Some notes (I'll keep updating this, expect a LOT more soon) - Testing is done in the High Power profile. There is definitely a bug when you set it to balanced, but that doesn't apply here. - Core Isolation is disabled for our testing. - Some testing was done with regular DDR5 and CUDIMM kits to exclude either a particular memory kit or just CUDIMMS in general. That doesn't seem to be the case. - Currently running a lot more testing with different memory speeds and Core Isolation on/off. Will probably be a follow up video, just don't expect anything like that to magically make the 265K compete with the 7800X3D in games. (I just hope we can at least fix some things like poor CS2 performance) As always. If you have questions, just ask!
Gamers nexus seem to have good numbers with DDR5 8600, definitely would like to see a CUDIMM motherboard comparison at matching memory frequencies to a Standard DIMM slot DDR5
Thank you for testing Microsoft Flight Simulator! That is the most important game for me and most youTube channels do not test it in their comparisons.
@@TechTesters I wish some reviewers test economy games - CPU there is ultra important and its very easy to test in comparison to other games - heck factorio have command line benchmark that is ready to be automated - no need to even run a game.
Thank you for testing the Core 7 version. Like you said, everyone else is focused on the Core 9, so its great to have a Day-1 review of the midrange processor.
I wish all reviewers had the same sensible style that you do (Jarrod's Tech is another) where you can just review the product very diligently and then state where it sits on the 'bad product/good product' spectrum without tryhard drama and editorials about the 'bad' aspects. Thank you!
Part of that is because in the last 4-5 years almost all these products were underwhelming compared to years prior. Every 25+ years old enthusiast feels the same with these releases.
@@Mike-jm4gg 900$ candian dollars is not the same as USD... IDK why Candians and Australians think that 900$ for them is like 900$ for someone in the US. And no I'm not from the US.
What a mess. After the last issues with 13th and 14th gen, one would have expected that Intel made absolutely certain that this was a perfect launch, even if it had to be delayed. I am glad that I have moved to AMD, even though I might never be able to afford the current generation. Thanks for a great review.
Apparently there's a windows bug that causes massive memory latency unless you disable VBS or update to the latest version of 24h2. With those workarounds the memory latency apparently goes way down and performance goes up.
I'll pin a comment in a sec. But you're right, there is a bug (actually, multiple). But our testing is done with Core Isolation disabled and it's on the high power profile. So that issue does not apply here.
CS2 data looks really bad. It's barely going over 300 FPS while the AMD can easily do 500+. We're looking into it more now to see exactly what's going on there.
@@Lookingformorefun Duh, it's a 8 core CPU vs a 20 core CPU. Check other reviews versus the 7950X3D and later this year the 9800X3D and 9950X3D. The 9800X3D should be 5-10% faster than the 9800X3D for non-high core load games, and 10-15% faster for simulation / high core usage games just because the clocks should be decently higher. As long as they don't have the 9800X3D use more than 10W more power on average, it'll still be 40-50W (65-80W AMD vs 105-125W Intel) less power in games and better efficiency than the 7800X3D. For multicore AND gaming, you'll have a 9950X3D, and if AMD again, allows PBO overclocking/tuning when they release it in January, it should be close enough to the 285K+9950X in all-core work but still have even higher efficiency. I saw a review where the 7950X3D matches, or was a bit faster than the 285K in games, and in productivity, was about 10-15% slower *BUT* used 60-80% less power still than the 285K (160-170W vs 230-250W). Unless you *really need* the extra 10-15% performance, that comes with *more expensive memory and boards* (ie, a $200 X670E and $100 RAM does everything, with support for any 7000/9000 Ryzen) then there's nothing special about the 285K or 265K plus all the performance consistency issues that have been mostly worked out on even the 7950X3D and better/could not be an issue with the 9950X3D
Appreciate the look at the middle processor and look forward to further coverage. It is going to be interesting to see what things configuration wise will impact performance the most. This is basically what I expected gaming wise given how Intel was hedging their bets. It seems like when it comes to energy efficiency and multithreaded there aren't any asterisks with Arrow Lake, but gaming sure is. Given that memory latency is a problem for Arrow Lake it will be interesting to see if there will turn out to be any settings that will help.
Yeah. As expected the 265K annihilates the 7800X3D in normal applications. In gaming the 7800X3D is superior. Not surprising, since the 7800X3D also beats other AMD CPU’s in gaming including the new 9000 series.
Nice that you tested the 265K. I have mainly seen test of the 285K, but the 265K seem like the more reasonable choice for gamers. But it is a little hard to get the full picture when only testing up against 1 other CPU. But at least they cost about the same (today, the 7800X3D has become a lot more expensive😥) I have yet to se much about the 245K 🤷♂
Thanks! And it's just a matter of time, you only have a certain number of days to test pre-launch so you have to make choices. More CPUs would mean fewer games or removing some resolutions, and I figured it'd be best if I deep dive into this direction. More CPUs and more data will definitely follow soon!
@@TechTesters oh, I know how much work it takes. And if all the reviewers did the same thing I would only watch one. But because they do something different it is interesting to watch them all. But I still don't feel like I understand these CPU's yet. The head to head with the 7800X3D makes sense, I think it was fun. Der8auer focused on the options for OCing the CPUS, I think that was interesting. Gamers Nexus focused on the power efficiency, I always like that, it is fun to me 🙂. Hardware Unboxed tested different windows versions , this might help explain why the results are all over the place. These are all very different and I think the consumer benefits from having alle these different points of views when deciding what hardware to buy. But I have yet to find a review that includes all 3 K CPU's vs 7X3D, 9000X and 14000's CPUs. And I guess the 9000X3D's are coming soon, probably replacing the 7000X3D's. So we will probably get a lot of CPU benchmarks over the next months. For now the full picture remains out of focus for me. Looking forward to your next CPU video 🙂
The 7800X3D is the top gaming CPU. and at a similar price the comparison choice seems very solid, we all know the 7800X3D can do as its now over 1.5 years old.
@@AbbasDalal1000 if you’re equating negativity to being genuine, I have to disagree wholeheartedly. Some content creators go out of their way to use negativity as a crutch to get views and engagement. I prefer the information be presented in an objective fashion. That’s all.
And with this poor performance in Intel games, how exactly do they think they will convince me to pay for their new processors + new moutherboard + new ram? 🤔Sorry intel but after so many years with You now I will go to AMD and 9800X3D. ☺
LUCKILY I CANCELLED MY PURCHASE OF THE ULTRA 7 AND ASUS Z890 HERO YESTERDAY! WILL WAIT NOW FOR ISSUES TO BE SORTED OUT! LESSON IS: NEVER, NEVER, EVER, EVER BUY PC GAMING RIGS / PARTS AT LAUNCH!
@@christiansalim Will stay ultra 7, but going to wait 2-3 months to see if intel can sort out issues and then I'll make a call! Just wish that intel can fix multi e-core issues, to be utilized in gaming, seeing that amd is going to release 9900x3d next month on the 7th, if I'm not mistaken!? Probably going to be a monster, leaving intel even further behind!?
Thank you for being the only tech reviewer of the new Intel CPUs that actually puts the benchmarks into a non-upper-management perspective. So many tech reviewers treat it like it's a contest instead of a product, whoever crosses the finish line first wins in those videos
Could have mentioned the L3 Cache sizes when presenting the specs. That was what made the difference for some games. Intel Core 7 265K: 30 MB Ryzen 7 7800X3D: 96 MB
@@jrherita Agreed. Competition is good and a strong Intel will force AMD to not be complacent. That happened in the 2000s and early 2010s when Intel bragged about their “tick-tock” R&D approach which led to a decade of stagnation in the CPU area
Thank you so much for posting this excellent review of the Core Ultra 7 265K. I really like how you present the game performance results and I agree with all your conclusions. The videography is outstanding. Your videographer deserves a nice Christmas bonus. (Smile.) You certainly are busy! Thank you again for such a superbly presented review.
I love the honest and straight forward approach. Cutting through the marketing BS is the reason we love reviewers that know their stuff, and you're one of my favs. Thank you for keeping it real.
I assume this cpu design was fundamentally set in stone, a year or two ago, before the worst 13/14 series issues hit the fan. If people have a dodgy i7 / i9 LGA1700 cpu, they'd prefer to have a fully functioning reliable version of their existing cpu, more than "upgrading" to these.
Results should be more interesting in a month when everything will have been optimized. Also if you remove gaming perf I think it's looking as an upgrade in everything else, more computing power for less watts.
Thank you for doing all these reviews and tests on new PC parts. Amazing job, to the point and really helpful for us consumers. Keep up the great work!
Core isolation disabled you get a sub just for that. This is the best way to see what I am running at 4k. I will be here for your 285k results. Thank you.
Most launches of new platforms seem to have 3-6 months of updates before all the kinks are ironed out, but in this case the issues seem way bigger than normal. Would probably avoid Arrow Lake for the next 9-12 months if I wanted a good experience without issues.
Thank you . The addition of thunderbolt to many of the mother boards is quite good . For some of us users gaming is secondary . Music production and animation production are the priority . I wonder if the audio companies will go with thunderbolt more ?
@@edybtt No, I don't think that everyone plays games. I just poked fun at you. Not everyone tests these cpus for games only, but this is what people are most interested in, so obviously these kinds of reviews will be at the top.
Thanks for covering the 265K (instead of the 285K) and the succinct and balanced coverage (and the absence of attempts at childish humour, which has become a problem with some tech TH-cam channels). I hope Intel will be able to find their feet again, because at the moment, from a Gamer's perspective, they don't really have a convincing product.
My pleasure! And happy the type of content is appreciated! We'll definitely see if Intel (and/or Microsoft) can figure out the gaming side of things. Let's hope :)
@@TechTesters Thanks a lot for your reply. You have a new subscriber. :) I hope Intel will release a "zero efficiency cores" CPU for desktop as well in the future, because I'm sceptical that Microsoft will ever get core assignment right and Intel APO seems like a band-aid for a problem I'd rather not have to begin with. There is a place for high thread count applications, but I don't need them and don't want the downsides that come with optimising for them (core scheduling, silicone used for less performant cores, cost, etc.).
Appreciate you focusing on the Ultra 7 as the USA reviewers seem to have only received the Ultra 5 and Ultra 9. Question though, were your power measurements at just the EPS cables? See GN video from yesterday about Core Ultra power.
Intel always sends out the 5 and the 9, that's nothing new. I was just lucky to grab a 7 from elsewhere. As for power. Not using current clamps this time for that very reason. But CPU package power in HWInfo seems useful enough this time around. Aligns with wall power as well. So 190-200 Watts during stress seems to be what you should expect.
I'm happy with my Intel Core i7-14700K system (20 physical cores, 28 threads). Big upgrade from my old 2016 Intel Core i7-6700K system (with only 4 physical cores, 8 threads). Have a ProArt RTX 4080 and 32GB DDR5 and 2TB M.2 Samsung 990 Pro SSD and 1000W corsair power supply.
I wonder if Intel even Test their CPUs against AMD before throwing them to the shops and asking higher price compared to the faster AMD which are cheaper.
