Intel's Core Ultra 7 265K and 265KF CPUs Dip Below $250

[Dr. Dro]

They may be an alternative for microsoft windows. For the gnu userspace I would buy something else. Those E-Cores will not execute my code.

Feel free to buy an outdated processor where most cores can not execute not any modern code. Go for it

Where is avx512? Gone? Ah still no avx512!

Intel® Core™ Ultra 7 Processor 265K (30M Cache, up to 5.50 GHz) - Product Specifications | Intel

Intel® Core™ Ultra 7 Processor 265K (30M Cache, up to 5.50 GHz) quick reference with specifications, features, and technologies.

www.intel.com

https://www.amd.com/en/products/processors/desktops/ryzen/7000-series/amd-ryzen-5-7600x.html

Sienna_Cichlid /home/roman # uname -a
Linux Sienna_Cichlid 6.15.3

model name    : AMD Ryzen 5 7600X 6-Core Processor

flags        : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush mmx fxsr sse sse2 ht syscall nx mmxext fxsr_opt pdpe1gb rdtscp lm constant_tsc rep_good amd_lbr_v2 nopl xtopology nonstop_tsc cpuid extd_apicid aperfmperf rapl pni pclmulqdq monitor ssse3 fma cx16 sse4_1 sse4_2 movbe popcnt aes xsave avx f16c rdrand lahf_lm cmp_legacy svm extapic cr8_legacy abm sse4a misalignsse 3dnowprefetch osvw ibs skinit wdt tce topoext perfctr_core perfctr_nb bpext perfctr_llc mwaitx cpb cat_l3 cdp_l3 hw_pstate ssbd mba perfmon_v2 ibrs ibpb stibp ibrs_enhanced vmmcall fsgsbase bmi1 avx2 smep bmi2 erms invpcid cqm rdt_a avx512f avx512dq rdseed adx smap avx512ifma clflushopt clwb avx512cd sha_ni avx512bw avx512vl xsaveopt xsavec xgetbv1 xsaves cqm_llc cqm_occup_llc cqm_mbm_total cqm_mbm_local avx512_bf16 clzero irperf xsaveerptr rdpru wbnoinvd cppc arat npt lbrv svm_lock nrip_save tsc_scale vmcb_clean flushbyasid decodeassists pausefilter pfthreshold avic vgif x2avic v_spec_ctrl vnmi avx512vbmi umip pku ospke avx512_vbmi2 gfni vaes vpclmulqdq avx512_vnni avx512_bitalg avx512_vpopcntdq rdpid overflow_recov succor smca fsrm flush_l1d amd_lbr_pmc_freeze

Note 7600X was entry level processor in may 2023. Low end, cheap entry processor. The cheapest option available.

I searched sevearl times for cpuinfo ouput. I could not find any. Anyone willing to share cpuinfo for P and E core of the 15th intel core generation please? Than I can make a spreadsheet and compare. Especially compare with the lowest available instruction for all of those intel processors. I prefer a cpuinfo output for a 230€ intel processor incl. tax from may 2023. Not more expensive. or 180€ intel processor of may 2025 incl tax. We should stick to the same price range and DDR5 socket only.

Fancy, but ultimately meaningless. It's known for some time that Zen 4/5 has an ISA advantage due to AVX-512 support... but at the end of the day, this is what my server with its decade old processor supports... and it's everything that you would need for 99.99% of applications to run:

Model name: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2680 v4 @ 2.40GHz

Flags: fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm pbe syscall nx pdpe1gb rdts cp lm constant_tsc arch_perfmon pebs bts rep_good nopl xtopology nonstop_tsc cpuid aperfmperf pni pclmulqdq dtes64 monitor ds_cpl vmx smx est tm2 ssse3 sdbg fma cx16 xtpr pdcm pcid dca sse4_1 sse4_2 x2apic movbe popcnt tsc_deadline_timer aes xsave avx f16c rdrand lahf_lm abm 3dnowprefetch cpuid_fault epb cat_l3 cdp_l3 pti intel_ppin ssbd ibrs ibpb stibp tpr_shadow flexpriority ept vpid ept_ad fsgsbase tsc_adjust bmi1 hle avx2 smep bmi2 erms invpcid rtm cqm rdt_a rdseed adx smap intel_pt xsaveopt cqm_llc cqm_occup_llc cqm_mbm_total cqm_mbm_local dtherm ida arat pln pts vnmi md_clear flush_l1d

