AMD isn’t letting up when it comes to its processors, and it looks like the Ryzen 9 9900X3D may have just handed Intel’s top processor another blow. As it’s anticipated release looks to offer plenty more power as the X3D demand even surprised AMD.

We reviewed the Intel Core Ultra 285K, and, like many, we were reasonably impressed, but it didn’t do as much as we’d hoped it would. While we wait to put the Ryzen 9 9900X3D through its paces in our testing lab, we thought we’d see how the two processors compare using the information we have to hand from CES 2025. Of course, we’ll be back to update this article with more details once we make AMD’s offering run the gauntlet!

Now, as we come closer to the expected release of the CPU, we have been seeing leaks pop up about what it has to offer. One of which is the pricing, and the other gives us an insight into the potential performance. Until we get the full reviews, here’s a breakdown of how the two CPUs stack up against each other so far.

Specs comparison

We start off by looking at the base specs of the two and how they differ on the fundamental level. Gives you a good idea of what makes one of them better off over the other and what each of these means for the best CPUs around.

Design

Being from two different companies, there are plenty of differences between the Intel and AMD CPUs. Starting with the sockets, although AMD has moved over to LGA with the pins on the motherboard instead, they won’t be compatible. AMD’s AM5 features 1718, compared to Intel’s Arrow Lake-S compatible socket featuring 1851.

They are also based on different processes and so with varying sizes in transistors onboard the chip. Between the two, Intel has gotten the smaller and improved TSMC process as it uses the 3nm sizing in its Arrow Lake-S compared to the 4nm one found in AMD’s Zen 5.

Cores and threads

The two processors also vary drastically in their setup of provided cores and threads inside. Not only that, but Intel also has a variation in its breakdown of cores. It doubles up the 9900X3D in the number of cores up to 24 but splits that between eight performance and 16 efficient cores for varying workloads and improving its chip layout. WHiole also provides the same number of threads (24) as it cuts out hyperthreading in its processors.

AMD, on the other hand, sticks to a 12-core and 24-thread setup on its 9900X3D. Something a bit more usual and with strong multi-threading capabilities. Since both have many cores anyway, they target workload processes like rendering and simulations, which are more useful to creators than gamers.

Clock rates

When it comes to the clock rates of the processors and how fast they can get through the workloads, it’s a bit neck and neck between the two. At least in the factory settings and without overclocking, as that can increase things even more and provide performance improvements.

However, AMD’s 9900X3D has a base clock of 4.4GHz and can boost up to 5.5GHz. The 285K is similar in frequencies, although its spec sheet has many more listed. It can turbo up to 5.7GHz, but the performance core can max out to 5.5GHz, while the efficiency ones top out at 4.6GHz.

Cache

Used as a buffer for data and keeping it close to the processing cores. The cache allows for some fast processing, and AMD has quite an advantage with its stacked 3D design. That boosts its available cache to 140MB, whilst Intel is limited to 36MB. This means it can find itself slowed down when processing data in comparison.

That can be quite a big factor, especially when it comes to gaming. As we saw in our 9800X3D review, it can be at the top of gaming benchmarks without being the most expensive CPU out there. So it’s quite a big boost available to the AMD CPU.

Power

In terms of the power requirements and the size of the power supply you need for them, On paper, both have a similar TDP as AMD specs 120W compared to Intel’s 125W, but at least Intel tells you the limits it can reach as it also has a max of 250W. Meanwhile, for AMD, that might come down to the PBO and what your motherboard will supply the processor with. This would suggest the 9900X3D is better for power efficiency, but it will come down to how well it does with that power in testing.

Price difference expectation

AMD is holding out on the price of the 9900X3D close to its release, so we’re not 100% sure how much it will cost. But looking back at the trend and its previous release of the 7900X3D, we can make a good guess. That was released at $599, so seeing the 9000 series chip go above $600 wouldn’t be surprising. That looks even more likely, thanks to the Newegg leak that suggests the retailer will be listing it for the same as its predecessor.

On the other hand, the 285K is set at $589, which will likely be under the 9900X3D and makes it a tempting alternative for the budget. That is only a $10 difference, and considering the 285K reviews haven’t been favorable, it might be worth waiting to see how the 9900X3D fairs are compared as a good alternative to paying the extra.

Which CPU to pick?

The 9900X3D and 285K are more creator-focused processors with high core and thread counts. They can provide excellent workload performance across the board and lead in gaming. We won’t know which one leads in what until direct benchmarks, but as X3D chips have proven, AMD has a great advantage in gaming and will likely be a significant force in that.

It’s the productivity tasks that may be a detriment. But considering the 285K vs 14900K hasn’t been that big of an upgrade, the 9900X3D has plenty of opportunity to be at the top of the chain and likely make it the top pick.

About the Author

Sebastian Kozlowski

With a fascination for technology and games, Seb is a tech writer with a focus on hardware and deals. He is also the primary tester and reviewer at BGFG and PCGuide.