I'm not surprised, the 7800X3D is really something special. Intel needs to figure out the 3D V-cache. The improvement in power efficiency is nice to see though although still a ways away. Wasn't considering their CPUs after the degradations issues for the last couple generations and their prices but hopefully this is the beginning of Intel turning things around. It will be interesting to see how the decision to no longer have hyperthreading will effect their performance in things like video editing going forward. edit: after watching the Hardware Unboxed review of the Ultra 9 where they go into a bit more detail on the "mess" that Nada mentioned maybe it's not quite the beginning of a turnaround that I would have like to seen. Hopefully at the very least they won't have the same degradation issues.
@@Killswitch1411 considering they're called "gaming PCs" and that is the main area where people watching videos like this are looking for performance I'd say that's pretty relevant.
@@TheEvdiggity never said it was irrelevant, people watching these videos watch for more than gaming as well. I wouldn't buy a x3d for the fact it does poorly on non gaming tasks and it's worth taking the slight gaming hit for my use case.
@@Killswitch1411 I know there are more use cases but when the video in which the comment is made has 40 GAMES tested each at 3 different resolutions the focus is pretty obvious. I also have other use cases but the 7800X3D is also amazing in terms of it's efficiency. The latest Gamers Nexus video shows this in great detail. Taking this into consideration it is all around a pretty amazing CPU which is probably why the price recently went from about $350 to $500/sold out. Trying to be dismissive of it just makes you look like an Intel fanboy.
@@TheEvdiggity calling me a fanboy makes you look stupid, sorry but I Don't even own a Intel system right now. There were also other tests besides games in this video so fundamentally you're wrong. The only One who sounds like a fan boy is you with your by no means necessary defense of the 7800x3d. Pretty sad honestly 😂. Stop fast forwarding to the game fps benchmarks lol.
Thanks for the review. Unless something goes wrong, I don't think I'll upgrade my CPU until sometime in 2026. My 10700 still does fine for the games I play.
Yea Wukong is using the buit in benchmark. It's not perfect, but manual runs through the game weren't ideal either, and actual fight sequences are too inconsistent to use for comparisons. For seperate testing (like a pc build), it'll probably end up being the latter as that matters most.
What i understand if i am not a Gamer and want to work on Blender, After Effects, Premiere Pro, Da Vinci Resolve, and i am building a PC from scratch, i can surely go for Intel Core Ultra Series. And i know i won't be using CPU for Rendering, i will definitely go with atleast 4070tisuper or may be with a next gen 70 series card of Nvidia.
I would still wait a little bit to see what is wise in terms of memory choice, but you're right: for non gaming stuff this is a good step. I just wanted to dive more into one area, knowing other reviewers will cover the CPU more broadly anyway :)
@@TechTesters Yup, I need to wait for a new gen GPU from Nvidia, but looking forward to Arc Battlemage GPU as well. Both are a minimum of 3 Months away from Today, Till then, plenty of performance information will become available. Thanks for yours and will wait for future ones as well.
I'm pretty sure that anyone who tested that at the time remembers. But there is a difference between a messy launch, and a messy launch with some performance regression.
I was so forward to looking at this new CPU and was ready to buy. Then as the results came in I wasn't sure because I was not and do not play the games that most people play. But you put the nail in the coffin for this new cpu, because the game I do play is flight simulator. Wasn't ready to join the AMD team, because my last for builds were all Intel with no problems. But I guess once the 7800 ex 3D price drops back to normal I will finally join the AMD team. Thank you for reviewing the new processors with flight simulator, which most reviewers seem to ignore.
Maybe wait just a little bit. We're testing some more variables right now, specifically looking at some of the "problem" games like MSFS and CS2. I don't have all the results yet but there are some signs that different memory might just improve some things, at least a little bit.
Thanks for the review. Arrow to the knee Lake vs Zen 5%, this generation of CPUs really isn't something to get exited about. Let's hope the upcoming X3D chips change things.
This is what I want to see. 😍 BTW By the bad performance, it looks like it just came from most of the old title games like 3-4 years ago. Because on 8:47 this year games like black myth and Star Wars are just not that different
Supposing there is some driver issue with the new CPU I'd like to see the 14700K thrown in the lot, just to understand where the the 265K is lagging behind and why. MFS is slower at 1080P then at 4K for example on the 265K
1 FPS up or down doesn't really make it slower. It's just hitting CPU-side limits across all 3 resolutions. I didn't have time to do a full retest of another CPU, there's just too many games and resolutions to test, but if I look at some older data I just don't see the 14700K not beating the 265K in most games.
Great point at the end, wintel ment stable launches in the past, this was still a purchasing concern for a lot of people who still daily Intel. This launch is messy. Kinda like Ryzen v1
Great review! Pretty shocking differences, also in 4k. I hope the new X3D line up will have a better all-in-one proccesor. Something Intel clearly doesn't have this generation. Dankjewel!
It could not be said that these processors are really bad The only thing that is clear is that the new generation of Intel is not for gaming , And losing the game market can be a heavy failure for Intel
if you look at other reviews, you can say they are bad, both for the launch and the removal of features and for everything in general, it is a mess, but perhaps it is a sign of change, being a amd fanboy i think is change for the worse
@@betag24cn In fact, I use Intel, apparently the recent problems have confused them and made a retreat, of course, it should be known that new processors are investing in the future and artificial intelligence is the most important news today.
At this point I'd probably recommend to wait at least a week or 2-3 more to see what happens with these CPUs and how AMD's new X3D chip does. It also depends on what you plan to do with it :)
I still have my 12700K with 4080 RTX for 4k gaming and it works fine for 60fps gaming at least. it seems after that with Intel CPU things went a bit downhill.
Guess we have to wait a microcode update before buying these new ultra processors. In a month or two probably with some updates (mainly microcode) these processors will shine. Intel cannot any circumstances leave this generation like this, at the moment its just awful.
I hope so. But they're in stores today so we can't ignore today's performance either. But it does feel like this needed just a bit of time to sort the final details.
to cutp on power cpnsumption and to prove it was doing very little for the people, it was at vest a help for some videp editing software, for the rest, it was nothing basocally, gamers have been dissbling it to allow better overclocks and higher fps on some scenarios for years
Not a gamer here so my interests are not necessarily there, but I do want to ask about all this race for higher and higher FPS. It seems to me for any given display resolution, at some point there is diminishing FPS or other benefit returns if not no returns for the visual. Obviously the more complex the images, the longer time to render resulting in lower FPS. Please educate me why this is not the case. Thanks in advance! And thanks for the review of the U7 265, the processor I am eyeing for my needs.
You can definitely argue that you get "enough" performance in games for most purposes. But a lot of people spend a lot of time gaming, and I think it's important to know if your CPU is bottlenecking your favorite game. Seeing a real issue with CS2 not hitting 400-500 FPS+, or MSFS not hitting 70 FPS+, is something you might care about.
Some notes (I'll keep updating this, expect a LOT more soon)
- Testing is done in the High Power profile. There is definitely a bug when you set it to balanced, but that doesn't apply here.
- Core Isolation is disabled for our testing.
- Some testing was done with regular DDR5 and CUDIMM kits to exclude either a particular memory kit or just CUDIMMS in general. That doesn't seem to be the case.
- Currently running a lot more testing with different memory speeds and Core Isolation on/off. Will probably be a follow up video, just don't expect anything like that to magically make the 265K compete with the 7800X3D in games. (I just hope we can at least fix some things like poor CS2 performance)
As always. If you have questions, just ask!
How many hours do of sleep this week?
@@HorstJt Not enough :P
Gamers nexus seem to have good numbers with DDR5 8600, definitely would like to see a CUDIMM motherboard comparison at matching memory frequencies to a Standard DIMM slot DDR5
@@HorstJt hahaha, that was what I was thinking aswell. What a time consuming chores. But thanks @Tech Testers for doing it 👌
@@TechTestersthank u for the effort, we appreciate it
Thank you for testing Microsoft Flight Simulator! That is the most important game for me and most youTube channels do not test it in their comparisons.
Happy to help!
new MS Flight Simulator will be more multi threaded, release in November
exactly, MSFS is a real benchmark for CPUs :)
@@TechTesters I wish some reviewers test economy games - CPU there is ultra important and its very easy to test in comparison to other games - heck factorio have command line benchmark that is ready to be automated - no need to even run a game.
Thank you for testing the Core 7 version. Like you said, everyone else is focused on the Core 9, so its great to have a Day-1 review of the midrange processor.
I wish all reviewers had the same sensible style that you do (Jarrod's Tech is another) where you can just review the product very diligently and then state where it sits on the 'bad product/good product' spectrum without tryhard drama and editorials about the 'bad' aspects.
Thank you!
Part of that is because in the last 4-5 years almost all these products were underwhelming compared to years prior. Every 25+ years old enthusiast feels the same with these releases.
Very nice review! Thanks for the MSFS test.
Thank you, and happy it's appreciated!
“My Disappointment Is Immeasurable And My Day Is Ruined..”
Seems like 7800x3d still best quality/price atm
it so xpensive now 450 they raised the price :-/
not seems...but 1 millions % fact much faster cpu with 87 vs 250 & 193 watt high end intel cpu
Almost 900$ in Canada so no😢
@@Mike-jm4gg 900$ candian dollars is not the same as USD... IDK why Candians and Australians think that 900$ for them is like 900$ for someone in the US. And no I'm not from the US.
And the 9800X3D is about to launch.
What a mess. After the last issues with 13th and 14th gen, one would have expected that Intel made absolutely certain that this was a perfect launch, even if it had to be delayed. I am glad that I have moved to AMD, even though I might never be able to afford the current generation.
Thanks for a great review.
Thank you! And agreed, I don't understand why they didn't take a bit more time to makt the launch go smoother.
same here, i Never bought amd before, but just got my new system, with the 7800x3d. intel is just broken atm.
runs like a beast lol
Apparently there's a windows bug that causes massive memory latency unless you disable VBS or update to the latest version of 24h2. With those workarounds the memory latency apparently goes way down and performance goes up.
I'll pin a comment in a sec. But you're right, there is a bug (actually, multiple). But our testing is done with Core Isolation disabled and it's on the high power profile. So that issue does not apply here.
OMG, 7800X3D is 57% faster than 265K in CS2
CS2 data looks really bad. It's barely going over 300 FPS while the AMD can easily do 500+. We're looking into it more now to see exactly what's going on there.
But its only 50% of intel cpu performance in cinebench 2:56
and only 50% of performance in blender 3:26
this is because sop or what ever its called was turned off
@@TechTesters You need test vs AMD 9000X3D
@@Lookingformorefun Duh, it's a 8 core CPU vs a 20 core CPU. Check other reviews versus the 7950X3D and later this year the 9800X3D and 9950X3D. The 9800X3D should be 5-10% faster than the 9800X3D for non-high core load games, and 10-15% faster for simulation / high core usage games just because the clocks should be decently higher.
As long as they don't have the 9800X3D use more than 10W more power on average, it'll still be 40-50W (65-80W AMD vs 105-125W Intel) less power in games and better efficiency than the 7800X3D. For multicore AND gaming, you'll have a 9950X3D, and if AMD again, allows PBO overclocking/tuning when they release it in January, it should be close enough to the 285K+9950X in all-core work but still have even higher efficiency.
I saw a review where the 7950X3D matches, or was a bit faster than the 285K in games, and in productivity, was about 10-15% slower *BUT* used 60-80% less power still than the 285K (160-170W vs 230-250W). Unless you *really need* the extra 10-15% performance, that comes with *more expensive memory and boards* (ie, a $200 X670E and $100 RAM does everything, with support for any 7000/9000 Ryzen) then there's nothing special about the 285K or 265K plus all the performance consistency issues that have been mostly worked out on even the 7950X3D and better/could not be an issue with the 9950X3D
Finally someone test new cpus on 1440P and 4K too big thumbs up 👌👌🔥🔥🔥🔥 Subscribed
Glad it's appreciated :D
@@TechTesters Keep up the good work
Utter waste of time GPU limited.
@@impuls60 why does it show different numbers with different CPUs then?
Right? 1080p makes sense yea but also a low res and if you buy it you'll most likely be at 1440p or 4k
Lol I've seen a lot of Techtester videos but I've never seen that look on Nada's face before. Way to go Intel 😂
rigth?
for a moment i got sad she was replaced, hear her talk was a relief
Appreciate the look at the middle processor and look forward to further coverage. It is going to be interesting to see what things configuration wise will impact performance the most.
This is basically what I expected gaming wise given how Intel was hedging their bets. It seems like when it comes to energy efficiency and multithreaded there aren't any asterisks with Arrow Lake, but gaming sure is. Given that memory latency is a problem for Arrow Lake it will be interesting to see if there will turn out to be any settings that will help.
Yeah. As expected the 265K annihilates the 7800X3D in normal applications. In gaming the 7800X3D is superior. Not surprising, since the 7800X3D also beats other AMD CPU’s in gaming including the new 9000 series.
Nice that you tested the 265K. I have mainly seen test of the 285K, but the 265K seem like the more reasonable choice for gamers.
But it is a little hard to get the full picture when only testing up against 1 other CPU. But at least they cost about the same (today, the 7800X3D has become a lot more expensive😥)
I have yet to se much about the 245K 🤷♂
Thanks! And it's just a matter of time, you only have a certain number of days to test pre-launch so you have to make choices. More CPUs would mean fewer games or removing some resolutions, and I figured it'd be best if I deep dive into this direction. More CPUs and more data will definitely follow soon!
@@TechTesters oh, I know how much work it takes. And if all the reviewers did the same thing I would only watch one. But because they do something different it is interesting to watch them all. But I still don't feel like I understand these CPU's yet.
The head to head with the 7800X3D makes sense, I think it was fun. Der8auer focused on the options for OCing the CPUS, I think that was interesting. Gamers Nexus focused on the power efficiency, I always like that, it is fun to me 🙂. Hardware Unboxed tested different windows versions , this might help explain why the results are all over the place.
These are all very different and I think the consumer benefits from having alle these different points of views when deciding what hardware to buy.
But I have yet to find a review that includes all 3 K CPU's vs 7X3D, 9000X and 14000's CPUs. And I guess the 9000X3D's are coming soon, probably replacing the 7000X3D's. So we will probably get a lot of CPU benchmarks over the next months.
For now the full picture remains out of focus for me.
Looking forward to your next CPU video 🙂
The 7800X3D is the top gaming CPU. and at a similar price the comparison choice seems very solid, we all know the 7800X3D can do as its now over 1.5 years old.
You are such a pro. It’s so easy to be ultra negative. I really appreciate your reasoned approach.
Thanks! I try :)
easy to be genuine?
@@AbbasDalal1000 if you’re equating negativity to being genuine, I have to disagree wholeheartedly. Some content creators go out of their way to use negativity as a crutch to get views and engagement. I prefer the information be presented in an objective fashion. That’s all.
@@Bush880 thats too much, but then every product will be ok only
And with this poor performance in Intel games, how exactly do they think they will convince me to pay for their new processors + new moutherboard + new ram? 🤔Sorry intel but after so many years with You now I will go to AMD and 9800X3D. ☺
I love these types of comments. What processor is currently in your computer?
@@CyberneticArgumentCreator i8700 delided and overclocked on 5.2Ghz all 6 cores. Its time for upgrade for me.
That is a TON of charts and a great information dump. Thumbs up!
Intel: Do better! We need competition in the market.
Glad you think so, thank you!
LUCKILY I CANCELLED MY PURCHASE OF THE ULTRA 7 AND ASUS Z890 HERO YESTERDAY! WILL WAIT NOW FOR ISSUES TO BE SORTED OUT! LESSON IS: NEVER, NEVER, EVER, EVER BUY PC GAMING RIGS / PARTS AT LAUNCH!
So u will staying for ultra 7 or change ur mind and buy amd 7 7800x3d ?
@@christiansalim Will stay ultra 7, but going to wait 2-3 months to see if intel can sort out issues and then I'll make a call! Just wish that intel can fix multi e-core issues, to be utilized in gaming, seeing that amd is going to release 9900x3d next month on the 7th, if I'm not mistaken!? Probably going to be a monster, leaving intel even further behind!?
Sorry 9800x3d
@@wynandnieuwoudt3421 so u will using amd right now and say goodbye to intel ??
@@christiansalim Yes
So new Ryzen CPU's doesn't look that bad any more :)
Thank you for being the only tech reviewer of the new Intel CPUs that actually puts the benchmarks into a non-upper-management perspective. So many tech reviewers treat it like it's a contest instead of a product, whoever crosses the finish line first wins in those videos
Could have mentioned the L3 Cache sizes when presenting the specs. That was what made the difference for some games.