Still trying to figure out all the hate for AL. I have both intel and AMD systems, not a fan of either side. I stumbled upon AL for a good deal locally (Core Ultra 5 225) and decided to build a system around it. I don't really play many demanding games, but I do game at 4k so the magical x3d chips ( I have a 7800x3d and a minisforum 7945hx3d) don't really have any benefit for my use case.
I do play BeamNG drive(very multithreaded). And my current 14900k system does just fine but I can bring it to its knees cpu wise with lots of cars spawned.
When I fired up the 225 10 Core 10 thread AL cpu, I found it matching the performance of my 14900k. Thoroughly impressed I went out and got a 285k, I'm sure my use case and generational performance is an outlier but AL isnt all bad and if I just went by what people said online I should never touch it.

One thing you can't deny is the single thread performance went way up with AR, and I haven't seen a performance regression vs my 14900k, but I see a lot cooler temps and lower power usage

The most recent price drops suck since I'm already invested but it is what it is.

Amd fans are quick to point out intel always having a dead socket and no upgrade path, If I do manage to keep the systems I build for any period of time, I'm changing the MB out anyways. If im upgrading im not half assing it.

High prices and low performance at launch really hurt its reputation, plus fabbing it at TSMC increased prices even further while making availability very sparse. Hard to get an Arrow Lake (especially if you want to buy an Ultra 9 285 or 285K, the 265K is way easier), but Raptor Lake is still widely available at every price point in my region.

 

[theglaze]

Over 120 MINIMUM fps is embarrasing? Ok bud

It's about relative performance.

285K is -20% worse than 9800X3D (in that 1080p benching).

 

[Tyler-98-W68]

I noticed which nice to know they doing to seeing I have like $100 gift credit at amazon, though I was saving it for my next gpu.

It crack at the fact that 125w cpu will pull well over 250watt.... I dont like this whole PL1/PL2 crap but both intel and amd doing but amd dont pull anywhere near as much wattage. I stay on to my 6700k as long as I did cause I dont want cpu that draw more the 125w under an circumstance preferable 95w,

Maybe some people are ok with cpu pull upward of 300w and gpu pull well over that now days, but I am not one them

I have no problems on the power draw when the performance is there........i went from over 400w on my 14900K to about 250w max on my 285K........I mean my 225 probably consumes less power than your 6700K while being so much faster.

Just because you don't want a higher power CPU doesn't mean higher power CPU's are bad.

AL is everywhere in Canada, lots of stock but I get other places it might not be as easy to find, the recent price drop makes it somewhat more desirable vs raptor lake.

 

[Onasi]

You might collapse to a heart attack if you look at what they did to Radeon pricing. Lo and behold:
View attachment 404546
A thousand USD 9070 XT. Sans VAT, it's 840 USD. Still an atrocity. Just FYI, they sell 5070 Ti for the same money.

Just looked and in that same shop the 5060Ti 16 gigs from MSI is listed for the exact price MSI quoted on TPUs review plus 20% VAT. So, while outrageous, it isn’t out of pocket with the rest of the world. The fuck do they think Radeon cards do, heal cancer?

 

[JustBenching]

It's about relative performance.

285K is -20% worse than 9800X3D (in that 1080p benching).

With a card youll never use to play at that resolution. Like seriously, if you think 120 1% lows are embarrassing, how do you actually play games? I mean my 4090 gets nowhere near 120 1% lows in the majority of games im playing. Should I throw it out the window? What the hell man

 

[theglaze]

how do you actually play games?

I run simulators (flight, space, racing) with VR or triple 4K.
Sims were dominated by Intel. Since 3D V-Cache, AMD has completely taken over that space. There are many repetitive calculations that leverage the cache.
But most AAA games don't have significant CPU compute, so we have to look at low-resolution tests to extrapolate the efficiencies, or lack there of with Core Ultra 2.
It's a scene rarely covered by the big benchmarkers.

 

[Dr. Dro]

I have no problems on the power draw when the performance is there........i went from over 400w on my 14900K to about 250w max on my 285K........I mean my 225 probably consumes less power than your 6700K while being so much faster.

