• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Intel Core Ultra 9 285k 'Arrow Lake' Discussion/News ("15th gen") on LGA-1851

RSR said:
It’s a refresh, so that’s normally only clock speed bumps. That does put the 290K Plus in rather an odd spot as a pre binned special.

What I do find interesting is they have bumped the memory speed up which is something that normally doesn’t happen.

However, what I said in the Zen6 thread about Arrow Lakes shortfalls are not clock speed related; they are down to the Cache / IO. While not a perfect answer, you can overcome some of those by increasing the D2D / NGU / Cache / RAM, as I don't know why out of the box they are stupidly low (26), and there is also a bug (or safeguard) where it sets the tWRWR_sg (89+) incorrectly, which causes the writes to be much slower than they should be.

If any of that has been changed that would bring a good uplift over stock 265/285K’s

I’ll pick a few up as normal and see how it goes.
Click to expand...


That actually sounds impressive really. Glad that you broke it down for me, not always reading the detail that matters.

Yes, let us know your thoughts. Especially for an OOBE, not necessarily optimised to the n'th degree, unlike a Skatterbencher video :)
 
Last edited:
Been playing with some AL setups, not impressed frankly, though the 65 watt 265 has reasonably OK power use for the performance. My 14700K feels (i.e. responsiveness), and generally performs, better in almost every case aside from AI stuff which I don't really do on the CPU anyhow. I'll caveat that with they have lower spec RAM than my 14700K setup but not massively so.

EDIT: Not to say AL is bad as such just for a follow up to RL it really doesn't impress me.
 
Last edited:
Rroff said:
Been playing with some AL setups, not impressed frankly, though the 65 watt 265 has reasonably OK power use for the performance. My 14700K feels (i.e. responsiveness), and generally performs, better in almost every case aside from AI stuff which I don't really do on the CPU anyhow. I'll caveat that with they have lower spec RAM than my 14700K setup but not massively so.

EDIT: Not to say AL is bad as such just for a follow up to RL it really doesn't impress me.
Click to expand...

What games out of curiosity? From a workstation standpoint, where I have been using Adobe Lightroom / PS / Scripting and VM work, it seems to motor long fine daily.

I have been running through a series of benchmarks to see the uplift on each variable.
 
RSR said:
What games out of curiosity? From a workstation standpoint, where I have been using Adobe Lightroom / PS / Scripting and VM work, it seems to motor long fine daily.

I have been running through a series of benchmarks to see the uplift on each variable.
Click to expand...

The main one for me is a custom workload involving a couple of virtualised applications and a mix of media editing and coding software - the 14700K just holds up better when a lot of operations are ongoing - not like a night and day difference but noticeable. I get a similar regression turning HT off on my 14700K essentially making it similar to the 265K but it still holds up better.

I will caveat that these are pre-built Dell systems but that shouldn't really have much impact other than they are running stock speed RAM vs the performance (but not super high end performance) RAM on my 14700K.
 
Last edited:
Rroff said:
The main one for me is a custom workload involving a couple of virtualised applications and a mix of media editing and coding software - the 14700K just holds up better when a lot of operations are ongoing - not like a night and day difference but noticeable. I get a similar regression turning HT off on my 14700K essentially making it similar to the 265K but it still holds up better.

I will caveat that these are pre-built Dell systems but that shouldn't really have much impact other than they are running stock speed RAM vs the performance (but not super high end performance) RAM on my 14700K.
Click to expand...

Unless they have been wiped with a fresh install, those Dell builds come with a lot of pre-installed bloat and normally run JEDEC spec RAM.

I need to repeat some testing, as 581.80 seems to have nerfed some numbers, whereas the latest Nvidia driver is fine. However, there is a good uplift going from stock > stock + XMP > Stock + D2D + NGU + R > OC
 
RSR said:
Unless they have been wiped with a fresh install, those Dell builds come with a lot of pre-installed bloat and normally run JEDEC spec RAM.
Click to expand...

I did a fresh install - these are clearance/outlet systems, though the NVME SMART data shows minimal power on/cycles corresponding to the original imaging - so probably haven't been used.

5200 and 5600MT RAM rather than the 6000 on my 14700K but that shouldn't make massive odds.

With the current DDR5 prices I'd almost make bank just selling the RAM LOL for the price I paid for them. Though I'm only keeping 1-2 for myself.
 
Rroff said:
5200 and 5600MT RAM rather than the 6000 on my 14700K but that shouldn't make massive odds.
Click to expand...

On ArrowLake, those RAM speeds, along with the default D2D (26) / NGU (26) values, will present results in the worst light. Well, I say worse light, it's a pretty much stock system

Once I have finished running through the benchmarks, I'll post the results of the uplift in each setting.
 
