Ultra 9 285K or Ryzen 7800X3D: Gaming Test Insights

1. Introduction

The Core Ultra 9 285K has officially been released, and many are eager to see how it compares in gaming performance to the Core i9-14900K, Ryzen 9 9950X, and Ryzen 7 9800X3D.

For the first comparison, an initial conclusion can be drawn: the Core Ultra 9 285K’s gaming performance is close to that of the Core i9-14900K (slightly lower), although its CPU utilization is notably higher, with a noticeable gap. Interested readers can find more details in the article titled “Core Ultra 9 285K vs. Core i9-14900K: Gaming Performance Comparison” on my homepage.

The second main competitor to watch is the Ryzen 7 9800X3D, though it hasn’t been released yet. Therefore, I’ve included the previous generation Ryzen 7 7800X3D in the tests for comparison.

If the Core Ultra 9 285K can easily outperform the Ryzen 7 7800X3D, it should also stand a chance against the Ryzen 7 9800X3D. Conversely, if the Core Ultra 9 285K struggles to outperform the Ryzen 7 7800X3D, showing equal or even lower gaming performance, then it likely won’t beat the Ryzen 7 9800X3D either, effectively disqualifying it in advance.

Thus, the Core Ultra 9 285K vs. Ryzen 7 7800X3D matchup is a critical test, and this article will reveal the final results.

2. Specification Comparison

The Core Ultra 9 285K, released on October 24, 2024, uses TSMC’s 3nm process and features 8 large cores and 16 small cores, totaling 24 cores and 24 threads. It has a base clock speed of 3.7GHz, a maximum clock speed of 5.7GHz, an L2 cache of 40MB, and a smart cache of 36MB. The standard power consumption is 125W, with a peak of 253W, and the official suggested retail price is $589.

The Ryzen 7 7800X3D, released on January 4, 2023, utilizes TSMC’s 5nm process with 8 cores and 16 threads, featuring 512KB of L1 cache, 8MB of L2 cache, and 96MB of L3 cache. It has a base clock speed of 4.2 GHz and a maximum of 5.0 GHz, with a power consumption of 105W. It integrates two display cores running at 2200MHz, with a suggested retail price of $449.

3. Test Platform Configuration

The main configuration is as follows:

The Core Ultra 9 285K is paired with the MSI MAG Z890 TOMAHAWK motherboard, while the Ryzen 7 7800X3D is paired with the MSI MPG X670E CARBON motherboard. The remaining components are identical for both setups.

Memory: 32GB DDR5 6000MHz, GPU: GeForce RTX 4090, Storage: two Samsung 970 EVO 1TB drives, Operating System: Windows 11.

4. Gaming Test Between Ultra 9 285K and Ryzen 7800X3D

Seven games were tested at 1080P with the highest graphics settings. The following are detailed comparisons between the Ryzen 7 7800X3D (left) and the Core Ultra 9 285K (right) platforms.

Game 1: Ghostwire: Tokyo

• Ryzen 7 7800X3D: Avg FPS 183, min FPS 134, frame time 5.1ms, CPU usage 24%, power 56W, temp 52°C, RAM 10.8GB, GPU usage 84%, VRAM 6.4GB, GPU power 233W, GPU temp 47°C.
• Core Ultra 9 285K: Avg FPS 168, min FPS 132, frame time 5.3ms, CPU usage 19%, power 64W, temp 49°C, RAM 11.7GB, GPU usage 81%, VRAM 7.0GB, GPU power 229W, GPU temp 42°C.

The Core Ultra 9 285K showed a 15 FPS lower average, slightly less stable minimum FPS, and 8W higher power consumption, though with a 3°C lower temperature.

Game 2: Cyberpunk 2077

• Ryzen 7 7800X3D: Avg FPS 133, min FPS 82, frame time 7.0ms, CPU usage 67%, power 76W, temp 64°C, RAM 12.1GB, GPU usage 84%, VRAM 8.2GB, GPU power 253W, GPU temp 47°C.
• Core Ultra 9 285K: Avg FPS 128, min FPS 86, frame time 7.9ms, CPU usage 60%, power 112W, temp 58°C, RAM 10.3GB, GPU usage 80%, VRAM 8.4GB, GPU power 236W, GPU temp 42°C.

The Core Ultra 9 285K trailed by 5 FPS in average, though it had a higher minimum FPS. It consumed 36W more power but had a 6°C lower temperature.

Game 3: Red Dead Redemption 2

• Ryzen 7 7800X3D: Avg FPS 190, min FPS 149, frame time 4.9ms, CPU usage 51%, power 67W, temp 57°C, RAM 13.7GB, GPU usage 87%, VRAM 5.4GB, GPU power 281W, GPU temp 45°C.
• Core Ultra 9 285K: Avg FPS 178, min FPS 137, frame time 6.0ms, CPU usage 42%, power 92W, temp 52°C, RAM 10.8GB, GPU usage 85%, VRAM 5.0GB, GPU power 278W, GPU temp 44°C.

Here, the Core Ultra 9 285K’s average FPS was 12 FPS lower, with slightly increased frame time and 25W higher power usage, though it maintained a lower temperature by 5°C.