Intel Core 7 265K: 30 MB
Ryzen 7 7800X3D: 96 MB
Mostly good news for people like me still running an old perfectly good 13900k! Btw, good to see you back and always beautiful.
Same here. I was just about to upgrade but something tells me “don’t you are just fine with your i9 13900k” maybe later
To sum up: a two year old AMD CPU beats the crap out of the latest Intel release. But Intel throws in some blue screens. Nice.
Wasn't the 7800X3D released in 2023?
So far it's mostly been easy anti-cheat. So it's not great, but I've seen more blue screens with previous launches.
@@TrusteftTech OK, an 18-month-old CPU beats intel's latest....
A $500 processor beat a $400 processor, who would have thought?
@@BOZ_11 Yes it does. And that is good for AMD. No point in spreading inaccurate information which can only come back to make you look bad.
TLDR: Stick with AMD.
Yeah but her sad face next to the Intel CPU is worth an upvote for sure
@@jrherita Agreed. Competition is good and a strong Intel will force AMD to not be complacent. That happened in the 2000s and early 2010s when Intel bragged about their “tick-tock” R&D approach which led to a decade of stagnation in the CPU area
only for gaming...
amd is slower in "computation"
@@Lookingformorefun 7800x3d, yes. But 7950x I am not sure. Haven’t seen any comparison
@@corvoattano85317950x3d and you get the best of both worlds.
Exactly the video I needed for the new CPUs!
Thank you so much for posting this excellent review of the Core Ultra 7 265K. I really like how you present the game performance results and I agree with all your conclusions. The videography is outstanding. Your videographer deserves a nice Christmas bonus. (Smile.) You certainly are busy! Thank you again for such a superbly presented review.
Like how you politely described this cpu a garbage without saying word garbage 😂
I love the honest and straight forward approach. Cutting through the marketing BS is the reason we love reviewers that know their stuff, and you're one of my favs. Thank you for keeping it real.
Shes not gonna sleep with ya bro ffs lol
@@Boss-zo4lw Grow up and learn how to handle compliments.
The thumbnail says it all.
I assume this cpu design was fundamentally set in stone, a year or two ago, before the worst 13/14 series issues hit the fan. If people have a dodgy i7 / i9 LGA1700 cpu, they'd prefer to have a fully functioning reliable version of their existing cpu, more than "upgrading" to these.
Results should be more interesting in a month when everything will have been optimized. Also if you remove gaming perf I think it's looking as an upgrade in everything else, more computing power for less watts.
Compute definitely looks fine. But gaming looks pretty problematic?
Great review, love the format!
Smart move to focus on 265k, which most sales will be at🎉
That's what I thought!
Thank you for doing all these reviews and tests on new PC parts. Amazing job, to the point and really helpful for us consumers. Keep up the great work!
Glad you think so, thank you!
Dang, this is not what I hoped for. 😕
Core isolation disabled you get a sub just for that. This is the best way to see what I am running at 4k. I will be here for your 285k results. Thank you.
I'll see if I can include some Core iso on/off for a followup ;) And thank you!
Most launches of new platforms seem to have 3-6 months of updates before all the kinks are ironed out, but in this case the issues seem way bigger than normal. Would probably avoid Arrow Lake for the next 9-12 months if I wanted a good experience without issues.
Thank you . The addition of thunderbolt to many of the mother boards is quite good . For some of us users gaming is secondary . Music production and animation production are the priority . I wonder if the audio companies will go with thunderbolt more ?
Not if they watch Arrow Lake reviews, this launch is a debacle
Excellent info, well presented. You guys do great work.
Your concerned look in the thumbnail is too cute.
:D Thank you
This is great for new builders who want intel. I'm happy with my 13600K for gaming and work.
RIP Intel, at this rate they won't even be able to give these chips away so a price drop won't even help.
Rip intel for what? U5 U7 U9 is not for gaming, idk why every tests and benchmarks is with games....
@@edybtt What are they for then? Especially the U5 lol
@@maximumpain4579 you think everyone plays games? Ofc for multitasking, work productivity, developing and much more
I hoped Intel would finally become competitive again. Very disappointing.
@@edybtt No, I don't think that everyone plays games. I just poked fun at you. Not everyone tests these cpus for games only, but this is what people are most interested in, so obviously these kinds of reviews will be at the top.
Finally!
I was waiting for this 💪
Were there any temp benchmarks done? That's what I'm mostly curious about.
I wanted to get as many games in first, more will follow. But temps are definitely going to be a big improvement over 12/13/14th gen.
Thank you Nada, excellent review as always 🎉
My pleasure 😊
Thanks for covering the 265K (instead of the 285K) and the succinct and balanced coverage (and the absence of attempts at childish humour, which has become a problem with some tech TH-cam channels). I hope Intel will be able to find their feet again, because at the moment, from a Gamer's perspective, they don't really have a convincing product.
My pleasure! And happy the type of content is appreciated! We'll definitely see if Intel (and/or Microsoft) can figure out the gaming side of things. Let's hope :)
@@TechTesters Thanks a lot for your reply. You have a new subscriber. :) I hope Intel will release a "zero efficiency cores" CPU for desktop as well in the future, because I'm sceptical that Microsoft will ever get core assignment right and Intel APO seems like a band-aid for a problem I'd rather not have to begin with. There is a place for high thread count applications, but I don't need them and don't want the downsides that come with optimising for them (core scheduling, silicone used for less performant cores, cost, etc.).
Appreciate you focusing on the Ultra 7 as the USA reviewers seem to have only received the Ultra 5 and Ultra 9.
Question though, were your power measurements at just the EPS cables? See GN video from yesterday about Core Ultra power.
Intel always sends out the 5 and the 9, that's nothing new. I was just lucky to grab a 7 from elsewhere.