Just because you don't want a higher power CPU doesn't mean higher power CPU's are bad.

AL is everywhere in Canada, lots of stock but I get other places it might not be as easy to find, the recent price drop makes it somewhat more desirable vs raptor lake.

SMT increases the power consumption so much on RPL it's downright scary. I actually turned it off some time ago and haven't looked back. It's possible some of the massive efficiency improvements in ARL's overall power usage come from the fact it doesn't have SMT support at all. The extra few threads aren't worth the 40 C increase I get in load temps.

 

[Tek-Check]

Your link is using linux, irrelevant for 96% of the market,

Not at all. The sales of Ryzen and EPYC AM5 (aka Ryzen in disguise) in the segment of managing online gaming servers exploded. Those are used by tens of millions of online gamers. This trend intensified after Intel CPU instability scandal... AMD posted record numbers in CPU sales in recent quarters.

look at the distribution of power man. Sure on average they all consume the same power but I assume that's because there are a lot of full core workloads. But the distribution tells the whole story, in lighter workloads intel is significantly more efficient. There is not a single workload that the ryzen chips manage to do without pulling circa 70w+, while there were a lot that the 285k was pulling 40. And that's easy to verify, if you have a dual CCD ryzen just browse the web.

I did not dispute that Lion Cove is more efficient in lighter workloads. Of course it is. It is built on N3 node and it is snappier at lower power scenarios, which the graph from Linux also shows. Plus, it does not have a penalty of chiplets+IOD design. You don't need to convince me about such things.

 

[Daven]

When was the last time a new zen generation offered more cores at the same price? Did it ever actually happen?

Release MSRPs Zen 1 thru 2:

1800X $499 8 cores
2700X $329 8 cores (price drop)
3900X $499 12 cores (same as original Zen 1 8 cores)

Even though Rocket Lake used the backported Cypress Cove, there's a huge performance gap with Alder Lake. You can't really put the 10nm/Intel 7 CPUs in the same basket as that 14nm+++ chip.

AMD Zen processors went from 14 nm down to 4 nm. An architecture is an architecture regardless of back ports or process node. Intel switched from the 'Core' architecture to the 'Cove' architecture with Rocket Lake. In doing so, IPC went up 20% so that the 8 core rocket lake processor was about the same as the 10 Core Comet Lake processor.

 

[JustBenching]

I run simulators (flight, space, racing) with VR or triple 4K.
Sims were dominated by Intel. Since 3D V-Cache, AMD has completely taken over that space. There are many repetitive calculations that leverage the cache.
But most AAA games don't have significant CPU compute, so we have to look at low-resolution tests to extrapolate the efficiencies, or lack there of with Core Ultra 2.
It's a scene rarely covered by the big benchmarkers.

I know how to test games and such, I do usually benchmark the heaviest parts of games. For example my testing, 9800x 3d on the left, 12900k on the right

Spoiler

And yes, in some sim games the 9800x 3d is a lot faster (about 2x as fast as my 12900k in MSFS) but that's a very fringe case. Also there are games that is slower - yes even than my 12900k. TTW heavy battle scenes for example

Release MSRPs Zen 1 thru 2:

1800X $499 8 cores
2700X $329 8 cores (price drop)
3900X $499 12 cores (same as original Zen 1 8 cores)

Did you forget about the 329$ R7 1700? The fact that you have to pick the most obnoxiously expensive chip amd has ever released to make their newer cpus look decent says all that needs to be said don't you think?

 

[Hecate91]

With a card youll never use to play at that resolution. Like seriously, if you think 120 1% lows are embarrassing, how do you actually play games? I mean my 4090 gets nowhere near 120 1% lows in the majority of games im playing. Should I throw it out the window? What the hell man

The embarrassing thing is an 8 core outperforming a cpu with nearly double the cores, and yeah I'm sure some people would be playing in 1080P as it's the most popular used monitor resolution.

Did you forget about the 329$ R7 1700? The fact that you have to pick the most obnoxiously expensive chip amd has ever released to make their newer cpus look decent says all that needs to be said don't you think?

