Home > CPU Comparison > Core Ultra 9 285K or Ryzen 9 9950X3D: what's better?

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K vs AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D

91 out of 100
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K
VS
93 out of 100
AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K
AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D

We compared two desktop CPUs: the 3.7 GHz Intel Core Ultra 9 285K with 24-cores against the 4.3 GHz AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D with 16-cores. On this page, you'll find out which processor has better performance in benchmarks, games and other useful information.

  1. Review
  2. Differences
  3. Performance
  4. Specs
  5. Comments (15)

Review

General overview and comparison of the processors
Single-Core Performance
Performance in single-threaded apps and benchmarks
Multi-Core Performance
Measure performance when all cores are involved
Power Efficiency
The efficiency score of power consumption
Integrated Graphics
iGPU capabilities for gaming and 3D-intensive tasks
The "iGPU" and "Power Efficiency" have a minor impact on the NanoReview Score for desktop CPU.
NanoReview Final Score
Choose your main usage scenario to recalculate the Final Score and see which CPU suits your needs.
πŸ”Œ Usage Scenario:

Value for money (Beta)

Global average CPU prices are used by default! For better accuracy, enter your current prices and click β€œCalculate".
Currency
VS
58.3
(Average)
Value Index
41.5
(Average)

Key Differences

What are the key differences between 9950X3D and 285K
Advantages of Intel Core Ultra 9 285K
  • More powerful Intel Arc iGPU (4-Cores) integrated graphics: 2 vs 0.6 TFLOPS
  • Has 8 more physical cores
  • More modern manufacturing process – 3 versus 4 nanometers
  • More than 10Β° C higher critical temperature
  • Around 12.8 GB/s (14%) higher theoretical memory bandwidth
Advantages of AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D
  • Has 92 MB larger L3 cache size, helping fully utilize a high-end GPU in gaming
  • 4% higher Turbo Boost frequency (5.7 GHz vs 5.5 GHz)

Test in Benchmarks

Comparing the performance of CPUs across various tasks
CPU:
Core Ultra 9 285K
vs
Ryzen 9 9950X3D

Cinebench

Reputable cross-platform benchmark for high-performance processors
Cinebench 2024 (Single)
Cinebench 2024 (Multi)
Cinebench 2026 (Single) - 753
Cinebench 2026 (Multi) - 9861
Cinebench Scores (11th and 6th place)
Submit your benchmark results

GeekBench v6

The new version of this benchmark emulates common operations often used in real-world apps
Geekbench 6 (Single-Core)
Geekbench 6 (Multi-Core)
File compression 1560 MB/sec 1800 MB/sec
Clang compilation 242.2 Klines/sec 241.4 Klines/sec
HTML 5 Browser 479.5 pages/sec 392.8 pages/sec
PDF Renderer 622.1 Mpixels/sec 624.1 Mpixels/sec
Text processing 371.2 pages/sec 357.5 pages/sec
Background blur 95.4 images/sec 81.9 images/sec
Photo processing 164.2 images/sec 143.5 images/sec
Ray tracing 52.3 Mpixels/sec 55.9 Mpixels/sec
Sources: GeekBench [1], [2]

PassMark

Synthetic test that focuses on raw computational performance for low-level functions
Passmark CPU (Single-Core)
Passmark CPU (Multi-Core)
Integer math 172.3 GOps/sec 242.7 GOps/sec
Floating point math 224.2 GOps/sec 159.5 GOps/sec
Find prime numbers 542M Primes/sec 609M Primes/sec
Random string sorting 94.9M Strings/sec 95.3M Strings/sec
Data encryption 57.7 GBytes/sec 44.4 GBytes/sec
Data compression 789.7 MBytes/sec 905.8 MBytes/sec
Physics 3933 Frames/sec 5662 Frames/sec
Extended instructions 62.3B Matrices/sec 72.9B Matrices/sec
Sources: PassMark [3], [4] – 8455 & 11549 samples

Blender

3D rendering test that measures CPU performance in 3D modeling tasks (uses all cores)
Blender CPU
Core Ultra 9 285K
554.43
Ryzen 9 9950X3D +11%
616.73

Performance Per Watt

Shows the score you get per each watt of PL1 TDP
Cinebench 2024 / Watt 18.1 PPW 14.4 PPW
Geekbench 6 Multi / Watt 184.8 PPW 132.6 PPW
Passmark CPU Mark / Watt 537.8 PPW 412.3 PPW
Blender / Watt 4.44 PPW 3.63 PPW
These are rough calculations, as most CPUs surpass PL1 TDP wattage even in multicore workloads.