Game 4: The Witcher 3

• Ryzen 7 7800X3D: Avg FPS 103, min FPS 80, frame time 9.6ms, CPU usage 47%, power 66W, temp 58°C, RAM 12.2GB, GPU usage 88%, VRAM 7.3GB, GPU power 268W, GPU temp 43°C.
• Core Ultra 9 285K: Avg FPS 97, min FPS 49, frame time 9.6ms, CPU usage 44%, power 89W, temp 52°C, RAM 12.7GB, GPU usage 80%, VRAM 7.9GB, GPU power 259W, GPU temp 40°C.

The Core Ultra 9 285K performed 6 FPS lower in average, with a significantly lower minimum FPS. It used 23W more power but maintained a 6°C lower temperature.

Game 5: Microsoft Flight Simulator

• Ryzen 7 7800X3D: Avg FPS 94, min FPS 69, frame time 10.6ms, CPU usage 31%, power 57W, temp 62°C, RAM 13.1GB, GPU usage 50%, VRAM 6.7GB, GPU power 188W, GPU temp 45°C.
• Core Ultra 9 285K: Avg FPS 76, min FPS 64, frame time 13.1ms, CPU usage 21%, power 57W, temp 46°C, RAM 12.5GB, GPU usage 40%, VRAM 7.1GB, GPU power 110W, GPU temp 32°C.

The Core Ultra 9 285K showed a significant FPS drop (18 FPS lower), with higher frame time and identical power consumption, though with a 16°C cooler operating temperature.

Game 6: Hogwarts Legacy

• Ryzen 7 7800X3D: Avg FPS 89, min FPS 73, frame time 13.0ms, CPU usage 32%, power 59W, temp 60°C, RAM 21.1GB, GPU usage 56%, VRAM 10.4GB, GPU power 189W, GPU temp 45°C.
• Core Ultra 9 285K: Avg FPS 79, min FPS 67, frame time 12.4ms, CPU usage 27%, power 73W, temp 50°C, RAM 19.6GB, GPU usage 60%, VRAM 10.1GB, GPU power 220W, GPU temp 40°C.

In this game, the Core Ultra 9 285K was 10 FPS lower on average, with equal frame times and 14W higher power usage, while operating at a lower temperature by 10°C.

Game 7: Starfield

• Ryzen 7 7800X3D: Avg FPS 146, min FPS 99, frame time 6.2ms, CPU usage 79%, power 82W, temp 68°C, RAM 14.6GB, GPU usage 85%, VRAM 6.5GB, GPU power 255W, GPU temp 48°C.
• Core Ultra 9 285K: Avg FPS 151, min FPS 92, frame time 7.3ms, CPU usage 72%, power 129W, temp 64°C, RAM 11.9GB, GPU usage 89%, VRAM 6.2GB, GPU power 271W, GPU temp 44°C.

In Starfield, the Core Ultra 9 285K performed slightly better by 5 FPS on average, with higher power usage by 47W and a 4°C lower temperature.

5. Conclusion

The overall comparison is clear:

The Ryzen 7 7800X3D consistently exhibits higher CPU utilization, maximizing memory and GPU resources more effectively, showcasing a well-rounded hardware performance advantage, making it evidently better suited as a gaming processor.

In summary, the gaming performance of the Core Ultra 9 285K falls short of the Ryzen 7 7800X3D, effectively ruling it out from competing with the upcoming Ryzen 7 9800X3D and eliminating it from contention for the title of “strongest gaming processor.”

However, it is worth noting that compared to previous generations, the Core Ultra 9 285K demonstrates significant improvements in power consumption and temperature control, which is certainly commendable.

Related:

1. RTX 5070 Ti vs RTX 5080: 4K Gaming Performance Test
2. GTX 1660 to Radeon RX 7600: How Big Is the Upgrade?
3. Ryzen 5 7500F with RTX 5070 Ti: Any Bottleneck Issues?
4. RTX 5070 Ti vs RTX 4080: Performance Test Results Revealed
5. RX 9070 XT vs RX 7800 XT: Performance Showdown!
6. RTX 5070 Ti vs RX 9070 XT? Performance Compared!
7. Is RTX 2080 Still Worth Buying in 2025? Game Test Results
8. RTX 5090 Benchmark: PCIe 5.0 vs 4.0 Gaming Comparison
9. RX 9070 XT 1080P Performance: How Well Does It Run?
10. Ryzen 7 9800X3D with RTX 5080: Game Benchmark Results
11. Understand AI Algorithms and GPU Operation Principles
12. Ryzen 7 9800X3D vs Core i3 14100F: 4K Gaming Test
13. GPU vs CPU: Which is Better for Neural Network Training?
14. Game Performance Test: Ryzen 7 9800X3D vs Core 9 285K
15. Should You Buy GeForce RTX 3090 in 2025? Full Review

Disclaimer:

1. This channel does not make any representations or warranties regarding the availability, accuracy, timeliness, effectiveness, or completeness of any information posted. It hereby disclaims any liability or consequences arising from the use of the information.
2. This channel is non-commercial and non-profit. The re-posted content does not signify endorsement of its views or responsibility for its authenticity. It does not intend to constitute any other guidance. This channel is not liable for any inaccuracies or errors in the re-posted or published information, directly or indirectly.
3. Some data, materials, text, images, etc., used in this channel are sourced from the internet, and all reposts are duly credited to their sources. If you discover any work that infringes on your intellectual property rights or personal legal interests, please contact us, and we will promptly modify or remove it.