The comparison is flagship cpu's, but I get it AMD is chopped liver and no one ever uses the inflation excuse, a $329 CPU in 2017 would be $435 today.
But all that needs to be said is AMD CPU's are getting record sales and Ryen cpu's are the top sellers on retail sites, Intel CPU prices wouldn't be dropping if they weren't desperate for sales.

 

[dgianstefani]

The embarrassing thing is an 8 core outperforming a cpu with nearly double the cores, and yeah I'm sure some people would be playing in 1080P as it's the most popular used monitor resolution.

Was this your sentiment from Bulldozer thru Zen 3? Doubt it.

Well known number of cores means little for gaming perf once you're at six or eight. Hence the P/E strategy and AMD one CCD full fat, one with "C" cores. But go on.

Is it embarrassing the 9900/9950X/X3D is slower in games than the 77/7800X3D? Hmm? Or another double standard?

The comparison is flagship cpu's, but I get it AMD is chopped liver and no one ever uses the inflation excuse, a $329 CPU in 2017 would be $435 today.
But all that needs to be said is AMD CPU's are getting record sales and Ryen cpu's are the top sellers on retail sites, Intel CPU prices wouldn't be dropping if they weren't desperate for sales.

Yes yes. Record sales etc. Checks marketshare...

 

[Macro Device]

Just looked and in that same shop the 5060Ti 16 gigs from MSI is listed for the exact price MSI quoted on TPUs review plus 20% VAT. So, while outrageous, it isn’t out of pocket with the rest of the world. The fuck do they think Radeon cards do, heal cancer?

You might check https://ozon.ru/, https://citilink.ru/, https://www.onlinetrade.ru/ and see for yourself it's not just DNS going bonkers with Radeons, it's countrywide. I have no idea why. But it's the theme for the last three or four years and me buying a 6700 XT was an exception to this rule as it was cheaper than 3060 at that moment.

 

[Tek-Check]

But all that needs to be said is AMD CPU's are getting record sales and Ryen cpu's are the top sellers on retail sites, Intel CPU prices wouldn't be dropping if they weren't desperate for sales.

Desperate or not, it's desirable for us, consumers. I really hope Intel finally sells a bit more ARL with new dirt cheap prices, as this would put pressure on AMD to lower prices too. So, win-win for consumers. If they don't, Ryzen CPUs will drop in price at a slower pace, which is not good.

 

[JustBenching]

The embarrassing thing is an 8 core outperforming a cpu with nearly double the cores, and yeah I'm sure some people would be playing in 1080P as it's the most popular used monitor resolution.

It's outperforming the 16 core 9950x, the 32core 9970x, some 256 core threadrippers and epycs as well. Are threadripper and epycs embarrasing?

The comparison is flagship cpu's, but I get it AMD is chopped liver and no one ever uses the inflation excuse, a $329 CPU in 2017 would be $435 today.

And what would a 449$ 2020 CPU in 2020 be today?

But all that needs to be said is AMD CPU's are getting record sales and Ryen cpu's are the top sellers on retail sites, Intel CPU prices wouldn't be dropping if they weren't desperate for sales.

AMD has been dropping prices from 2017 to today, this whole freaking time. So they are desperate for sales, clearly, right?

 

[Hecate91]

Was this your sentiment from Bulldozer thru Zen 3? Doubt it.

Well known number of cores means little for gaming perf once you're at six or eight.

Is it embarrassing the 9900/9950X/X3D is slower in games than the 77/7800X3D? Hmm? Or another double standard?

Ah, but the Intel fans will tell you cores matter because they have all those e-cores for benchmark scores.
The 9900X, 9950X, and the X3D variants aren't necessarily gaming cpu's, every reviewer discusses dual CCD CPU's being worse for gaming, core scheduling is also a Windows issue.
I can tell you have quite the double standards since you're saying Bulldozer to Zen 3 were bad cpu's.

Yes yes. Record sales etc. Checks marketshare...

A monopolistic company still leading in marketshare, color me surprised.

Desperate or not, it's desirable for us, consumers. I really hope Intel finally sells a bit more ARL with new dirt cheap prices, as this would put pressure on AMD to lower prices too. So, win-win for consumers. If they don't, Ryzen CPUs will drop in price at a slower pace, which is not good.

I agree lower prices is a good thing, though it would be more desirable if these were launch prices, and if Intel weren't changing sockets so often these cpu's would actually be a good value with a longer lasting platform.