Recent User Tests

The latest benchmark tests that have been submitted by users
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K
DateBenchmarkResult
πŸ“˜ 2026-06-17 (Olafur Torfi)Cinebench 2024142 / 2242
πŸ“˜ 2026-02-01 (aDamatGeek)Cinebench 2024142 / 2383
πŸ“˜ 2026-01-29 (GeneralJeep)Geekbench 6 CPU3134 / 21707
πŸ“˜ 2025-12-31 (Szymon919191)Cinebench 2024141 / 2261
πŸ“˜ 2025-12-26 (Bill)Geekbench 6 CPU3207 / 22197
Add View all (14)
AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D
DateBenchmarkResult
πŸ“˜ 2026-09-01 (Soutajupe)Cinebench 2024146 / 2634
πŸ“˜ 2026-08-02 (Naragan)Cinebench 2024143 / 2632
πŸ“˜ 2026-08-02 (Naragan)Cinebench 2026794 / 10890
πŸ“˜ 2026-08-02 (Naragan)Geekbench 6 CPU3553 / 25131
πŸ“˜ 2026-07-10 (omecha)Cinebench 2026753 / 9861
Add View all (78)

Specifications

Full technical specification of Intel Core Ultra 9 285K and AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D

General

Vendor Intel Amd
Released October 11, 2024 January 7, 2025
Type Desktop Desktop
Instruction Set x86-64 x86-64
Codename Arrow Lake Zen 5 (Granite Ridge)
Model number 285K 9950X3D
Integrated GPU Arc iGPU (4-Cores) Radeon Graphics
Rival Equivalent - AMD Ryzen 9 9950X -
Intel CPU rating (#3rd place)

CPU

Performance Cores
P-Cores 8 16
P-Threads 8 32
Base Frequency (P) 3.7 GHz 4.3 GHz
Turbo Boost Frequency (P) 5.5 GHz 5.7 GHz
Efficient Cores
E-Cores 16 -
E-Threads 16 -
Base Frequency (E) 3.2 GHz -
Turbo Boost Frequency (E) 4.6 GHz -
Total
Total Cores 24 16
Total Threads 24 32
Bus Frequency 100 MHz 100 MHz
Multiplier 37x 43x
L1 Cache 192K (per core) 80K (per core)
L2 Cache 3MB (per core) 1MB (per core)
L3 Cache 36MB (shared) 128MB (shared)
Unlocked Multiplier Yes Yes

Package

Fabrication Process 3 nm 4 nm
TDP (PL1) 125 W 170 W
Max. Boost TDP (PL2) 250 W 230 W
Socket FCLGA-1851 AM5
Peak Temperature 105Β°C 95Β°C
Desktop CPU ranking (8th and 5th place)

iGPU

Integrated Graphics Intel Arc iGPU (4-Cores) Radeon Graphics
GPU Base Clock 300 MHz 400 MHz
GPU Boost Clock 2000 MHz 2200 MHz
Shading Units 512 128
TMUs 32 8
ROPs 16 4
Execution Units 64 2
TGP 14 W 15 W
iGPU FLOPS
Core Ultra 9 285K +233%
2 TFLOPS
Ryzen 9 9950X3D
0.6 TFLOPS
More info: Radeon Graphics iGPU (Ryzen 7000) compared to Arc iGPU (4-Cores)

Memory Support

Memory Types - DDR5-6400 - DDR5-5600
Max. Memory Size 192 GB 192 GB
Memory Channels 2 2
Max. Memory Bandwidth 102.4 GB/s 89.6 GB/s
ECC Support Yes Yes

Misc

Official Site Intel Core Ultra 9 285K official page AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D official page
PCI Express Version 5.0 5.0
PCI Express Lanes 24 28

