<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
     xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
     xmlns:dc="https://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
     xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"
     xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
     xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
>
    <channel>
                    <atom:link rel="alternate" hreflang="en-GB"
                       href="https://www.tomshardware.com/uk/feeds/tag/intel-core"
                       type="application/rss+xml"/>
                            <title><![CDATA[ Latest from Tom's Hardware UK in Intel-core ]]></title>
                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/uk/tag/intel-core</link>
        <description><![CDATA[ All the latest intel-core content from the Tom's Hardware  UK team ]]></description>
                                    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 27 Jun 2026 10:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
                            <language>en</language>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ RAM crisis provokes enthusiast to try Windows 11 on DDR1-era hardware — other key vintage components included the Core 2 Q6600 and ATI Radeon HD 4650 AGP ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/software/windows/ram-crisis-provokes-enthusiast-to-try-windows-11-on-ddr1-era-hardware-other-key-vintage-components-included-the-core-2-q6600-and-ati-radeon-hd-4650-agp</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Enthusiast demos Microsoft’s newest OS running 'completely stable' on a Core 2 Quad Q6600, using a DDR1 motherboard, supported by an ATi Radeon HD 4650 AGP graphics card. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">7hdbhSUhMpHSXeGv5PupsL</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Yf2Jtopwhsuxdgyz2EjZ9k-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Sat, 27 Jun 2026 10:00:00 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <category><![CDATA[Windows]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[Software]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[Operating Systems]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Mark Tyson ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/56vqMYLDaKRHPhHZgbADFR.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Mark&#039;s enthusiasm for computers dampened at an early age by the rubber-keyed Sinclair Spectrum 48K and feelings of Commodore 64 envy. However, in the mid-80s, hope in a digital future was rekindled by the purchase of an Atari 520 STe. Since that time Mark has used a multitude of computers for fun and professional endeavors. He often owned both Macs and PCs but went cold on the former after OS9 was killed off, and warmed to the latter with the introduction of Windows XP.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
Early work years were spent in artwork and reprographics but in the late noughties, Mark started to blog about computers, Taiwanese food culture, and guitar design. This activity led to a full-time position writing about breaking PC tech news for HEXUS, for the best part of a decade. When HEXUS was abruptly closed, Mark helped with the foundation of Club386, before finding a new home at Tom&#039;s Hardware.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
When not wearing through the keycap legends on his PC keyboards, Mark can be found wandering the computer malls of Taiwan&#039;s neon-lit conurbations and enjoying local and international cuisine.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Yf2Jtopwhsuxdgyz2EjZ9k-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Martyx]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[A pair of Corsair DDR Memory Modules. Model CMX512-3200C2PT]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[A pair of Corsair DDR Memory Modules. Model CMX512-3200C2PT]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[A pair of Corsair DDR Memory Modules. Model CMX512-3200C2PT]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Yf2Jtopwhsuxdgyz2EjZ9k-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>The RAMpocalypse is hitting enthusiasts hard. We recently reported on the crisis seeping down to affect supplies of the<a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/dram/ddr2-memory-prices-jump-up-to-60-percent" target="_blank"> decades-old DDR2</a> gen RAM. So it comes as no huge surprise that a well-known tech tinkerer has been inspired to look at the viability of Windows 11 on an even more ancient DDR1 platform. Step forward Omores, who demonstrates Microsoft’s newest OS running on a <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/sbm-mid-cost-system,1687-2.html" target="_blank">Core 2 Quad Q6600</a>, using a DDR1 motherboard, supported by an <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-4650-agp,2383.html" target="_blank">ATI Radeon HD 4650 AGP</a> graphics card. “The best part,” says our hacky hero. “It’s completely stable.”</p><blockquote class="reddit-card"  ><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/windows/comments/1uehzxa/windows_11_on_a_ddr1_motherboard_with_agp_support">Windows 11 on a DDR1 motherboard, with AGP support enabled</a> from <a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/windows">r/windows</a></blockquote><script async src="//embed.redditmedia.com/widgets/platform.js" charset="UTF-8"></script><p>DDR1 first became available to PC builders and DIYers at the turn of the century, replacing the aging SDR SDRAM. The DDR1 rollout began with data rates like DDR-200 and DDR-266, being the preferred choice over older platforms featuring PC100 or PC133 SDRAM. We don’t know the rated speed of the DDR1 sticks Omores used, as it isn’t shown, but DDR-400 was the best official non-overclocked standard (a couple of years later). It would make sense to use the best memory on a cherry-picked older system like this.</p><p>Other key components of this age-defying Windows 11 PC build include an ASRock ConRoe 865PE motherboard. This is regarded as something of a legendary board as it bridged generations and allowed folks to use the latest <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/core2-duo-knocks-athlon-64,1282.html" target="_blank">Core 2 Duo</a> and Core 2 Quad chips from Intel while keeping their DDR1 RAM and AGP graphics cards. It isn’t only today that PC DIYers have cared deeply about component longevity.</p><p>The last significant component in this DDR1 system that we were told about was the ATI Radeon HD 4650 AGP graphics card. This seems to have required the most wrangling to make it work with Windows 11 / modern software. However, Omores reveals that “With some 'hacking' ... AGP 8X is fully functional and H.264 hardware decoding is active.” The key was finding, then crowbarring, ATI’s <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/windows-7-support-ends" target="_blank">Windows 7</a> 64-bit drivers from 2012 onto the system.</p><p>Once some details of the setup were confirmed in the video using tools like CPU-Z and GPU-Z, Omores showed the ‘fresh’ Windows 11 DDR1 system running modern browsers, with embedded video and hardware decoding. A handful of games and 3D benchmarks were also shown running without glitches. Last but not least, the system did indeed run <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/crysis-10-year-anniversary-benchmarks,5329.html" target="_blank">Crysis</a>.</p><p>In a later comment on the Reddit post, Omores elaborates on how to install the ATi driver on Windows 11 and shares a more detailed <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vs4bqCEnvUA" target="_blank">video link.</a> “I like that Windows 11 is rock stable on these older systems with no <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/-uefi-bios-definition,5768.html" target="_blank">UEFI </a>whatsoever and only ACPI 1.1,” adds the adventurer in older PC tech. “A lesser-known fact is that Windows 11 actually officially supports BIOS systems via Windows 11 IoT, so it's kind of expected to run smoothly.”</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Best Laptops 2026: Our benchmarked picks for productivity, portability, and battery life ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/best-laptops</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ We test dozens of laptops a year for their performance, screen quality, and battery life, to find the best laptops right now across Windows, macOS, Intel, AMD, and Qualcomm notebooks. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">DMaVmtLRBKzeAfhnoCQ4i7</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EPXv6HUoN7zEWmNon7hA5H-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Sat, 11 Apr 2026 14:35:03 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Fri, 26 Jun 2026 04:21:57 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[Laptops]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Andrew E. Freedman ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MTveuGNKPqpzrLttEA9ebb.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Andrew oversees laptop and desktop coverage and keeps up with the latest news in tech and gaming. His work has been published in Kotaku, PCMag, Complex, Tom’s Guide and Laptop Mag, among others. He fondly remembers his first computer: a Gateway that still lives in a spare room in his parents&#039; home, albeit without an internet connection. When he’s not writing about tech, you can find him playing video games, checking social media and waiting for the next Marvel movie. Follow him on Threads &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.threads.net/@freedmanae&quot;&gt;@FreedmanAE&lt;/a&gt; and BlueSky &lt;a href=&quot;https://bsky.app/profile/andrewfreedman.net&quot;&gt;@andrewfreedman.net&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;a href=&quot;https://bsky.app/profile/andrewfreedman.net&quot;&gt; &lt;/a&gt;You can send him tips on Signal: andrewfreedman.01&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EPXv6HUoN7zEWmNon7hA5H-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Tom&#039;s Hardware]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Best Laptops]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Best Laptops]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Best Laptops]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EPXv6HUoN7zEWmNon7hA5H-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Whether you're a student submitting homework, at work typing away at documents, spreadsheets, or presentations, or you're just someone who wants to access resources online and connect with family and friends, you want a laptop with the components and features you'll need to get the job done. That means a great screen, a comfortable keyboard, and long battery life (and nice design doesn't hurt, either!). </p><p>The laptop space is more competitive than ever. Windows machines come from many companies using silicon from three major CPU vendors: Intel, AMD, and Qualcomm. Apple, meanwhile, has a range of powerful and portable systems based on its own Apple Silicon.</p><p>In 2026, Intel's most recent chips are its Intel Core Ultra (Series 3) chips, code-named Panther Lake, while AMD launched its "Gorgon Point" Ryzen AI processors at CES. At Computex,  Nvidia announced that its <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/nvidia-unveils-rtx-spark-superchip-at-computex-2026-new-platform-promises-to-turn-windows-into-an-agentic-ai-os-with-arm-cpu-blackwell-gpu-and-128gb-unified-memory">RTX Spark</a> chips will launch in laptops from Microsoft, Dell, Lenovo, HP, and more starting in the fall, taking on Qualcomm in the Windows on Arm space. Earlier this year, Qualcomm released its Snapdragon X2 Elite Xtreme, Elite, and Plus chips.</p><p>On Macs, Apple's top chips are the  M5 series, including the M5 Pro and M5 Max, which can be found in the MacBook Pro and MacBook Air lineup. </p><h2 id="prime-day-exceptional-laptop-deal">Prime Day Exceptional Laptop deal</h2><h2 id="prime-day-exceptional-laptop-deal-2">Prime Day Exceptional Laptop deal</h2><div class="product star-deal"><a data-dimension112="fc4ccd56-4f2a-44ee-997e-fd4c2213d8e5" data-action="Star Deal Block" data-label="Apple's most affordable laptop is $10 cheaper at Amazon than it is over at Best Buy. This is the 256GB model without TouchID, but you can get it in any color: silver, blush, indigo, or citrus." data-dimension48="Apple's most affordable laptop is $10 cheaper at Amazon than it is over at Best Buy. This is the 256GB model without TouchID, but you can get it in any color: silver, blush, indigo, or citrus." data-dimension25="$589.99" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0GR6BVYS5" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:500px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:100.00%;"><img id="SAUMAT4jVDtYfa8cZRKEm4" name="apple-2026-macbook-neo-13inch-laptop-wit-0f1d98da-44c0-4cce-9b78-36e94f8dc282.jpg" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SAUMAT4jVDtYfa8cZRKEm4.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="500" height="500" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a><p>Apple's most affordable laptop is $10 cheaper at Amazon than it is over at Best Buy. This is the 256GB model without TouchID, but you can get it in any color: silver, blush, indigo, or citrus. <a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0GR6BVYS5" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="fc4ccd56-4f2a-44ee-997e-fd4c2213d8e5" data-action="Star Deal Block" data-label="Apple's most affordable laptop is $10 cheaper at Amazon than it is over at Best Buy. This is the 256GB model without TouchID, but you can get it in any color: silver, blush, indigo, or citrus." data-dimension48="Apple's most affordable laptop is $10 cheaper at Amazon than it is over at Best Buy. This is the 256GB model without TouchID, but you can get it in any color: silver, blush, indigo, or citrus." data-dimension25="$589.99">View Deal</a></p></div><p><em>Here is standout deal from the Prime Day event, which is currently taking place. Our list of best overall picks continues below.</em></p><h2 id="best-laptops-you-can-buy-today">Best Laptops You Can Buy Today</h2><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-the-best-laptop-and-mac-overall"><span>The Best Laptop (and Mac) overall</span></h3><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:2520px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:42.86%;"><img id="MDMKMqP5fgQ3i486EdvgYV" name="21-9a.JPG" alt="MacBook Air (13-inch, M5)" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MDMKMqP5fgQ3i486EdvgYV.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="2520" height="1080" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MDMKMqP5fgQ3i486EdvgYV.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><div class="buying-guide-block"><h3 id="1-macbook-air-m5"><span class="title__text"><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/macbooks/apple-macbook-air-13-inch-m5-review">1. MacBook Air (M5)</a></span><span class="chunk rating"><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star half"></span></span></h3><div class="_hawk subtitle"><p>The Best Laptop (and Mac) overall</p></div><p class="specs__container"><strong>CPU: </strong>Apple M5 (10-core CPU) | <strong>GPU: </strong>10-core GPU (integrated) | <strong>Display: </strong>13.6-inch, 2560 x 1664, Liquid Retina, IPS, LED, True Tone | <strong>Weight: </strong>2.7 pounds (1.23 kg)</p><div class="hawk-wrapper"></div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Strong performance and 16GB of RAM minimum</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Long battery life</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Strong performance</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Comfortable keyboard and trackpad</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">No longer starts at $1,099 (though the base model now starts with 512GB of storage)</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">Display notch is still there, still kind of awkward</div></div><p>The MacBook Air has been a go-to laptop recommendation for quite some time, thanks to strong performance, a fanless design, excellent built quality, and long-lasting battery life. With the version of the chip with M5, you get the benefits of years of hardware revisions since the Air's last redesign with M2, including a minimum 16GB of RAM and a 12-megapixel webcam.</p><p>The M5 chip in the MacBook Air showed off excellent single and multi-core performance. In fact, it;s closest rival was the same chip in the MacBook Pro, which gets a boost because of an active fan.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1133px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:65.23%;"><img id="PKWQiPx43Dgc8kBXKm2qpQ" name="image001" alt="MacBook Air M5" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PKWQiPx43Dgc8kBXKm2qpQ.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1133" height="739" attribution="" endorsement="" class="inline"></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>That being said, the system can throttle under heavy workloads like rendering. But for most people's typical tasks, including writing, editing, making spreadsheets, editing photos, listening to music, programming, and general multitasking, you'll have a very powerful machine.</p><p>Apple has boosted the base MacBook Air's price to $1,099, but it now starts with 512GB of memory. Given the price of components these days, the laptop is still a great value. If you want a Mac but don't want to spend that much for it, you could take a step down to the entry-level <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/macbooks/apple-macbook-neo-a18-pro-review"><u>MacBook Neo</u></a>, starting at $599, as long as you're willing to sacrifice on power, memory, ports, and a backlit keyboard.</p><p><strong>Read: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/macbooks/apple-macbook-air-13-inch-m5-review">MacBook Air (M5) review</a></p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-best-windows-laptop"><span>Best Windows laptop</span></h3><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:2520px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:42.86%;"><img id="Kz9RXMV8XoLWTSFEFrQwGU" name="21-9" alt="Dell XPS 14 (2026)" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Kz9RXMV8XoLWTSFEFrQwGU.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="2520" height="1080" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Kz9RXMV8XoLWTSFEFrQwGU.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><div class="buying-guide-block"><h3 id="2-dell-xps-14-da14260"><span class="title__text"><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/dell-xps-14-2026-da14260-review">2. Dell XPS 14 (DA14260)</a></span><span class="chunk rating"><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span></span></h3><div class="_hawk subtitle"><p>Best Windows laptop</p></div><p class="specs__container"><strong>CPU: </strong>Intel Core Ultra 7 355 | <strong>GPU: </strong>Intel Graphics (integrated) | <strong>Display: </strong>14-inch, 1920 x 1200, non-touch, 1 1 -120 Hz, InfinityEdge | <strong>Weight: </strong>3 pounds (1.36 kg)</p><div class="hawk-wrapper"></div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Attractive, lightweight design</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Strong battery life on the 1200p model</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Physical function row and borders on the touchpad</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Surprisingly good speakers</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">Low-travel, lattice-free keyboard made me more error-prone</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">Starts at $1,600</div></div><p>The Dell XPS 14 is back, and while you might expect its performance or design to be the headlining feature, it's the battery life that wows. With its base 1920 x 1200 LCD display, which has a variable refresh rate that goes all the way down to 1 Hz, it  lasted 20 hours and 41 minutes on our battery test.</p><p>That's not to say the battery life is all there is to like about this laptop. The 3-pound chassis is sleek, and Dell added a function row back to the keyboard, making it way easier to use over the touch bar of yesteryear.</p><p>If you're OK with 12 hours of charge, more expensive models with a tandem OLED display have way better colors and more powerful Arc B390 integrated graphics.</p><p>That being said, both of them have a low-travel keyboard without space between the keys, which definitely tripped up my fingers, so you'll need time to get your muscle memory going. And the starting price, at $1,600, is a lot to ask but is unfortunately common as the memory crisis rages on.</p><p><strong>Read: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/dell-xps-14-2026-da14260-review"><u>Dell XPS 14 (2026) review</u></a></p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-best-ultralight-laptop"><span>Best ultralight laptop</span></h3><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:5458px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:42.85%;"><img id="6LqMTpLUzcGVdhRgNH5u5" name="IMG_0436" alt="Lenovo Yoga Slim 7i Aura Edition Gen 11" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6LqMTpLUzcGVdhRgNH5u5.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="5458" height="2339" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><div class="buying-guide-block"><h3 id="3-lenovo-yoga-slim-7i-aura-edition"><span class="title__text"><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/ultrabooks-ultraportables/lenovo-yoga-slim-7i-aura-edition-2026-review">3. Lenovo Yoga Slim 7i Aura Edition</a></span><span class="chunk rating"><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span></span></h3><div class="_hawk subtitle"><p>Best ultralight laptop</p></div><p class="specs__container"><strong>CPU: </strong>Intel Core Ultra 7 355 | <strong>GPU: </strong>Intel Arc Graphics (integrated) | <strong>Display: </strong>14-inch, 2880 x 1800, 120 Hz, touch, POLED, Dolby Vision | <strong>Weight: </strong>2.15 pounds (0.975 kg)</p><div class="hawk-wrapper"></div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Featherweight chassis</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Beautiful OLED display</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Potent speakers</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Impressive battery life</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">Limited port selection, including no headphone jack</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">CPU performance is lacking versus the competition</div></div><p>Some of the best laptops are barely noticeable in your bag. The Lenovo Yoga Slim 7i Aura Edition, at 2.15 pounds is extremely light.</p><p>Still, despite the weight, you get plenty of other benefits. The speakers are surprisingly good for a laptop of this size. Perhaps most impressively, the system ran for 16 hours and 38 minutes on our battery test, outlasting many of the laptops we bit against it by multiple hours.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:2594px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:66.96%;"><img id="FpVRXri5fs4wQHT23pnGjm" name="battery" alt="Lenovo Yoga Slim 7i Aura Edition Gen 11" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FpVRXri5fs4wQHT23pnGjm.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="2594" height="1737" attribution="" endorsement="" class="inline"></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>The system also offers a lovely display. The POLED touchscreen measured 476 nits of brightness while falling in similar gamut ranges as other OLED notebooks that weren't as luminous. </p><p>There are some downsides. There are limited ports outside of Thunderbolt 4/USB-C, including a lack of a headphone jack. And CPU performance fell behind some competitors, like Apple's M5 MacBook Air and a thicker AMD-based 2-in-1 from HP.Still, the laptop impressed for its airiness and multimedia strengths. And as tested with 32GB at $1,519, it's not a crazy price as the costs of many laptops skyrocket during an ongoing component shortage.</p><p><strong>Read:</strong> <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/ultrabooks-ultraportables/lenovo-yoga-slim-7i-aura-edition-2026-review"><u>Lenovo Yoga Slim 7i Aura Edition review</u></a></p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-another-great-windows-clamshell"><span>Another great Windows clamshell</span></h3><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:4072px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:42.85%;"><img id="ijamaWCDF5QjXNuSqZhxdB" name="IMG_2234" alt="The HP OmniBook Ultra on a table. The table has no frills, just like the laptop, which excels at packing power into a plain design." src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ijamaWCDF5QjXNuSqZhxdB.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="4072" height="1745" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ijamaWCDF5QjXNuSqZhxdB.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><div class="buying-guide-block"><h3 id="4-hp-omnibook-ultra"><span class="title__text"><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/ultrabooks-ultraportables/hp-omnibook-ultra-review">4. HP OmniBook Ultra</a></span><span class="chunk rating"><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span></span></h3><div class="_hawk subtitle"><p>Another great Windows clamshell</p></div><p class="specs__container"><strong>CPU: </strong>AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 | <strong>GPU: </strong>AMD Radeon 890M | <strong>Display: </strong>13-inch, 2240 x 1400, IPS, 16:10, 60 Hz, Touch | <strong>Weight: </strong>3.47 pounds (1.57 kg)</p><div class="hawk-wrapper"></div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Excellent performance</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Sleek chassis design</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Competitive battery life</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Thunderbolt 4 on AMD</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">Too much bloatware</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">Fussy USB-A port</div></div><p>We can argue about how much the AI PC is really any sort of revolution, but there are still some strong ultraportables coming out. The HP OmniBook Ultra puts the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 375 in a sleek chassis with strong productivity performance.<br><br>HP is offering up decent battery life here, running for 12 hours and 52 minutes on our battery test. That's not the best, but all things considered including the high-resolution display, it's not bad. It's also nice to see Thunderbolt 4 ports on an AMD system, which is exceedingly rare.<br><br>The experience is knocked down a bit by a significant amount of bloatware, but if you're looking for a strong AMD laptop, the HP OmniBook Ultra is a strong competitor if you don't mind doing some uninstalling.</p><p><strong>Read:</strong> <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/ultrabooks-ultraportables/hp-omnibook-ultra-review"><u>HP OmniBook Ultra review</u></a> </p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-the-best-budget-laptop"><span>The best budget laptop</span></h3><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:2514px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:42.84%;"><img id="LVZQQHMJdFZERZUz3iLTaB" name="Macbook Neo 21 x 9" alt="MacBook Neo" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LVZQQHMJdFZERZUz3iLTaB.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="2514" height="1077" attribution="" endorsement="" class="inline"></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><div class="buying-guide-block"><h3 id="5-macbook-neo"><span class="title__text"><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/macbooks/apple-macbook-neo-a18-pro-review">5. MacBook Neo</a></span><span class="chunk rating"><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star half"></span></span></h3><div class="_hawk subtitle"><p>The best budget laptop</p></div><p class="specs__container"><strong>CPU: </strong>Apple A18 Pro (6-core CPU with 2 performance cores, 4 efficiency cores) | <strong>GPU: </strong>5-core GPU | <strong>Display: </strong>13.0-inch, 2408 x 1506, Liquid Retina LED, IPS, 60 Hz | <strong>Weight: </strong>2.7 pounds (1.23 kg)</p><div class="hawk-wrapper"></div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Premium chassis</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Bright, vivid display</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Touchpad is clickable anywhere</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Most affordable MacBook ever</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">Keyboard isn't backlit</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">Ports are not labeled based on functionality</div></div><p>If you're looking for an affordable laptop, Apple does it best these days. The MacBook Neo starts at $599 ($499 with an education discount), but you rarely feel like you're not getting enough – unlike most Windows laptops in this price range. The Neo has a premium, all-metal chassis, a bright, vivid screen, and a custom mechanical trackpad that lets you click anywhere. And yes, you get all of macOS running on what was formerly an iPhone chip.</p><p>The quality of the 13-inch chassis and screen are key here. You're not getting something plastic. You're not getting something low-resolution, and you're not getting something dim. You also get a great webcam for this price range, and the system stays remarkably cool. There are some niceties you sacrifice, however. Apple has gone without a backlit keyboard. And the two USB ports aren't labeled, so you'll have to remember which is the faster 10 Gbps USB 3 port (the back one) for backup drives and monitors, lest you end up with an error message.</p><p>I suspect that most people with light workloads — especially students and people using home computers doing a lot of work in the browser — won't have too much trouble with the 8GB of RAM. That being said, 16GB systems can be found in the Windows world for a bit more money, though you'll need to hunt for sales.</p><p>But if a premium laptop experience (including great build quality and a high-res screen) are important to you, Apple delivers that better than any Windows machine priced close to the Neo’s $599 starting price. </p><p><strong>Read:</strong> <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/macbooks/apple-macbook-neo-a18-pro-review"><u>MacBook Neo review</u></a></p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-the-best-laptop-for-work"><span>The Best Laptop for work</span></h3><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1920px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:42.86%;"><img id="RmBqZu5T3xVdET6dBNNbPP" name="Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon (Gen 11) - Cover.jpg" alt="The Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon on a black background. The familiar design, including a red Trackpoint, showcases its focus on reliability for work." src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RmBqZu5T3xVdET6dBNNbPP.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="1920" height="823" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RmBqZu5T3xVdET6dBNNbPP.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><div class="buying-guide-block"><h3 id="6-lenovo-thinkpad-x1-carbon-gen-11"><span class="title__text"><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/lenovo-thinkpad-x1-carbon-gen-11">6. Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon (Gen 11)</a></span><span class="chunk rating"><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star half"></span></span></h3><div class="_hawk subtitle"><p>The Best Laptop for work</p></div><p class="specs__container"><strong>CPU: </strong>Intel Core i7-1355U | <strong>GPU: </strong>Intel Iris Xe (integrated) | <strong>Display: </strong>14-inch, 1920 x 1200, 16:10, touchscreen | <strong>Weight: </strong>2.48 pounds (1.12 kg)</p><div class="hawk-wrapper"></div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Strong performance</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Long battery life</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Excellent input devices and speakers</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">Base screen could be brighter</div></div><p>There are plenty of reasons why the ThinkPad X1 Carbon is a classic. It's thin design and strong build quality are beloved by ThinkPad diehards. The latest model, the ThinkPad X1 Carbon (Gen 11), offers long battery life and great speakers.<br><br>Perhaps most critically, the ThinkPad X1 Carbon offers an excellent keyboard. Lenovo's reputation was built on great typing experiences, so this is crucial. For those who love Lenovo's TrackPoint, it's still here, allowing you to move the mouse without ever taking your fingers away from the home row on the keyboard.<br><br>The latest version comes with Intel's 13th Gen Core processors. We reviewed it with a Core i7-1355U, 16GB of RAM and a 512GB PCIe Gen 4 SSD.<br><br>The one real issue we had is that the base screen could benefit from being a bit brighter. Those who want the most vivid experience can opt for an OLED panel, but at a higher price.<br><br>When shopping for the ThinkPad X1 Carbon (Gen 11), keep an eye out for Lenovo's frequent sales, as there's often a deal available.</p><p><strong>Read: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/lenovo-thinkpad-x1-carbon-gen-11"><u>Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Carbon (Gen 11) Review</u></a></p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-the-best-windows-tablet"><span>The Best Windows Tablet</span></h3><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:4272px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:42.86%;"><img id="Gs6fDVXBZWLFVfRhP4HVkC" name="21-9.jpg" alt="A Microsoft Surface Pro (11th Edition) with a blue keyboard. The slim design fits easily in a backpack and works great with a stylus." src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Gs6fDVXBZWLFVfRhP4HVkC.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="4272" height="1831" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Gs6fDVXBZWLFVfRhP4HVkC.