At least Arrow Lake isn't a fire hazard: Core Ultra 200 Series power and thermal testing

[@0MeALot0]

The trick with 12th till 14th gen is disabling hyper-threading if they use too much power or get too hot. The efficiency of the ultra range is mostly because of no hyper-threading.

[@kasimirdenhertog3516]

I had a 13900F in a passively cooled system. Disabled HT and power consumption reduced significantly while it could still pull the punches.

[@pvdgucht]

Yeah returned my 285K and Z890 yesterday. And picked up a 9800X3D and X870E. It’s so much better and I am no longer so incredibly CPU limited. Even at 4K only with a 4070 Super I was really CPU limited in many modern games like: watch dogs legion, Hogwarts legacy, cyberpunk, star wars Jedi and outlaws, flight sims, even older games like shadow of the tomb raider. All of these show such a big improvement. Never thought I would go to AMD but they have become undeniably amazing. 50% faster is insane. Even a fix from Intel can never fix this. On top of that they didn’t and won’t guarantee another generation for this platform while AMD is promising at least AM5 support until 2027. So I am happy that I was still able to return my €650 Z890 and get all my money back. Heck the 9800X3D was even €200 cheaper than the 285K and the X870E was €120 cheaper for the same model (Gigabyte Aorus Master). Anyway get fucked intel I no longer support you guys, u have fucked with me for the last time! I wanted to believe but they sell garbage.🗑️

[@Silicon-Insights]

We're hoping Intel gets back on track in the next generation or two but it's hard to blame you or anyone else for being this disappointed. The 200 Series was executed very poorly.

[@pvdgucht]

@@Silicon-Insights yeah true. Well I do think their Arrow lake CPU has a lot of potential but it needs quite a lot of improvement to compete. I mean the 9800X3D runs circles around the 285K in gaming while being even cooler en more efficient in my tests. 285K was at 60 degrees with a contact frame while in a heavily CPU reliant game which is impressive compared to the 14900K but my 9800X3D was at 45 degreed in the same game using 20 watts or more less power. And apart from gaming, in some benchmarks it comes close to the 285K in multi core while that one has 24 Cores instead of 8. So I guess the 9950X3D will smoke the 285K for productivity as-well. Anyway I believe the next intel generation should: Have much more cache to improve gaming performance and efficiency. Have newer architectures for the P and e cores that have higher IPC. Have a faster interconnect (fabric) of the tiles or put the memory controller back onto the same tile to improve latency. Have battlemage architecture for the integrated GPU And lastly have a few more TOPS for the NPU to make any sense and make it more usable. If they deliver all this I think they would have a decent product and could compete again or who know even beat AMD if they have enough cache. But for all this to happen, they would need some serious transistor density improvements or have a bigger more costly die I guess.

[@divisionplusbeatz]

Help! I need to build a complete new PC. I work alot with adobe software and do alot of rendering/editing. I also want a CPU for 4k gaming. I cant decide between the 285k and 9800X3D. Which CPU would you recommend for the best system performance and saving times? The price difference is not important to me.

[@Silicon-Insights]

The 285K is the best choice of those two CPUs, if you're gaming at 4K then you're almost certainly not hitting a particularly high framerate, and it's high framerates (depends on the game, but a high framerate is generally at least 120 FPS, sometimes closer to 200s or more) that the 9800X3D is most useful for. The 285K has 24 cores (eight fast, 16 slow) compared to the eight fast cores on the 9800X3D, so the 285K should be better than the 9800X3D in most non-gaming stuff, especially anything to do with rendering. That being said, I think the 14900K, or the 9950X, or the 7950X are also good alternatives to the 285K. Personally, I'd go with the 9950X unless there's some feature with the 285K you need in particular.

[@divisionplusbeatz]

@@Silicon-Insights thank you!!

[@pvdgucht]

Your use case is the only use case where the 285K is justifiable to buy. Although I would personally maybe still go for the 9950X3D when it comes out in January but then again I have no idea how big the impact of Intel Quicksync is with rendering. Idk if the IGPU helps a lot or not and also real world test have to be done because there are so many variables.

[@AngryChineseWoman]

Lol the thumbnail

[@betag24cn]

as a amd fanboy i have to praise the power consumption reduction, but from the point it comes, it is still power hungry and performance is basically weird, alot of patches will be required but perhaps laptop and the msi claw users migth end with benefits from those patches if intel ever do a real patch, or if intel is not sold to qualcomm, or samsung, or amd in pieces

[@ZoomZoom30010]

Remeber i was here