As for power. Not using current clamps this time for that very reason. But CPU package power in HWInfo seems useful enough this time around. Aligns with wall power as well. So 190-200 Watts during stress seems to be what you should expect.
12900k for £270 here in the UK is an absolute steal imo.. makes no sense to buy the newest gen anymore..
Or a faster 215€ R7 7700.
Still a great CPU :)
I'm happy with my Intel Core i7-14700K system (20 physical cores, 28 threads). Big upgrade from my old 2016 Intel Core i7-6700K system (with only 4 physical cores, 8 threads). Have a ProArt RTX 4080 and 32GB DDR5 and 2TB M.2 Samsung 990 Pro SSD and 1000W corsair power supply.
Nice system, enjoy it for a few years more! :D
Great review. You are a great communicator. Thanks for covering MSFS. Hard to find reviews that actually include this title. Take care.
I can just imagine comparing it with a 9800x3d
Everybody got a free cpu samples except me.
I wonder if Intel even Test their CPUs against AMD before throwing them to the shops and asking higher price compared to the faster AMD which are cheaper.
Good thing I'm not looking to upgrade from my 12900KS. This new CPU design sounds like it needs some issues sorted out.
Definitely wait a little bit longer :)
Thank you Nada for all the hard work you put into making these detailed benchmarks 💯👏💪
My pleasure!
I'm not surprised, the 7800X3D is really something special. Intel needs to figure out the 3D V-cache. The improvement in power efficiency is nice to see though although still a ways away. Wasn't considering their CPUs after the degradations issues for the last couple generations and their prices but hopefully this is the beginning of Intel turning things around. It will be interesting to see how the decision to no longer have hyperthreading will effect their performance in things like video editing going forward.
edit: after watching the Hardware Unboxed review of the Ultra 9 where they go into a bit more detail on the "mess" that Nada mentioned maybe it's not quite the beginning of a turnaround that I would have like to seen. Hopefully at the very least they won't have the same degradation issues.
just special for gaming that's it.
@@Killswitch1411 considering they're called "gaming PCs" and that is the main area where people watching videos like this are looking for performance I'd say that's pretty relevant.
@@TheEvdiggity never said it was irrelevant, people watching these videos watch for more than gaming as well. I wouldn't buy a x3d for the fact it does poorly on non gaming tasks and it's worth taking the slight gaming hit for my use case.
@@Killswitch1411 I know there are more use cases but when the video in which the comment is made has 40 GAMES tested each at 3 different resolutions the focus is pretty obvious. I also have other use cases but the 7800X3D is also amazing in terms of it's efficiency. The latest Gamers Nexus video shows this in great detail. Taking this into consideration it is all around a pretty amazing CPU which is probably why the price recently went from about $350 to $500/sold out. Trying to be dismissive of it just makes you look like an Intel fanboy.
@@TheEvdiggity calling me a fanboy makes you look stupid, sorry but I Don't even own a Intel system right now. There were also other tests besides games in this video so fundamentally you're wrong. The only One who sounds like a fan boy is you with your by no means necessary defense of the 7800x3d. Pretty sad honestly 😂. Stop fast forwarding to the game fps benchmarks lol.
Hello to my fav Tech mama! Great comparison and reviews :D
Thanks looks like a lot of work for the review. Very good video
It was a lot of work indeed. So glad it's appreciated!
Thanks for the review. Unless something goes wrong, I don't think I'll upgrade my CPU until sometime in 2026. My 10700 still does fine for the games I play.
Welcome!
I'm still on the 12th gen ^_^ quick question- the Black Myth Wukong, you guys ran it with the benchmark tool?
Yea Wukong is using the buit in benchmark. It's not perfect, but manual runs through the game weren't ideal either, and actual fight sequences are too inconsistent to use for comparisons. For seperate testing (like a pc build), it'll probably end up being the latter as that matters most.
I foresee that as soon as manufacturers update the BIOS and all other drivers for the new architecture... Intel will be the performance leader
I hope so! :)
What i understand if i am not a Gamer and want to work on Blender, After Effects, Premiere Pro, Da Vinci Resolve, and i am building a PC from scratch, i can surely go for Intel Core Ultra Series.
And i know i won't be using CPU for Rendering, i will definitely go with atleast 4070tisuper or may be with a next gen 70 series card of Nvidia.
Yes
I would still wait a little bit to see what is wise in terms of memory choice, but you're right: for non gaming stuff this is a good step. I just wanted to dive more into one area, knowing other reviewers will cover the CPU more broadly anyway :)
@@TechTesters Yup, I need to wait for a new gen GPU from Nvidia, but looking forward to Arc Battlemage GPU as well. Both are a minimum of 3 Months away from Today, Till then, plenty of performance information will become available.
Thanks for yours and will wait for future ones as well.
Ryzen 7 7800x3d is so Goated that even it will take lots of efford for Amd to beat this monster
Everyone don't remember how AMD messed up in their ryzen 1 first launch.
I'm pretty sure that anyone who tested that at the time remembers. But there is a difference between a messy launch, and a messy launch with some performance regression.
I was so forward to looking at this new CPU and was ready to buy. Then as the results came in I wasn't sure because I was not and do not play the games that most people play. But you put the nail in the coffin for this new cpu, because the game I do play is flight simulator. Wasn't ready to join the AMD team, because my last for builds were all Intel with no problems. But I guess once the 7800 ex 3D price drops back to normal I will finally join the AMD team. Thank you for reviewing the new processors with flight simulator, which most reviewers seem to ignore.
Maybe wait just a little bit. We're testing some more variables right now, specifically looking at some of the "problem" games like MSFS and CS2. I don't have all the results yet but there are some signs that different memory might just improve some things, at least a little bit.