Tetras said:
RSR knows better than me, but afaik memory latency/tweaking makes a much bigger difference on these CPUs than it ever did with raptor.
Click to expand...

As a quick example, these are not final numbers but on a three-run average.

OS
W11 25H2 26200.7309

GPU + Driver
Asus GeForce RTX 5090 ROG Astral 581.80


Stock CPU + XMP

CPU Game Resolution Settings Average FPS 1% Lows
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K Marvel Rivials 1080P Medium 216 172
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K Marvel Rivials 1080P Ultra 163 128


Stock CPU + Tweaked D2D, NGU, R, Memory

CPU Game Resolution Settings Average FPS 1% Lows
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K Marvel Rivials 1080P Medium 237 190
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K Marvel Rivials 1080P Ultra 175 138

These results have a few other things changed, but will show a bit more once I have finished it all

CPU Game Resolution Settings Average FPS 1% Lows
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K Marvel Rivials 1080P Medium 267 222
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K Marvel Rivials 1080P Ultra 176 140
 
Last edited:
RSR said:
On ArrowLake, those RAM speeds, along with the default D2D (26) / NGU (26) values, will present results in the worst light. Well, I say worse light, it's a pretty much stock system

Once I have finished running through the benchmarks, I'll post the results of the uplift in each setting.
Click to expand...

Yeah Dell BIOS being Dell doesn't have access to tweak that stuff. I've messed about a bit with different RAM configurations but it doesn't fundamentally change anything.

EDIT: Not looked at whether I can do it with software i.e. XTU but ultimately I was just playing about while I had the opportunity.
 
Last edited:
 
G.Skill Royal RGB XMP 32GB (2x16GB) DDR5 PC5-57600C34 7200MHz Dual Channel Kit - Silver
MEM-GSK-02543
£480 (incl. VAT)
Find out more
Trident Z5 Royal NEO RGB EXPO 32GB (2x16GB) DDR5 PC5-48000C28 6000MHz - Silver
MEM-GSK-04194
£600 (incl. VAT)
Find out more
G.Skill Royal RGB EXPO 32GB (2x16GB) DDR5 PC5-48000C26 6000MHz Dual Channel Kit - Silver
MEM-GSK-05025
£600 (incl. VAT)
Find out more
290K+ rumoured to be cancelled:

videocardz.com

Intel reportedly 'cancels' Core Ultra 9 290K Plus, but keeps 270K/250K Arrow Lake Refresh SKUs - VideoCardz.com

Intel's Core Ultra 200K Plus desktop has a change before launch Intel has reportedly canceled its Core Ultra 9 290K Plus desktop CPU. This is based on
videocardz.com videocardz.com

Intel must be hoping they can rush out Nova Lake ASAP to get over the diaster that was Arrow Lake and the LGA-1851 platform. It will surely go down as one of the worst platforms in Intel's history.
 
Well if the 290k was 10% faster that's great but it still isn't anywhere near enough to dethrone AMD so I can understand why they don't launch it

Plus Intel chips are much more sensitive to high quality RAM, and that's either not possible to find atm or you're gonna pay through your nose for it

So selling a chip that can't beat AMD and it requires $1000 RAM to perform at its best is a tough situation
 
Last edited:
Dave2150 said:
290K+ rumoured to be cancelled:

videocardz.com

Intel reportedly 'cancels' Core Ultra 9 290K Plus, but keeps 270K/250K Arrow Lake Refresh SKUs - VideoCardz.com

Intel's Core Ultra 200K Plus desktop has a change before launch Intel has reportedly canceled its Core Ultra 9 290K Plus desktop CPU. This is based on
videocardz.com videocardz.com

Intel must be hoping they can rush out Nova Lake ASAP to get over the diaster that was Arrow Lake and the LGA-1851 platform. It will surely go down as one of the worst platforms in Intel's history.
Click to expand...

Part of the reason Arrow Lake was received so negatively was that it was rushed out and had a lot of bugs. Those have mostly been resolved except for one, which, for some odd reason, Arrow Lake runs ~10% or better on Windows 11 23H2, but that's a Microsoft issue. To say one of its one of the worst platforms is disingenuous, as it's on par with normal Zen 5. Yes, it has its faults due to the IMC being off-chip and the slow cache and die interconnects. As I have demonstrated in this thread, you can improve performance by tweaking the D2D, NGU, and Cache values quite a bit, since Intel was very conservative on those.

Mr Hallock explains it very well here:


Thankfully, on Nova Lake, the IMC returns to the compute title and judging by the Panther Lake breakdown, the D2D and especially NGU, which looks to have nearly doubled in performance, looks on the surface to have corrected one of the major issues with Arrow Lake. As I was going to put it all in the Nova Lake thread a bit later.

In short, I hope they don't rush Nova Lake out, as they don't need another launch with bugs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom