Intel this month released a presentation updating its channel partners and end-users how its Core Ultra 200-series “Arrow Lake-S” desktop processors stack up against AMD Ryzen 9000 series “Zen 5” processors, including the latest 9000X3D series chips with 3D V-Cache. The company claims a superior balance of gaming and productivity performance at comparable prices. These performance claims take into account the various software and microcode updates the platform received since its October 2024 debut—nearing a year in the market—particularly taking into account advances Intel made to its APO (application performance optimization) software in this time.

Intel begins its presentation by layout out its entire Socket LGA1851 desktop processor lineup. The maxed-out Core Ultra 9 8P+16E processors are shown as being competitive to the entire Ryzen 9 9000 series high core-count processors. The Core Ultra 7 265K/KF 8P+12E chips are compared to the Ryzen 7 9800X3D, which remains the fastest processor for PC gaming. The non-K Core Ultra 7 265 and 265F are compared to the Ryzen 7 9700X. And then the bulk of the Core Ultra 5 6P+8E and 6P+4E lineup is compared to the Ryzen 5 9600X and 9600.

The flagship Core Ultra 9 285K is pitted against AMD’s flagship part, the Ryzen 9 9950X3D. The gaming performance is shown to be mostly trailing by single-digit percentages, while content creation performance sees performance gains in favor of the 285K in 4 out of 5 tests. Then, in a separate slide, the 285K is pitted against the Ryzen 9 9950X, the chip lacking 3D V-Cache. Here, the gaming performance is mostly at par, while productivity performance sees Intel post leads in all five tests. Sticking with the 285K and 9950X (non-X3D) comparison, and Intel put out a slide with a wider selection of games, where the performance is shown being at par, or favoring the 285K in three out of nine tests. A much wider selection of productivity tests sees the 285K convincingly ahead of the 9950X (non-X3D).

Next up, Intel compared the Core Ultra 7 265K with the Ryzen 7 9700X in a wide selection of games. Here, the 265K is shown either at-par or lagging behind the 9700X in 7 out of 9 game tests, and posting gains in 2 of them. Intel’s latest pricing sees the 265K go for $299, putting it at an advantage against the 9700X with its $360 price. Armed with 8P+12E cores, particularly those high performance-Watt “Skymont” E-cores, the 265K predictably smokes the Ryzen 7 9700X in productivity performance, posting performance gains as high as 84% in multithreaded productivity benchmarks.

Interestingly, Intel compared the 265K with the Ryzen 7 9800X3D in a much narrower set of game tests, because the AMD chip bludgeons Intel in 4 out of 5 game tests. “Starfield” is the only test where the 265K is shown performing on par. The 265K posts much higher productivity performance owing to its higher core count. Then comes an interesting slide from Intel, where it is comparing the performance-per-Dollar of the $299 Core Ultra 7 265K with the $479 Ryzen 7 9800X3D, and is claiming a 25% lead. Intel compares the 265K to the 9800X3D across a broader set of productivity benchmarks to make its point.

Intel also makes an interesting comparison between the Core Ultra 7 265K and the Ryzen 9 9900X 12-core/24-thread non-X3D processor, where the gaming performance is shown to be mostly on-par, however, no comparisons have been made between their productivity performance.

We now jump down to the Core Ultra 5 245K, which springs a mixed bag when it comes to gaming. Out of the nine game tests, the 245K trails the Ryzen 5 9600X in three of them, is at par in three others, while leading the 9600X in three. Barring two single-thread heavy productivity benchmarks, namely Photoshop and Cinebench 2004 ST, The 245K dominates the 9600X in multithreaded productivity owing to its higher core-count of 6P+8E.

Intel compared the Core Ultra 5 225 with its predecessor, the Core i5-14400, and claimed a geomean of 20% higher gaming performance.

Here are some important performance footnotes by Intel: