Intel Core i9-14901KE vs Intel Core Ultra 9 285 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data for the Intel Core Ultra 9 285 provides a complete benchmark profile, while the Intel Core i9-14901KE has no recorded benchmark entries in the database. This absence of data means all comparative analysis must draw solely from the Core Ultra 9 285 measurements and its nearest rival comparisons.

The Core Ultra 9 285 delivers an average benchmark score of 75488, placing it in the 95th percentile of all CPUs tracked. Its nearest recorded rivals show extremely tight margins: the AMD EPYC 8224P scores 75582, a difference of -0.1 percent, while the AMD EPYC 4545P scores 75373, a difference of 0.2 percent. The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 9755X3D and AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 9755 also sit within 0.3 percent, with scores of 75716 and 75738 respectively. These sub-1 percent gaps indicate a cluster of closely matched processors at this performance tier.

Looking at the Cinebench suite, the Core Ultra 9 285 scores 48945 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, 20556 in Cinebench R20 multi-core, and 4933 in Cinebench R15 multi-core. Single-core results scale similarly: 6909 in R23, 2901 in R20, and 696 in R15. The ratio between multi-core and single-core performance in R23 is roughly 7.1 to 1, which reflects the processor's 24-core configuration.

PassMark results provide further granularity. The multi-thread score of 56602 contrasts with a single-thread score of 4881. Integer math reaches 164869, while floating-point math reaches 194988, indicating the FPU handles floating-point workloads approximately 18 percent better than integer workloads. Extended instructions score 45357, which shows strong SIMD capabilities. Data compression scores 602121, while data encryption scores 46949, a substantial gap that suggests encryption workloads rely on a different execution path than compression tasks.

The find prime numbers test yields a score of 459, which appears low relative to other PassMark metrics. Random string sorting scores 73651, and physics simulation scores 3598. These figures collectively describe a processor that excels in parallel workloads, as evidenced by the high multi-thread score relative to the single-thread score.

Architecture Differences

The two processors belong to different generations and manufacturing nodes. The Intel Core i9-14901KE uses Raptor Lake architecture, specifically Raptor Lake-R, built on Intel's 10 nm process. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 uses Arrow Lake architecture, specifically Arrow Lake-S, built on TSMC's 3 nm process. The Core Ultra 9 285 integrates 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die, while the Core i9-14901KE has a 257 mm² die with no transistor count listed in the database.

The core configurations differ substantially. The Core i9-14901KE has 8 cores and 16 threads, indicating Hyper-Threading support. The Core Ultra 9 285 has 24 cores and 24 threads, meaning no Hyper-Threading. Despite having three times the cores, the Core Ultra 9 285 has the same thread count as its core count, so single-threaded performance per core is a separate consideration from core count.

Clock speeds also differ. The Core i9-14901KE has a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.80 GHz. The Core Ultra 9 285 has a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.60 GHz. The Core i9-14901KE reaches a 0.20 GHz higher boost, but the Core Ultra 9 285 operates at a 1.30 GHz lower base clock.

Cache hierarchies show structural changes. The Core i9-14901KE provides 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 9 285 provides 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and the same 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The per-core L1 cache more than doubles, and per-core L2 cache increases by 50 percent, while the shared L3 remains identical.

Memory support diverges sharply. The Core i9-14901KE supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the Core Ultra 9 285 supports DDR5 only. Both use dual-channel memory buses. The Core Ultra 9 285 lists a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s, while the Core i9-14901KE has no memory bandwidth figure recorded. ECC memory support is present on both processors.

PCIe connectivity differs. The Core i9-14901KE provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the Core Ultra 9 285 provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU, a 4-lane increase. Integrated graphics also change: the Core i9-14901KE uses UHD Graphics 770, while the Core Ultra 9 285 uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU.

The sockets are incompatible. The Core i9-14901KE uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Core Ultra 9 285 uses Intel Socket 1851. The Core i9-14901KE has an unlocked multiplier, while the Core Ultra 9 285 does not. The Core i9-14901KE has a TDP of 125 watts, while the Core Ultra 9 285 has a TDP of 65 watts. The Core Ultra 9 285 has a launch MSRP of $579. The Core i9-14901KE has no launch MSRP recorded.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 has 24 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Core i9-14901KE has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Core Ultra 9 285 provides 16 additional physical cores, though neither processor's thread count exceeds its core count in the case of the Core Ultra 9 285.

Q: What is the performance percentile of the Core Ultra 9 285?

