Could lack of hyperthreading in Intel’s Core Ultra 200 CPUs hand an entire generation of consumers to AMD?
AMD could profit massively from this Intel launch
Share this article...
WePC is reader-supported. When you buy through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Prices subject to change. Learn more
Intel’s Core Ultra CPUs have just been released and the results are less than impressive on… most fronts. This is the first generation of CPUs that Intel has released that have not featured hyperthreaded CPU cores in over 22 years. So, what encouraged the change?
We believe this is an efficiency play from Intel, as they can no longer justify adding to the outlandish power requirements of the 14th-generation processors. Sooner or later, something has to give. AMD’s recent release also focused on power efficiency, so it must just be something in the water. But has Intel gone too far with the new 200 series CPUs? We observed the supposed flagship beaten by CPUs more than a generation old on AMD’s side.
Efficiency is up, but performance suffers
When we said Intel focused on efficiency, we really meant it. When we reviewed the 285K, we ran it through a multitude of tests, recording the package power every step of the way, these are the results;
285K vs 9950X power consumption
285K vs 14900K power consumption
285K vs 7800X3D gaming power efficiency
First of all, we compared the 285K to the recently released 9950X, which consumed more than double the power in some situations. (113W average vs 48W in CS2) Nothing compared to the 14900K which consumed up to 168W in Horizon Forbidden West (285K averaged 91W) so there’s clearly a night and day difference as far as power efficiency is concerned. Sadly, the same can be said for gaming performance – just not in the way you’d want it to be said.
285k vs 14900K average fps
285K vs 9950X gaming performance
285K vs 7800X3D gaming
Gaming performance suffers, largely because of the increased power efficiency and lower clock speeds compared to the 14900K. In CS2, a game where frame rates matter, the 285K scored 313 FPS average, whereas the 14900K brought home 341. Not what you want for a flagship one generation ahead.
It gets worse when you consider the performance difference between the 285K and the 7800X3D – A CPU that costs a lot less than the 285K does. The 7800X3D tops out at 348 FPS in CS2, just 6 FPS more than the 14900K, but you have to remember that this CPU consumes pretty much half the power in most situations.
9800X3D is on the horizon
For the gamers out there, it’s hard to ignore the looming 9800X3D that is expected (at this point) to blow everything on offer right out of the water in terms of gaming performance. If we consider the 7000 series, the performance uplifts that the 7800X3D offered over the base Ryzen 7000 series CPUs were massive. If the 9800X3D can offer even a fraction of that uplift over, say the 9950X, then it’s game over.
Not only that, but the 9800X3D will likely cost less and not require a new motherboard, meaning it’s not only easier to upgrade but cheaper too. AMD is bringing the 9800X3D at the exact right time, right when gamers need it most.
No credit to the 285K?
Okay, credit where credit is due, this CPU does a damn lot for the power it uses. If we go back to the 14900K comparison for a second, the 285K manages to edge ahead in multi-core performance. All while using less power and having a deficit of eight logical processors.
285K vs 14900K multi core
285K vs 9950X review synthetic multi core
This is seriously impressive stuff. Not only that but when PBO is disabled, the 285K manages to edge ahead of the 9950X too by a slightly larger margin. Just goes to show that you don’t need to pump a lot of power into your chip to get high-performance out of it.
This CPU is a serious contender if you want the most out of your PC in terms of multi-core performance, and don’t want to spend multiple sheets on a large power bill.
Why the shift towards efficiency?
We think that AMD and Intel have exhausted a lot of the performance gains that they can get from the current hardware just by turning up the Wattage dial. This step down was necessary to step up in the future, in terms of performance. It seems collaborative as both AMD and Intel have opted to focus more on energy efficiency at the same time. Maybe there’s a new regulation we don’t know about?
Intel may have just driven gamers into the arms of AMD
Either or, Intel may have just driven this generation of gamers into the arms of AMD, but only if AMD can deliver on the 9800X3D front, only time will tell. As we mentioned before, this might be necessary to ensure the optimization of CPUs continues as it has in the past few years (excluding Raptor Lake R, everything has been pretty innovative).
AMD has an opportunity to gain back some custom from the less-than-optimal launch of the Ryzen 9000 series. Let’s hope they take it.
