Home
Creators
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register Favorites Keys Review DMs Logout
Community
Telegram ThePornDude
Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

(Slightly) Early Access: Intel Core Ultra 9 285K Gaming Performance: There Are Serious Problems (Patreon)

Published:
2024-10-25 07:28:26
Imported:
2026-06
Tags:

Content

Hi everyone, obviously there's a lot going on at the moment and we've been debating whether to talk about Arrow Lake S in the Direct or whether we should do a video. Truth is, there are so many problems here, it really needed a video. This one focuses just on gaming performance, but please take a look at Will's text review - it's huge! https://www.eurogamer.net/digitalfoundry-2024-intel-core-ultra-9-285k-ultra-5-245k-review

Video blurb: One thing's for sure - the CPU demands on today's games are extreme in many cases. The days of mainstream processors routinely delivering well over 60FPS on every title are over. We need more performance - but unfortunately, we aren't getting it with the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K. In fact, in some cases, it's slower than a 12900K... or worse. Will Judd provided the numbers here and delivered our web review, but it's down to Rich to share the bad news in video form.

Downloads: https://www.digitalfoundry.net/intel-core-ultra-9-285k-gaming-performance-there-are-serious-problems

Files

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K Gaming Performance: There Are Serious Problems

One thing's for sure - the CPU demands on today's games are extreme in many cases. The days of mainstream processors routinely delivering well over 60FPS on every title are over. We need more performance - but unfortunately, we aren't getting it with the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K. In fact, in some cases, it's slower than a 12900K... or worse. Will Judd provided the numbers here and delivered our web review, but it's down to Rich to share the bad news in video form. The Digital Foundry at Eurogamer review has more benchmarks, power efficiency, memory scaling and extreme mode testing. We did the work, but it doesn't change our opinion on the product: https://www.eurogamer.net/digitalfoundry-2024-intel-core-ultra-9-285k-ultra-5-245k-review Want some DF-branded tee-shirts, mugs, hoodies and various items based on DF catchphrases? Check out our store: https://store.digitalfoundry.net Join the DF Supporter Program for pristine video downloads, behind the scenes content, early access to DF Retro, early access to DF Direct Weekly and much, much more: https://bit.ly/3jEGjvx Subscribe for more Digital Foundry: http://bit.ly/DFSubscribe

Comments

Yeshy

I think it's more poor utilization (of the P+E cores)/optimization than anything; games are rarely CPU bound unless you want to hit/saturate 120fps. On a gaming laptop generally 30-50W is sufficient to hit 60fps, if that is the case then surely desktops are being inefficient (obviously poorer frametimes on a laptop, but it's still close. enabling Vsync and measuring power draw/utlization is a good idea but no one cares about efficiency)

Eric Benoit

I just hope my CRT lasts as long as me, I'll be content at 1024x768 while I slowly upgrade my CPU/ motherboard

Michel

Great work Rich!

DyeHardX86

I replayed Alan Wake 2 on my JVC PC monitor at 768 it looked fantastic and my 3600/RX6800XT ran it great even with mid RT all in all was very crisp image and smooth performance

Eric Benoit

That's the way to go! It's like John and Richard say with CRTs resolution doesn't really matter and you can pump more resources into lighting and effects