Ultra 7 265F. 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 | 174.1 GOps/s | 137.6 GOps/s |
| Floating-Point Math | 227 GOps/s | 171.8 GOps/s |
| Prime Number Search | 549 M primes/s | 416 M primes/s |
| Random String Sort | 96.3 M strings/s | 60.4 M strings/s |
| Data Encryption | 58.6 GB/s | 38.3 GB/s |
| Data Compression | 799.2 MB/s | 488.8 MB/s |
| Physics | 4081 frames/s | 3063 frames/s |
| Extended Instructions | 626 M matrices/s | 376 M matrices/s |
| File Compression | 1560 MB/s | 1350 MB/s |
| Clang Compilation | 242.2 KLines/s | 189.3 KLines/s |
| HTML5 Browser | 479.5 pages/s | 439.7 pages/s |
| PDF Rendering | 622.1 MP/sec | 561.5 MP/sec |
| Text Processing | 371.2 pages/s | 334.5 pages/s |
| Background Blur | 95.4 frames/s | 84.8 frames/s |
| Photo Processing | 164.2 frames/s | 153.2 frames/s |
| Ray Tracing | 52.3 MP/sec | 41.4 MP/sec |
Blender
Performance/Watt
| Geekbench 6 Multi / W | 184.8 PPW | 306.5 PPW |
| PassMark CPU / W | 544.3 PPW | 742.4 PPW |
| Cinebench 2024 / W | 18.9 PPW | 23.1 PPW |
| Blender / W | 4.47 PPW | 5.04 PPW |
General Info
| Manufacturer | Intel | Intel |
| Announced | October, 11, 2024 | December, 18, 2024 |
| Type | PC use | PC use |
| Architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 |
| Codename | Arrow Lake | Arrow Lake |
| Model number | 285K | 265F |
| Integrated GPU | Arc iGPU (4-Cores) | No |
Processor
| Cores | 8 | 8 |
| Threads | 8 | 8 |
| Frequency | 3.7 GHz | 2.4 GHz |
| Max Frequency (Turbo) | 5.5 GHz | 5.3 GHz |
| Cores | 16 | 12 |
| Threads | 16 | 12 |
| Frequency | 3.2 GHz | 1.8 GHz |
| Max Frequency (Turbo) | 4.6 GHz | 4.6 GHz |
| Cores count | 24 | 20 |
| Threads count | 24 | 20 |
| Bus frequency | 100 MHz | 100 MHz |
| Multiplier | 37x | 24x |
| L1 cache | 112 KB/core | 192 KB/core |
| L2 cache | 3000 KB/core | 3000 KB/core |
| L3 Cache | 36 MB total | 30 MB total |
| Unlocked multiplier | Yes | No |
Package
| Process tech. | 3 nm | 3 nm |
| Power (TDP) | 125 W | 65 W |
| Max TDP (Boost) | 250 W | 182 W |
| Socket | FCLGA-1851 | FCLGA-1851 |
| Critical temp. | 105 °C | 105 °C |
Memory Support
| Memory Type | DDR5-6400 | DDR5-6400 |
| Max Size | 192 GB | 256 GB |
| Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC support | Yes | Yes |
Other
| PCIe Version | 5.0 | 5.0 |
| Max PCIe Lanes | 24 | 24 |
| Tech | n/a | - Compute: ABM, ADX, AVX-VNNI, BMI1, BMI2, CLMUL, DLBoost 3.0, F16C, SHA - Performance: CFET, EIST, TBMT 3.0, TBT 2.0, Thread Director - Virtualization: VT-d, VT-rp, VT-x - Security: MBEC, RDRAND, SIPP, TDT, TXT, XD bit, vPro |
Results
After analyzing the data, we consider Intel Core Ultra 9 285K the clear winner in this comparison.
Survey
Total Votes: 0
