In recent weeks, we’ve seen several benchmark leaks for the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, with some suggesting it outperforms the 14900K and 14900KF. Now that it has officially launched, we were able to conduct in-house testing of the Ultra 285K to assess its real-world performance.

Since its announcement, everyone has been curious about how the Core Ultra 285K would stack up against its predecessor, the Core i9-14900K, another processor that we’ve reviewed and tested. Our goal is to help you understand the performance differences between the two and whether upgrading to the Core Ultra series is worth it or if sticking with the previous top model is the better choice.

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K

Cores

24

Threads

24

Boost clock speed

5.7GHz

Base clock speed

3.7GHz P-cores/3.2GHz E-cores

L3 Cache

36MB

TDP

125W base/250W max

Platform

LGA 1851 (Arrow Lake)

Shop on Amazon

CHECK PRICE

Intel Core i9-14900K

Cores

24 (8P-16E)

Threads

32

Boost clock speed

P-Core 5.8GHz / E-Core 4.4GHz

Base clock speed

P-Core 3.2GHz / E-Core 2.4GHz

L3 Cache

36 MB

TDP

253W

Platform

Intel Socket 1700

Shop on Amazon

CHECK PRICE

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K vs Intel Core i9-14900K: Specifications

As you can see, there are plenty of differences between the two when it comes to specifications. First, we have a new socket type in the 15th-gen lineup, LGA 1851. This means that you’ll need to upgrade your motherboard if you’re planning to get the Core Ultra 285K, as it won’t be compatible with the one that you’ve been using with the 14900K or any other processor from the 14th, 13th, or 12th gen lineup.

Aside from that, while the Core Ultra 285K has the same number of cores as the 14900K, it boasts a smaller thread count. However, this is mainly because Intel has dropped hyper-threading, which has caused the number of threads to drop as well. Surprisingly, even though the Core Ultra CPUs are created with TSMC’s 3nm process instead of the 10nm process used for the previous gen lineup, it doesn’t seem to affect the power design. The Core Ultra 285K has the same base power at 125W, while the max power is only 3W less than the 14900K, 250W. However, we do recommend pairing it with one of the best AIO coolers, as it will not only help keep the temps low but also improve the lifespan of the processor.

The Core Ultra 285K features higher base clock speeds than the 14900K, but its boost clock speed is lower at 5.7 GHz. These are just specifications on paper, though. The real performance can only be determined through testing, which we've had the chance to do.

Gaming and synthetic performance comparisons

We've already tested the 14900K in a previous review, so it was time to see how the Core Ultra 285K performs in the benchmarks. Here's the testing setup we used for this review

Although we had to get the new Z890 Hero motherboard for the processor, it’s important to note that you can still use the same cooler from your previous-gen CPU, as there are no compatibility issues.

First, let’s discuss the synthetic benchmarks, which include results from CPU Z, Cinebench R23, and Geekbench 6. In the multi-core tests, the Core Ultra 285K led the race, scoring 18,753.7, 41,536, and 23,550 points in the three mentioned tools. On the other hand, the 14900K scored 17,074.2, 39,973, and 22,713 points. So, the 285K is clearly the winner in the multi-core tests, but the difference isn’t ‘that significant.’

Things started to change and look bad for the 285K in the single-core tests. In CPU Z, while the 285K scored 896.6 points, it was behind the 14900K, which led the battle with 927.6 points. Similarly, in Cinebnech R23 and Geekbench 6, the 14900K scored higher than the 285K. This was a bit surprising, considering we were expecting the 285K to score more points compared to its predecessor due to its new architecture and various other improvements.

We also wanted to get an idea about the gaming performance. We decided to test the 285K in Cyberpunk 2077, as we also tested the 14900K in the same game. With a low preset at 1080p, the Core Ultra 285K delivered only three more FPS than the 14900K, 219. Again, the difference here was not ‘significant’ or something that made the new CPU shine among the two. So, if you were thinking that the 15th gen would offer a huge performance boost in gaming, it sadly isn’t the case.

Price difference

Now, let’s talk about the price difference between the two. The Core i9-14900K was previously available for around $542 on Amazon, but right now, you can get it for $442. If you look at the data on Camelcamelcamel, this is the lowest price we’ve seen so far for the processor. On the other hand, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K is listed for $629.99 on Newegg, which is $187 more than the 14900K. So, the difference here is significant and one that you’ll need to seriously consider while upgrading.

Should you upgrade?

Now that we’ve explained the differences in specifications, performance, and price, it’s time to talk about whether you should upgrade to the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K or stick to the previous gen 14900K.

The first thing you need to understand is that the Core Ultra 9 285K boasts a new socket, the LGA 1851. This means that to use the processor, you will need to get a new Z890 motherboard as well. This motherboard features the 1851 socket and is compatible with the latest Intel CPUs. A decent mid-range Z890 motherboard would cost you around $400, so you’ll need to add this price to the upgrade process as well. On the other hand, if you already own an LGA 1700 motherboard, you won’t have to worry about getting a new one for the 14900K, as these motherboards are compatible with 14th, 13th, and 12th gen CPUs.

When you combine the cost of the Core Ultra 285K and the motherboard, you’re looking at a total spend of around $1,000. This could be slightly less or more, depending on the type of motherboard you’re getting. Premium boards can cost up to $999, which can take the total to more than $1500.

If we look at the performance difference between the two, it isn’t significant and certainly not enough to justify spending $187 more on the Core Ultra 285K and the additional cost of the motherboard. We only saw the 285K leading the multi-core benchmarks and gaming, and even in them, the difference wasn’t huge. An increase of three FPS isn’t something convincing. On top of that, in the single-core tests, the 285K failed to beat the 14900K, which again seems like a deal breaker for some.

So, if you already own a 14900K, there isn’t any reason why you should upgrade. It doesn't make sense to spend extra on a new processor and motherboard for a minor performance boost unless you’re someone who always wants to have the latest tech in their room.

Alternate options

If the Core Ultra 285K or the i9-14900K don’t seem like the right processors for your requirements or budget, you can explore some other options that might be more suitable. We’ve reviewed some of these processors and can wholeheartedly recommend them for your next build.

About the Author

Abdul Haddi

Abdul is a tech writer and Editor for PC Guide, specializing in all things tech, gaming, and hardware.