- Intel's flagship undercuts AMD while delivering similar overall desktop performance.
- AMD charges much more for modest gains at the very top
- Energy efficiency and price now determine the value of a flagship processor
I already wrote about Intel offering customers a better price at the lower end of the desktop processor market, wondering if the iconic chipmaker is becoming the new AMD. This question seems even more relevant considering that the same pattern is noticeable when looking at high-end processors.
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K is Team Blue's fastest desktop processor yet sells for $519 on Amazon (discount from $599). AMDcompeting Ryzen 9 9950X3D processor, positioned as a premium processor for gaming and content creation, costs approximately $676 there.
Despite this price difference, benchmark results show that the performance gap between the two processors remains relatively small.
Single-threaded performance favors Intel
Before we continue, I should note that the following comparison is only for regular desktop processors. It does not include high-end desktop or server platforms such as Threadripper Pro or Xeon and EPYC processors, which target a wide range of workloads and price ranges.
Looking at aggregate processor testsThe Ryzen 9 9950X3D leads the way with a CPU Mark of around 70,155.
The Core Ultra 9 285K follows with a score of about 67,427, leaving AMD ahead by a single-digit percentage.
Hardware configurations explain some of the difference, but certainly not all of it.
The AMD chip offers 16 cores and 32 threads with a power rating of 170W, while the Intel processor uses 8 performance cores and 16 efficiency cores for 24 threads at 125W.
Single-threaded performance favors Intel. The Core Ultra 9 285K scores around 5,092 points, compared to around 4,739 points for the Ryzen 9 9950X3D, which is important for games and everyday applications that don't scale cleanly across many cores.
Energy use also separates the two. Estimates put annual energy costs at $22.81 per Intel processor, while similar assumptions place the cost of an AMD processor closer to $31.03.
This combination of price and performance accounts for most of the cost difference. Intel sacrifices a little peak multi-threaded performance for lower power consumption and a much lower retail price.
AMD's advantage is most apparent in multi-threaded and cache-sensitive workloads, where the X3D design can still pull ahead.
While these benefits exist, they don't double the performance as the price difference between the two chips might suggest.
For buyers focused on creative tasks, gaming, general productivity, or mixed workloads, the best Intel processor delivers near-flagship results without the flagship price.
AMD still leads the pack in absolute performance, but the price it charges for it is definitely harder to justify than before.
Follow TechRadar on Google News. And add us as your preferred source to get our expert news, reviews and opinions in your feeds. Be sure to click the “Subscribe” button!
And of course you can also Follow TechRadar on TikTok for news, reviews, unboxing videos and get regular updates from us on whatsapp too much.