Thanks for the review. Arrow to the knee Lake vs Zen 5%, this generation of CPUs really isn't something to get exited about. Let's hope the upcoming X3D chips change things.
Let's hope we see some improvements from Intel as well :D
Great video as usual.
This is the only PC channel where I never want them to get to the graphs. 😩
This is what I want to see. 😍
BTW By the bad performance, it looks like it just came from most of the old title games like 3-4 years ago. Because on 8:47 this year games like black myth and Star Wars are just not that different
It doesnt have hyperthreading!! Battlefield and Pubg type games will absolutely suck. She showed Pubg on ULTRA so GPU bottlenecked. Fail.
Looks like im passing this gen. Lets see next year.
Supposing there is some driver issue with the new CPU I'd like to see the 14700K thrown in the lot, just to understand where the the 265K is lagging behind and why.
MFS is slower at 1080P then at 4K for example on the 265K
1 FPS up or down doesn't really make it slower. It's just hitting CPU-side limits across all 3 resolutions. I didn't have time to do a full retest of another CPU, there's just too many games and resolutions to test, but if I look at some older data I just don't see the 14700K not beating the 265K in most games.
No HT seems like the weirdest decision in 2024.
You have such a nice wify look.
What a mess, indeed. Thanks for the review!
Making sure I understand, the 285k then we would expect to perform better than the 265k right?
4 E-Cores and 200MHz should not change the results by a really drastic amount. But we'll find out soon!
Honest review, as usual.
I always try :)
All these thumbnails of weird face Tech tubers are funny to me, thanks Intel.
I tried smiling, but I just couldn't.
Great point at the end, wintel ment stable launches in the past, this was still a purchasing concern for a lot of people who still daily Intel. This launch is messy. Kinda like Ryzen v1
Ryzen v1 was also rough for sure :D
I was hoping to get the Ultra 9 285k, but I think I’m going to wait a month and get the new Ryzen 7 9800x3D
I'd definitely wait and see a few weeks :)
You look so sad in the thumbnail :(
Gamers nexus has a problem with it too...
I heard. But I need a bit of a break first before I start watching all the other content :D
Great review! Pretty shocking differences, also in 4k. I hope the new X3D line up will have a better all-in-one proccesor. Something Intel clearly doesn't have this generation. Dankjewel!
Graag gedaan :)
It could not be said that these processors are really bad
The only thing that is clear is that the new generation of Intel is not for gaming , And losing the game market can be a heavy failure for Intel
if you look at other reviews, you can say they are bad, both for the launch and the removal of features and for everything in general, it is a mess, but perhaps it is a sign of change, being a amd fanboy i think is change for the worse
@@betag24cn In fact, I use Intel, apparently the recent problems have confused them and made a retreat, of course, it should be known that new processors are investing in the future and artificial intelligence is the most important news today.
Here in Brazil we use the expression: "He was already born dead..."
What do you recommend for someone building their first pc? AMD or Intel?
At this point I'd probably recommend to wait at least a week or 2-3 more to see what happens with these CPUs and how AMD's new X3D chip does.
It also depends on what you plan to do with it :)
Great video. Thank you.
Glad you liked it!
Leuk jasjee! Voorlopig blijf ik nog bij de 7800x3D denk ik
This is just games, so gamers stick to amd. I would like to know what about productivity/work compared to amd 9000 series
I guess I'll wait for 16th gen and see what they do there. My 12700K is still good enough for all my needs.
I still have my 12700K with 4080 RTX for 4k gaming and it works fine for 60fps gaming at least. it seems after that with Intel CPU things went a bit downhill.
I don't think I'd upgrade a 12700K yet either for a (mostly) gaming rig. Should be fine for a while longer.
Can't wait for your 9800X3D Test on 1440P and 4K 🔥🔥👌👌
If I can manage to get my hands on one, definitely :)
The good news is that if i upgrade from my 10700K i will probably most likely maybe see some improvement
You probably will. On the compute side definitely. I'd still wait at least a little bit though.
This was just a brand name change to milk customers
I think they confuse the customers more than help than at this point.
Thank you for the information
My pleasure!
Guess we have to wait a microcode update before buying these new ultra processors. In a month or two probably with some updates (mainly microcode) these processors will shine.
Intel cannot any circumstances leave this generation like this, at the moment its just awful.
I hope so. But they're in stores today so we can't ignore today's performance either. But it does feel like this needed just a bit of time to sort the final details.
Why remove hyperthreading?
to cutp on power cpnsumption and to prove it was doing very little for the people, it was at vest a help for some videp editing software, for the rest, it was nothing basocally, gamers have been dissbling it to allow better overclocks and higher fps on some scenarios for years
Great review
Thank you!
guess they will rename intel extreme masters to ryzen extreme masters starting 2025
Big improvement in power ? This thing is worse than the previous gen, of course it uses less juice to provide....less frames !
Not a gamer here so my interests are not necessarily there, but I do want to ask about all this race for higher and higher FPS. It seems to me for any given display resolution, at some point there is diminishing FPS or other benefit returns if not no returns for the visual. Obviously the more complex the images, the longer time to render resulting in lower FPS. Please educate me why this is not the case. Thanks in advance! And thanks for the review of the U7 265, the processor I am eyeing for my needs.
You can definitely argue that you get "enough" performance in games for most purposes. But a lot of people spend a lot of time gaming, and I think it's important to know if your CPU is bottlenecking your favorite game. Seeing a real issue with CS2 not hitting 400-500 FPS+, or MSFS not hitting 70 FPS+, is something you might care about.
@@TechTesters Really appreciate your response!