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><div class="buying-guide-block"><h3 id="7-microsoft-surface-pro-11th-edition"><span class="title__text"><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/ultrabooks-ultraportables/microsoft-surface-pro-2024-review">7. Microsoft Surface Pro (11th Edition)</a></span><span class="chunk rating"><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span></span></h3><div class="_hawk subtitle"><p>The Best Windows Tablet</p></div><p class="specs__container"><strong>CPU: </strong>Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite X1E-80-100 | <strong>GPU: </strong>Qualcomm Adreno GPU (integrated) | <strong>NPU: </strong>Qualcomm Hexagon (45 TOPS) | <strong>Display: </strong>13-inch PixelSense Flow, 2880 x 1920, 3:2, dynamic refresh up to 120 Hz, OLED | <strong>Weight: </strong>1.97 pounds (895 grams) without keyboard</p><div class="hawk-wrapper"></div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Long battery life</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Sleek design</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">OLED display is beautiful</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">More Arm-compatible apps than ever</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">Flex Keyboard is prohibitively expensive</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">Arm compatibility issues still remain</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">OLED display requires a CPU upgrade</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">Can run hot under load</div></div><p>Microsoft may push the Surface Pro as a do-it-all AI machine, but the truth is it's just a really nice, portable, slim PC that lasts a long time on a battery and includes a beautiful OLED display. It's definitively one of the best Surfaces to date.<br><br>The Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite processors offer enough performance to keep up with x86 competitors, making this one of the first Arm-based Surfaces that doesn't feel like it's lacking. Add on more Arm-compatible apps than ever, including the Chrome browser, and there's far less to miss from previous Intel models. That's not to say it's perfect — there are still some gaming issues, as well as drivers for specialized peripherals that may need to be rebuilt for the new platform.</p><p>The 45 TOPS NPU powers some of Windows 11's Copilot+ features, like Cocreator, Live Captions, and Windows Studio effects. None of these are showstoppers, but they're cool tricks.'<br><br>If you want a premium tablet running Windows 11, the Surface Pro is one of the only premium games in town. And that means paying a premium for a separate keyboard. But for those who love this form factor, the Surface Pro remains the best option out there.</p><p><strong>Read: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/ultrabooks-ultraportables/microsoft-surface-pro-2024-review"><u>Microsoft Surface Pro review</u></a> </p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-a-more-powerful-mac-laptop"><span>A more powerful Mac laptop</span></h3><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1999px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:42.87%;"><img id="dcdtVAxEuVfmBCcGjpEZRn" name="image2" alt="A MacBook Pro with M5 processor in a living room. Inside, it has Apple's latest M5 processor under a fan, making it a choice for those who need a more powerful Mac than the MacBook Air." src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dcdtVAxEuVfmBCcGjpEZRn.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="1999" height="857" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dcdtVAxEuVfmBCcGjpEZRn.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><div class="buying-guide-block"><h3 id="8-macbook-pro-14-inch-m5"><span class="title__text"><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/ultrabooks-ultraportables/apple-macbook-pro-14-inch-m5-late-2025-review">8. MacBook Pro (14-inch, M5)</a></span><span class="chunk rating"><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span></span></h3><div class="_hawk subtitle"><p>A more powerful Mac laptop</p></div><p class="specs__container"><strong>CPU: </strong>Apple M5 (10-core) | <strong>GPU: </strong>10-core GPU | <strong>Display: </strong>14.2-inch, 3,024 x 1964, Liquid Retina XDR, Pro Motion (Up to 120 Hz), True Tone, Nano Texture option | <strong>Weight: </strong>3.4 pounds (1.55 kg)</p><div class="hawk-wrapper"></div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Nano-texture display is stunning</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">One more Thunderbolt 4 port than prior model</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Long battery life</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Strong performance</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Great speakers</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">Apple Intelligence features are limited</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">RAM and SSD upgrade pricing is absurd</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">Display notch should have Face ID by now</div></div><p>The MacBook Air is a great starting point, but if you want an air-cooled processor and a few more features, the base MacBook Pro adds a few niceties. The 14-inch MacBook Pro starts with an M5 processor, has three Thunderbolt ports (including one on the right side), and a beautiful micro LED display.</p><p>For those willing to spend an extra $150, there's a nano-texture display option that is completely worth it if you ever use your laptop outside. The matte display looks excellent, and was great on desks near windows.</p><p>If you need the most power possible, we also reviewed the MacBook Pro with an M5 Max, including a 40-core GPU, a mix of Apple's latest performance and super cores, and a blazing fast SSD.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qdnWcSk3drWcZ6VkLES8Rm.png" alt="MacBook Pro (M5 Max)" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EnJEVuCYL5m4geTqRZVcUm.png" alt="MacBook Pro (M5 Max)" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/x6TEfXdcrRqiVjXtCJCU27.png" alt="MacBook Pro (M5 Max)" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RL2SpGYuBDVnpyioHWfpUm.png" alt="MacBook Pro (M5 Max)" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/iafwrbxMqU6WtWyWjUW657.png" alt="MacBook Pro (M5 Max)" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>Both the 14-inch and 16-inch laptops offer great speakers and beautiful displays, but you will have to pay quite a bit for any storage or memory upgrades you want, and you won't be able to make changes later.</p><p><strong>Read: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/ultrabooks-ultraportables/apple-macbook-pro-14-inch-m5-late-2025-review"><u>MacBook Pro (14-inch, M5) review</u><br></a><strong>Read:</strong> <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/macbooks/apple-macbook-pro-14-inch-m5-max-2026-review"><u>MacBook Pro (14-inch, M5 Max) review</u></a></p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-the-best-gaming-laptop"><span>The Best Gaming laptop</span></h3><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1920px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:42.81%;"><img id="whHg5W9WKNKGxWCJtw6RLG" name="Razer Blade 18 - Cover" alt="Razer Blade 18" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/whHg5W9WKNKGxWCJtw6RLG.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1920" height="822" attribution="" endorsement="" class="inline"></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><div class="buying-guide-block"><h3 id="9-razer-blade-18"><span class="title__text"><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/gaming-laptops/razer-blade-18-review">9. Razer Blade 18</a></span><span class="chunk rating"><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span></span></h3><div class="_hawk subtitle"><p>The best gaming laptop</p></div><p class="specs__container"><strong>CPU: </strong>Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX | <strong>GPU: </strong> Nvidia GeForce RTX 5090 Laptop GPU | <strong>Display: </strong>18-inch, IPS, 16:10, dual mode (3840 x 2400 at 240 Hz or 1920 x 1200 at 440Hz) | <strong>Weight: </strong>7.06 pounds (3.10 kg)</p><div class="hawk-wrapper"></div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Excellent performance</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Versatile dual-mode display</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Exemplary build quality</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Good keyboard, touchpad, and speakers</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Thunderbolt 5</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">Eye-watering price</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">Noticeable fan noise</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">No PCIe 5.0 SSD</div></div><p>Razer Blade 18 offers some of the strongest gaming performance we've seen in a laptop, but also features excellent design, comfortable features, and the latest connection standards. At $5,199.99 as tested, it sure should be good. It tops our list of the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/gaming-laptops/best-gaming-laptops"><u>best gaming laptops</u></a>.</p><p>The major highlight is the dual-mode display, which has two options: 3840 x 2400 at 240 Hz or 1920 x 1200 at 440 Hz. Those two choices (which you can switch between in Razer Synapse) is enough to showcase both intensive, graphics-driven games at high settings and esports where frames are more important than resolution and detail.</p><p>The laptop, packed with an Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX and Nvidia GeForce RTX 5090 Laptop GPU in our review configuration, outperformed the field in our gaming tests, especially at the lower resolution.Razer is one of the few laptop makers using Thunderbolt 5 ports (we've also seen them from MSI and Apple), so this system is ready to go if you're using advanced peripherals or the fastest external storage drives.</p><p>Perhaps the biggest downside is that the Blade's dual 2TB storage drives use PCIe 4.0 rather than 5.0. You won’t notice this in games or mainstream productivity, but if you want PCIe 5.0 speed for future proofing or 8K video editing, the Titan may still be the way to go. The Blade 18 does support PCIe 5.0 drives, if you want to upgrade to speedier storage in the future.</p><p><strong>Read: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/gaming-laptops/razer-blade-18-review"><u>Razer Blade 18 review</u></a></p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-other-laptops-we-tested"><span>Other Laptops We Tested</span></h3><p><strong>💻 Asus Zenbook A16</strong></p><p>The Zenbook A16 has Qualcomm's powerful Snapdragon X2 Elite Extreme processor, including 48GB of RAM on the package. While the chip is fast, the laptop, while lightweight, didn't meet our expectations. While light, it flexed and didn't feel premium; battery life was lesser than competitors; and while emulation is better than it used to be, there are still some compatibility issues with Windows on Arm for power users.</p><p><em><strong>Read:</strong></em><em> </em><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/ultrabooks-ultraportables/asus-zenbook-a16-snapdragon-x2-elite-review"><u><em>Asus Zenbook A16 review</em></u></a></p><p><strong>💻 Samsung Galaxy Book6 Ultra</strong></p><p>Samsung's Galaxy Book6 Ultra is a powerful system for creatives, thanks in part to the RTX 5070 GPU in the version we tested. The OLED screen is beautiful and you get an nice design (albeit one that is quite similar to Macs), but this laptop is pricey, and you get a shallow keyboard.</p><p><strong>Read: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/ultrabooks-ultraportables/samsung-galaxy-book6-ultra-review"><u><em>Samsung Galaxy Book6 Ultra review</em></u></a></p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-quick-laptop-shopping-tips"><span>Quick Laptop Shopping Tips </span></h3><section class="article__schema-question"><h3>✅ Get a good keyboard</h3><article class="article__schema-answer"><p>Whether you’re using your laptop to browse the web, send emails, code, write, or do other productivity work, the keyboard is one of your primary ways of interacting with your computer. Get something with responsive keys that aren’t mushy. Low-travel is ok if the keys have the right feel to them, but the last thing you want to do is “bottom out” while typing. Ideally, you can try out a store model before buying.</p></article></section><section class="article__schema-question"><h3>✅ Consider what you need in a screen</h3><article class="article__schema-answer"><p>At a minimum, your laptop should have a 1920 x 1080 screen. Some laptops offer 4K options, though it’s sometimes harder to see the difference at 13-inches or below. While 4K may be more detailed, 1080p screens give you much longer battery life. OLED screens are becoming far more common on laptops, with deep blacks and bright colors, but often at the cost of battery life. Right now, laptops with 16:10 screens are in vogue, though 16:9 is still popular.  <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/3-2-aspect-ratio-screens-best-for-productivity"><u>3:2</u></a> is great if you want a taller screen that shows more of your work at a time, but it's relatively rare. Additionally, more screens have been featuring variable refresh rates, allowing for smoother performance in some software, and longer battery life if you're idling. Many premium laptops will up to 120 Hz.</p></article></section><section class="article__schema-question"><h3>✅ Some laptops can be upgraded</h3><article class="article__schema-answer"><p>While <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html"><u>CPUs</u></a> and GPUs are almost always soldered down, some laptops let you replace the RAM and storage, so you can buy cheaper now and add more memory and a bigger <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/best-picks/best-hard-drives"><u>hard drive</u></a> or <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-ssds,3891.html"><u>SSD</u></a> down the road. But the thinnest laptops may not have that option, so buy with the future in mind. Some, like the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/framework-laptop-13-intel-2023"><u>Framework Laptop 13</u></a>, are designed around being easily upgradeable. While gaming laptops are often upgradeable, more and more productivity systems have soldered memory, Wi-Fi chips, and sometimes even storage.</p></article></section><section class="article__schema-question"><h3>✅ Battery life is important</h3><article class="article__schema-answer"><p>If you regularly use your laptop away from a power plug, aim for something that lasts for 12 hours or longer on a charge (gaming is an exception) at a bare minimum. But be wary of manufacturer claims, which don’t always use strenuous tests. Fast charging can help notebooks top you off even more quickly. </p></article></section><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-finding-discounts-on-the-best-laptops"><span>Finding Discounts on the Best Laptops</span></h3><p>Whether you're shopping for one of the best laptops, or just something that is good enough for your needs, you may find savings by checking out our lists of the latest <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/coupons/dell.com"><u>Dell coupon codes</u></a>, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/coupons/hp.com"><u>HP coupon codes</u></a>, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/coupons/lenovo.com"><u>Lenovo coupon codes</u></a>, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/coupons/bestbuy.com"><u>Best Buy promo codes</u></a> or <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/coupons/newegg.com"><u>Newegg promo codes</u></a>.</p><iframe src="https://content.jwplatform.com/players/JaCHc6hs.html" id="JaCHc6hs" title="How To Choose A Gaming Laptop" width="960" height="540" frameborder="0" scrolling="auto" allowfullscreen></iframe>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ The GPU benchmarks hierarchy 2026: Ten years of graphics card hardware tested and ranked ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gpu-hierarchy,4388.html</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Our GPU benchmarks hierarchy ranks all the current and previous generation graphics cards based on real-world gaming tests. Find out how the latest GPUs from Nvidia, AMD, and Intel stack up, with this comprehensive look at over 80 GPUs from the past decade. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">L8SfcAV5o28ayEFjzq6cfX</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tFPr7eEvykcUxHKw9WfWkE-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2025 16:14:08 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Fri, 26 Jun 2026 03:24:42 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[GPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Jeffrey Kampman ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8JCjGs5yVZds2YdKmzjUDE.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Jeff Kampman has been playing PC games ever since he learned how to fire up freeware CDs from the DOS command line. He started building his own PCs in the mid-aughts and later turned that passion into a career, working as a news and guides writer, reviewer, and ultimately Editor-in-Chief at The Tech Report, where he dove deep on CPUs and GPUs (and more) in pursuit of the smoothest gaming experiences around. Jeff later took on roles at Asus and Intel as a technical marketer before joining Tom&#039;s Hardware. As Senior Analyst, Graphics, Jeff covers everything from integrated graphics processors to discrete graphics cards to the massive data center GPU installations powering our AI future. Jeff is also a hobbyist photographer, Twitch streamer, espresso enthusiast, and runner.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tFPr7eEvykcUxHKw9WfWkE-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Tom&#039;s Hardware]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[GPU Benchmarks and Performance Hierarchy]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[GPU Benchmarks and Performance Hierarchy]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[GPU Benchmarks and Performance Hierarchy]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tFPr7eEvykcUxHKw9WfWkE-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-gpu-benchmarks-introduction"><span>GPU Benchmarks Introduction</span></h3><div  class="fancy-box"><div class="fancy_box-title">GPU Benchmarks & Performance Hierarchy</div><div class="fancy_box_body"><p class="fancy-box__body-text"><ul><li><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gpus,4380.html">The Best GPU for Gaming</a></li><li><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gpu-buying-guide,5844.html">GPU Buying Guide</a></li><li><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/best-gaming-graphics-card-gpu-deals-now-2025">Best GPU Deals</a></li><li><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-geforce-rtx-5050-vs-intel-arc-b580-face-off">Nvidia GeForce RTX 5050 vs Intel Arc B580 Face Off</a></li><li><a data-analytics-id="inline-link" href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus">All GPU Content</a></li></ul></p></div></div><p>Tom's Hardware exhaustively benchmarks every GPU to find out which are worthy of our list of <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gpus,4380.html" target="_blank">the best graphics cards</a>. Our GPU benchmarks hierarchy ranks current and previous generation graphics cards by performance. Whether it's playing games, running artificial intelligence workloads, or doing professional video editing, your graphics card typically plays the biggest role in determining performance — even <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html" target="_blank">the best CPUs for gaming</a> take a secondary role.</p><p>Our 2026 GPU Hierarchy testing spans three generations of Nvidia and AMD graphics cards, as well as Intel's Arc B-series GPUs.</p><p>Our testing has been made easier by the fact that no truly new gaming GPUs have been introduced in almost a year. If you haven't already upgraded your graphics card after the GeForce RTX 50-series and Radeon RX 9000-series launches in 2025, well, you're still looking at the exact same products now.</p><p>AMD did make its formerly China-only Radeon RX 9070 GRE available globally after Computex 2026, but in our review, we found that $549 product to be too expensive given the level of performance it delivers and the compromises made to hit its price point. <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/amd-radeon-rx-9070-gre-review" target="_blank">Check out that coverage for all the details. </a></p><p>Most of the products we recommend remain at elevated prices compared to their MSRPs, but this is just life in mid-2026. It's admittedly cold comfort, but unless you're shopping for an RTX 5090, graphics card prices haven't risen much more than they already did earlier this year. </p><p>Compared to the doubling or tripling of prices we've seen for RAM kits and SSDs in 2026 versus last year, a GPU upgrade remains a relatively affordable (and self-contained) option, either as a boost for an existing PC or part of an all-new parts list.</p><p>Let's dive into our ranking of GPUs past and present so you can figure out how all those cards stack up.</p><h2 id="prime-day-exceptional-graphics-card-deals">Prime Day exceptional graphics card deals</h2><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="6daf14e6-c7e3-422f-b507-36eff59cbaf0" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="Get this triple-fan RX 9060 XT at a low price and enjoy enough VRAM to play the latest games at 1080p and 1440p with aplomb. Be sure to grab the on-page promo code for the lowest price." data-dimension48="Get this triple-fan RX 9060 XT at a low price and enjoy enough VRAM to play the latest games at 1080p and 1440p with aplomb. Be sure to grab the on-page promo code for the lowest price." data-dimension25="$399.99" href="https://www.newegg.com/gigabyte-gv-r9060xtgaming-oc-16gd-radeon-rx-9060-xt-16gb-graphics-card-triple-fans/p/N82E16814932806" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1280px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:93.83%;"><img id="RjKXcrpB5dz9bEMjRJQWWS" name="RX 9060 XT 16GB Gaming" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RjKXcrpB5dz9bEMjRJQWWS.webp" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1280" height="1201" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a><p>Get this triple-fan RX 9060 XT at a low price and enjoy enough VRAM to play the latest games at 1080p and 1440p with aplomb. Be sure to grab the on-page promo code for the lowest price. <a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.newegg.com/gigabyte-gv-r9060xtgaming-oc-16gd-radeon-rx-9060-xt-16gb-graphics-card-triple-fans/p/N82E16814932806" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="6daf14e6-c7e3-422f-b507-36eff59cbaf0" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="Get this triple-fan RX 9060 XT at a low price and enjoy enough VRAM to play the latest games at 1080p and 1440p with aplomb. Be sure to grab the on-page promo code for the lowest price." data-dimension48="Get this triple-fan RX 9060 XT at a low price and enjoy enough VRAM to play the latest games at 1080p and 1440p with aplomb. Be sure to grab the on-page promo code for the lowest price." data-dimension25="$399.99">View Deal</a></p></div><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="81b8dcfa-e629-4f24-97ba-ed3ba9c6d8f6" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="The RTX 5070 is our pick for the best midrange graphics card thanks to solid baseline performance and theboost offered by DLSS 4.5 tech, and this PNY RTX 5070 delivers everything you need and nothing you don't to enjoy elite 1080p and great 1440p gaming experiences." data-dimension48="The RTX 5070 is our pick for the best midrange graphics card thanks to solid baseline performance and theboost offered by DLSS 4.5 tech, and this PNY RTX 5070 delivers everything you need and nothing you don't to enjoy elite 1080p and great 1440p gaming experiences." data-dimension25="$599.99" href="https://www.walmart.com/ip/PNY-GeForce-RTX-5070-Overclocked-Triple-Fan-Graphics-DLSS-4-Video-Card/15371260951" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:935px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:45.88%;"><img id="p3b84T6RJJ4gWCBTvVP7Bb" name="PNY 5070" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/p3b84T6RJJ4gWCBTvVP7Bb.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="935" height="429" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a><p>The RTX 5070 is our pick for the best midrange graphics card thanks to solid baseline performance and theboost offered by DLSS 4.5 tech, and this PNY RTX 5070 delivers everything you need and nothing you don't to enjoy elite 1080p and great 1440p gaming experiences. <a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.walmart.com/ip/PNY-GeForce-RTX-5070-Overclocked-Triple-Fan-Graphics-DLSS-4-Video-Card/15371260951" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="81b8dcfa-e629-4f24-97ba-ed3ba9c6d8f6" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="The RTX 5070 is our pick for the best midrange graphics card thanks to solid baseline performance and theboost offered by DLSS 4.5 tech, and this PNY RTX 5070 delivers everything you need and nothing you don't to enjoy elite 1080p and great 1440p gaming experiences." data-dimension48="The RTX 5070 is our pick for the best midrange graphics card thanks to solid baseline performance and theboost offered by DLSS 4.5 tech, and this PNY RTX 5070 delivers everything you need and nothing you don't to enjoy elite 1080p and great 1440p gaming experiences." data-dimension25="$599.99">View Deal</a></p></div><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="fbefccab-5080-4dd0-9d62-c38fb99a1340" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="This PowerColor RX 9070 is the exact model we use in our reviews, and we can attest to its quiet cooler and great performance for 1440p and even 4K gaming. 16GB of VRAM provides peace of mind, and you can boost performance as you wish with FSR 4 upscaling and framegen." data-dimension48="This PowerColor RX 9070 is the exact model we use in our reviews, and we can attest to its quiet cooler and great performance for 1440p and even 4K gaming. 16GB of VRAM provides peace of mind, and you can boost performance as you wish with FSR 4 upscaling and framegen." data-dimension25="$559.99" href="https://computers.woot.com/offers/powercolor-reaper-amd-radeon-rx-9070-16gb-1" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:679px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:72.90%;"><img id="yPzWoJjpzD6qFBk3hJ5QkE" name="51KS+A63CYL._AC_SX679_" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yPzWoJjpzD6qFBk3hJ5QkE.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="679" height="495" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a><p>This PowerColor RX 9070 is the exact model we use in our reviews, and we can attest to its quiet cooler and great performance for 1440p and even 4K gaming. 