In the video, the presenter compares the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K with the Intel Core i9 14900K across 45 games, following a previous comparison with AMD’s Ryzen 7 9800X 3D. The earlier review showed that the Ryzen 7 outperformed the 285K by 24% on average, raising concerns about Intel’s competitiveness in the gaming market. The video’s sponsor, Thermaltake Grizzly, promotes their Crow Sheet Graphene thermal pads as a superior alternative to traditional thermal pastes, emphasizing their high thermal conductivity and durability.
The presenter expresses skepticism about the value of the Core Ultra 9 285K for gaming, especially given its price of around $630. They aim to see how the 285K stacks up against the i9 14900K, which had already shown a 6% performance advantage in earlier tests. The testing methodology involves using a GeForce RTX 490 GPU at 1080p resolution to evaluate gaming performance across a wide range of titles, ensuring a comprehensive analysis of both CPUs.
Throughout the benchmarks, the 285K shows mixed results, with a notable outlier performance in “The Last of Us Part One,” where it outperformed the i9 14900K by 177%. However, in several other games, the 285K performs worse, including significant regressions in titles like “Cyberpunk” and “Hogwarts Legacy.” The 285K also struggles in competitive gaming scenarios, with the i9 14900K consistently outperforming it in most cases, including a substantial 20% lead in some games.
Overall, the 285K averages about 5% slower than the i9 14900K across the 45 games tested, with the i9 showing better performance in nine titles and a double-digit advantage in three. While the 285K’s power efficiency is highlighted as a positive aspect, the performance regression compared to its predecessors raises concerns for consumers. The presenter notes that the AMD Ryzen 7 9800X 3D remains a superior choice for gaming, outperforming the 285K by 24%.
The video concludes with a call for Intel to improve the gaming performance of the Arrow Lake CPUs, especially as a fix is expected to be released soon. The presenter suggests that the 285K is not a compelling option at its current price point and emphasizes the need for Intel to address compatibility issues, enhance performance, and potentially lower the price to become more competitive in the market. The discussion also touches on the pricing of memory options for the new CPUs, recommending more affordable alternatives to the expensive CU DIM memory used in testing.