Cast your vote

Choose between two processors
437 (39.8%)
661 (60.2%)
Total votes: 1098

Competitors

1. AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D vs AMD Ryzen 9 9950X
2. AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D vs AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D (2)
3. AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D vs AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D
4. AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D vs AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D
5. AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D vs Intel Core i9 14900K
6. Intel Core Ultra 9 285K vs Intel Core i9 14900K (8)
7. Intel Core Ultra 9 285K vs Intel Core i9 14900KS (8)
8. Intel Core Ultra 9 285K vs AMD Ryzen 9 9950X (35)
9. Intel Core Ultra 9 285K vs AMD Ryzen 9 9900X (1)
10. Intel Core Ultra 9 285K vs Intel Core i7 14700K
Compare other CPUs (460+)

Comments

So which CPU will you choose: AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D or Intel Core Ultra 9 285K?
🌐 Register your profile and become part of NanoReview community!
Avatar
Charlie Kirk November 18, 2025 at 05:43 PM
Son the 9950X3D is much superior
+19 Reply
Avatar
tech August 27, 2025 at 11:55 AM
AMD with x3d beats intel in every game
+20 Reply
Avatar
John December 18, 2025 at 07:21 AM
Thank God not only games exist in the world :))
+14 Reply
Avatar
Ammarr June 28, 2025 at 08:28 AM
Prices of 9950x3d = 285k+4060 prices in My country. So 285k is insanely good
+34 Reply
Avatar
sagnik June 18, 2025 at 02:38 PM
AMD is only better at avg resolution intel somehow outperforms in high end tasks
+16 Reply
Avatar
e21PlayZ June 14, 2025 at 07:07 AM
I will prefer intel because of the price and I like to mutitask so i need more cores
+24 Reply
Avatar
OVO April 5, 2025 at 01:45 PM
They are pretty much identical but Intel has the advantage with more cores
+45 Reply
Avatar
Failmaster Jones June 2, 2025 at 03:24 AM
The AMD obliterates the Intel in gaming. In productivity, they are matched in every real world scenario. The 9950x3D is the far superior product, regardless of number of cores.
+18 Reply
Avatar
God June 4, 2025 at 07:21 AM
Failmaster Jones, amd beats intel only in 1080p. and who tf plays in 1080p in 2025? literally nobody. intel crushes amd in 4k. not to mention intel is cheaper and more superior than amd.
+19 Reply
Avatar
Tiger June 27, 2025 at 09:16 PM
God, Who on earth told you it beats in 4k? Have you seen the 1% lows? I think you're a noob to compare average FPS in 4k because GPU does all the work. 1% lows is what matters and Intel is lost at sea
+11 Reply
Avatar
Ryan July 21, 2025 at 02:46 PM
God, You're high, bro. In what world does CPU matter in 4K gaming? Doesn't appear you know what you're talking about.
+7 Reply
Avatar
Straylight August 6, 2025 at 10:20 AM
Ryan, Only if you play at 4K native. But we are living in the age of DLSS. The moment you activate DLSS you are not playing at 4K native anymore. Even people with top of the line systems have to rely on DLSS and this reliance will only intensify in the coming years. Also you want a CPU that is future proof. A weak gaming CPU like the intel 285k will have to be replaced rather sooner than later compared to its AMD ryzen counterpart. Therefore CPU performance at 1440p and 1080p does matter. That’s why performing CPU benchmark tests at low resolutions are industry standard.
+7 Reply
Avatar
User February 11, 2026 at 10:28 PM
God, Most of the peoples plays games in 1080p and even lower.
+2 Reply
Avatar
Darkstar March 30, 2026 at 03:39 AM
Failmaster Jones, While they are matched in most scenarios, the key difference is price. The 285k offers 8 more ocres while being $100 cheaper in my country. Unless you do intensive gaming, then productivity users could benefit from the extras cores at a cheaper price.
0 Reply
Avatar
XFX Owner March 15, 2025 at 03:24 PM
Intel's maxiumum turbo boost can actually go up to 5.7 GHz with Intel Thermal Velocity Boost technology. It will be 5.5 GHz only if used with default clock speed boosting. Intel has the advantage of increasing its clock speed so i think it should undoubtably be included. If these tests have been made with 5.5 GHz and not 5.7 GHz, then this data is significantly innaccurate. Also, if stability is a concern, then it would be best to test both CPUs with base clock speeds. AMD would obviously then obliterate intel.
+67 Reply
EnglishРусский