 

[JustBenching]

9950x isn't a gaming chip, the 285k is a gaming chip. AMD user logic 101...

 

[Macro Device]

Every CPU is a gaming CPU if you can run Crysis on it.

 

[Tyler-98-W68]

The embarrassing thing is an 8 core outperforming a cpu with nearly double the cores, and yeah I'm sure some people would be playing in 1080P as it's the most popular used monitor resolution.

The comparison is flagship cpu's, but I get it AMD is chopped liver and no one ever uses the inflation excuse, a $329 CPU in 2017 would be $435 today.
But all that needs to be said is AMD CPU's are getting record sales and Ryen cpu's are the top sellers on retail sites, Intel CPU prices wouldn't be dropping if they weren't desperate for sales.

You know what's embarrassing? A very multithreaded designed game running worse on a 16 core amd x3d chip vs Intels lowest end arrow lake cpu. So a 10 core 10 thread CPU beating a 16 core 32 thread cpu with 3dcache??? How does that work?

 

[evernessince]

The graph was a response to someone saying that amd has a lead in efficiency.

Your link is using linux, irrelevant for 96% of the market, BUT - even in that one, look at the distribution of power man. Sure on average they all consume the same power but I assume that's because there are a lot of full core workloads. But the distribution tells the whole story, in lighter workloads intel is significantly more efficient. There is not a single workload that the ryzen chips manage to do without pulling circa 70w+, while there were a lot that the 285k was pulling 40.

And that's easy to verify, if you have a dual CCD ryzen just browse the web. Youll be casually hitting 70w scrolling a page. Work on an excel, youll still be seeing 60-70 watts. For these same workloads intel is sitting at single digits.

Everyone can see AMD is more efficient.: https://www.techpowerup.com/review/intel-core-ultra-7-265k/24.html

You cherry pick one chart and act as if that's the end all be all. Not surprising given your post history.

 

[chrcoluk]

Desperate or not, it's desirable for us, consumers. I really hope Intel finally sells a bit more ARL with new dirt cheap prices, as this would put pressure on AMD to lower prices too. So, win-win for consumers. If they don't, Ryzen CPUs will drop in price at a slower pace, which is not good.

Yes, its basically the same argument as when we say when AMD GPU's get cheaper it helps Nvidia prices. I fully agree with you.
We need at least 2 active players, and we need to see actions taken that benefit consumers.

 

[dgianstefani]

Ah, but the Intel fans will tell you cores matter because they have all those e-cores for benchmark scores.
The 9900X, 9950X, and the X3D variants aren't necessarily gaming cpu's, every reviewer discusses dual CCD CPU's being worse for gaming, core scheduling is also a Windows issue.
I can tell you have quite the double standards since you're saying Bulldozer to Zen 3 were bad cpu's.

Those examples were specific, I was saying that during that time AMD had higher core count CPUs that performed worse in games vs Intel counterparts, as you well know. Contrasting this against your comment on how current 8 core X3D CPUs do a little better in gaming than higher core count competition as if that's some inspired observation, when you know full well that's disingenuous, as gaming is one of the few workloads that tends to not scale past x number of cores, typically 2-8.

Ignoring meaning and moving goalposts, what a twist. In your words, "color me surprised".

 

[JustBenching]

Everyone can see AMD is more efficient.: https://www.techpowerup.com/review/intel-core-ultra-7-265k/24.html

You cherry pick one chart and act as if that's the end all be all. Not surprising given your post history.

Compared to what? The i7 265k runs circles around the R7 9700x. I honestly think the 9700x would actually need 500+ watts to match the 265k running at 180.

Everyone can see intel is more efficient.

 

[dgianstefani]

Compared to what? The i7 265k runs circles around the R7 9700x. I honestly think the 9700x would actually need 500+ watts to match the 265k running at 180.

Normal for low core count CPUs when facing high core count CPUs, this isn't interesting.

In a hypothetical world with no hard limits, and unlimited wattage/cooling you could OC a single core pentium to get better performance than a octa core, but it means nothing and isn't relevant to a discussion about 265K discounts.

 

[JustBenching]

Normal for low core count CPUs when facing high core count CPUs, this isn't interesting or relevant.

It isn't, but are we (they) pretending that it is not the case?