A: The Core Ultra 9 285 sits in the 95th percentile of all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 75488. Its nearest rivals, the AMD EPYC 8224P and AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 9755X3D, score 75582 and 75716 respectively, both within 0.3 percent.

Q: How do the cache sizes compare?

A: The Core i9-14901KE has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 9 285 has 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and the same 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 9 285 therefore has larger per-core L1 and L2 caches but equal L3 capacity.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Intel Core i9-14901KE and the Intel Core Ultra 9 285 support ECC memory. However, the Core i9-14901KE supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the Core Ultra 9 285 supports DDR5 only.

Q: What is the TDP difference?

A: The Core i9-14901KE has a TDP of 125 watts, while the Core Ultra 9 285 has a TDP of 65 watts. The Core Ultra 9 285 draws 60 watts less according to the recorded TDP figures.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Core i9-14901KE has a boost clock of 5.80 GHz, which is 0.20 GHz higher than the Core Ultra 9 285's boost clock of 5.60 GHz. The Core i9-14901KE also has a higher base clock at 3.80 GHz versus 2.50 GHz.

The Verdict

The data shows a clear division between the two processors. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 has recorded benchmark results placing it in the 95th percentile, with an average score of 75488. The Intel Core i9-14901KE has no recorded benchmarks, so its comparative performance cannot be quantified from the database.

The Core Ultra 9 285 delivers 24 cores versus 8, a 3 nm TSMC process versus Intel's 10 nm, a 65 watt TDP versus 125 watts, and PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes versus 16 lanes. The Core i9-14901KE counters with higher base and boost clocks, DDR4 and DDR5 memory support, and an unlocked multiplier.

For workloads that scale with core count, the Core Ultra 9 285 has the structural advantage. For workloads that depend on per-core clock speed, the Core i9-14901KE has the recorded clock advantage. The Core Ultra 9 285 also carries the only available benchmark data, which supports its position in the 95th percentile.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Core i9-14901KE | Core Ultra 9 285 |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 8 | 24 |

| Threads | 16 | 24 |

| Base clock | 3.80 GHz | 2.50 GHz |

| Boost clock | 5.80 GHz | 5.60 GHz |

| TDP | 125 W | 65 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel Socket 1851 |

| Architecture | Raptor Lake | Arrow Lake |

| Process node | 10 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Transistors | Not recorded | 17,800 million |

| Die size | 257 mm² | 243 mm² |

| L1 cache | 80 KB (per core) | 192 KB (per core) |

| L2 cache | 2 MB (per core) | 3 MB (per core) |

| L3 cache | 36 MB (shared) | 36 MB (shared) |

| Memory support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR5 |

| Memory bandwidth | Not recorded | 102.4 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 Lanes | Gen 5, 20 Lanes |

| Integrated graphics | UHD Graphics 770 | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU |

| Multiplier unlocked | Yes | No |

| Launch MSRP | Not recorded | $579 |

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 wins on core count, providing 24 cores and 24 threads, which suits heavily parallel workloads such as rendering, compilation, and scientific simulation. Its 3 nm process node from TSMC and 17,800 million transistors indicate a denser, more modern design. The 65 watt TDP suggests lower power draw under the recorded specifications. The PCIe Gen 5 implementation with 20 lanes offers additional CPU-attached connectivity. The larger per-core L1 cache at 192 KB and per-core L2 cache at 3 MB may improve locality for certain access patterns. Its 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth provides a measured ceiling for dual-channel DDR5 traffic. The Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU integrated GPU represents a different graphics capability compared to UHD Graphics 770. The 95th percentile ranking and average benchmark score of 75488 establish a quantified performance baseline, with nearest rivals all within 0.3 percent, indicating strong competitive positioning.

The Intel Core i9-14901KE wins on clock speed, with a 5.80 GHz boost clock and 3.80 GHz base clock, both higher than the Core Ultra 9 285. The unlocked multiplier allows manual overclocking, while the Core Ultra 9 285 is locked. The 8-core, 16-thread configuration with Hyper-Threading may benefit workloads that respond to additional threads per core rather than additional physical cores. DDR4 support provides compatibility with older memory platforms. The 257 mm² die size, while larger than the Core Ultra 9 285's 243 mm², reflects the older Raptor Lake design. The Intel Socket 1700 platform differs from the newer Socket 1851, so platform choice depends on motherboard compatibility. The 125 watt TDP indicates a higher power envelope, which may support sustained high clocks under load. No benchmark data exists for the Core i9-14901KE, so its real-world performance cannot be compared directly to the Core Ultra 9 285's recorded scores.