16GB of VRAM provides peace of mind, and you can boost performance as you wish with FSR 4 upscaling and framegen. <a class="view-deal button" href="https://computers.woot.com/offers/powercolor-reaper-amd-radeon-rx-9070-16gb-1" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="fbefccab-5080-4dd0-9d62-c38fb99a1340" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="This PowerColor RX 9070 is the exact model we use in our reviews, and we can attest to its quiet cooler and great performance for 1440p and even 4K gaming. 16GB of VRAM provides peace of mind, and you can boost performance as you wish with FSR 4 upscaling and framegen." data-dimension48="This PowerColor RX 9070 is the exact model we use in our reviews, and we can attest to its quiet cooler and great performance for 1440p and even 4K gaming. 16GB of VRAM provides peace of mind, and you can boost performance as you wish with FSR 4 upscaling and framegen." data-dimension25="$559.99">View Deal</a></p></div><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="c282bb78-e4ba-47c3-bc8c-5f7176821f60" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="MSI's Ventus 3X OC RTX 5070 Ti is a relatively compact triple-fan design that occupies about 2.5 slots. Its stealthy shroud will complement any build. Grab the on-page promo code for the lowest price." data-dimension48="MSI's Ventus 3X OC RTX 5070 Ti is a relatively compact triple-fan design that occupies about 2.5 slots. Its stealthy shroud will complement any build. Grab the on-page promo code for the lowest price." data-dimension25="$884.99" href="https://www.newegg.com/msi-rtx-5070-ti-16g-ventus-3x-oc-geforce-rtx-5070-ti-16gb-graphics-card-triple-fans/p/N82E16814137933" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1280px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:76.25%;"><img id="5TUGb6xScipeQTVsqGpYXg" name="msi-geforce-rtx-5070-12g-ventus-3x-oc-gr-8def5f25-9670-40bd-926b-2dbbd1838a35.jpg" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5TUGb6xScipeQTVsqGpYXg.webp" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1280" height="976" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a><p>MSI's Ventus 3X OC RTX 5070 Ti is a relatively compact triple-fan design that occupies about 2.5 slots. Its stealthy shroud will complement any build. Grab the on-page promo code for the lowest price. <a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.newegg.com/msi-rtx-5070-ti-16g-ventus-3x-oc-geforce-rtx-5070-ti-16gb-graphics-card-triple-fans/p/N82E16814137933" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="c282bb78-e4ba-47c3-bc8c-5f7176821f60" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="MSI's Ventus 3X OC RTX 5070 Ti is a relatively compact triple-fan design that occupies about 2.5 slots. Its stealthy shroud will complement any build. Grab the on-page promo code for the lowest price." data-dimension48="MSI's Ventus 3X OC RTX 5070 Ti is a relatively compact triple-fan design that occupies about 2.5 slots. Its stealthy shroud will complement any build. Grab the on-page promo code for the lowest price." data-dimension25="$884.99">View Deal</a></p></div><p><em>These are a few of the standout deals from Amazon's 2026 Prime Day event, which is currently taking place. Be sure to </em><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/best-gaming-graphics-card-gpu-deals" target="_blank"><em>check out our full list of the best Prime Day graphics card deals, too</em></a><em>. The GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy continues below.</em></p><p>Our full GPU hierarchy using traditional rendering (aka rasterization) comes first, and below that we have our separate ray tracing hierarchy. We've also mashed up these results into one overarching ranking for the complete pictures. </p><p>The results are all collected at native resolution, without enabling DLSS, FSR, or XeSS upscaling or frame generation. </p><div  class="fancy-box"><div class="fancy_box-title">June 2026 Update</div><div class="fancy_box_body"><p class="fancy-box__body-text">This update includes complete 2026 gaming data for 48 GPUs across 19 separate tests, including eight RT titles. We've retested three generations each of GeForce and Radeon cards, as well as Intel's Arc Battlemage products.</p></div></div><p>As a brief refresher of the cards in this version of our hierarchy, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-blackwell-architecture-deep-dive-a-closer-look-at-the-upgrades-coming-with-rtx-50-series-gpus" target="_blank">Nvidia's cutting-edge Blackwell architecture</a> and its DLSS 4 suite of tech upgrades the quality of both upscaling and ray reconstruction on RTX 50-series GPUs. It also adds Multi Frame Generation support. As of mid-2026, MFG can add anywhere from one to five AI-generated frames in between natively rendered ones.</p><p>Even if you're not into framegen, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-dlss-4-is-the-magic-bullet-behind-the-rtx-50-series-touted-2x-performance-reflex-2-multi-frame-gen-ai-tools-come-to-the-fore" target="_blank">DLSS 4.5 upscaling and its transformer neural network architecture</a> can offer a big boost in image quality at the same output resolution compared to earlier DLSS versions. That tech can benefit all GeForce RTX GPUs going back to the RTX 20-series, albeit at a heavier performance cost on older hardware compared to earlier DLSS versions. </p><p>Nvidia's <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/features/nvidia-ada-lovelace-and-geforce-rtx-40-series-everything-we-know">Ada Lovelace architecture</a> powers its prior-gen RTX 40-series cards. Ada introduced DLSS Frame Generation, which can double output frame rates in supported games. Ada cards don't benefit from MFG, though. </p><p>AMD's Radeon RX 9000 series cards, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/amd-rdna4-rx-9000-series-gpus-specifications-pricing-release-date" target="_blank">powered by its latest RDNA 4 architecture</a>, get a big boost to both ray-tracing and AI capabilities with dedicated RT and matrix math accelerators. AMD uses those capabilities to enable its FSR 4 upscaler and its much-improved image quality in a small but growing range of titles, whether through native support or with driver-level overrides. </p><p>The FSR Redstone update last year brought ML Frame Generation to RX 9000-series cards. Like FSR 4.x upscaling, ML Frame Generation can be directly integrated in games or enabled through a driver override. </p><p>Meanwhile, the last-gen <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/features/amd-radeon-rx-7000-rdna-3-price-performance-benchmarks-release-date">RDNA 3 architecture</a> powers seven RX 7000-series seven desktop cards. Until very recently, RX 7000-series cards couldn't officially run FSR 4 upscaling, but an official version of that tech will be made available for those cards in July 2026. </p><p>Intel's <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/intel-battlemage-arc-b-series-gpus-everything-we-know" target="_blank">Battlemage</a>-powered Arc B580 and Arc B570 offer major improvements in performance and efficiency compared to its <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-arc-alchemist-release-date-specs-pricing-all-we-know" target="_blank">Alchemist architecture</a>. Battlemage only serves the entry-level end of the graphics card market today. Intel introduced a larger Battlemage chip in the form of the Arc Pro B70 earlier this year, but that product is intended for AI and professional visualization, and it's priced like it. <br><br>On page two, you'll find our 2025-2026 test data for posterity. Page three has our 2024–2022 benchmark suite, which covers previous-generation GPUs running an older test suite and a Core i9-12900K. Page four has an even older 2020–2021 test suite with only raster games, running on a Core i9-9900K testbed. The legacy tables are no longer being actively updated. There's also the "Ancient Legacy GPU hierarchy" (without benchmarks, sorted by theoretical performance) for reference purposes. <br><br>The following tables sort everything solely by our performance-based GPU benchmarks, from fastest to slowest. Factors including real-world pricing, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/features/graphics-card-power-consumption-tested">graphics card power consumption</a>, overall efficiency, and features aren't factored into the rankings here. The latest results use an AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D testbed. Here are the tables and benchmark results — rasterization games first, then ray tracing games, and finally the content creation results.</p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-gpu-benchmarks-hierarchy-2026-the-tests"><span>GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026: The tests </span></h3><p>For our latest GPU benchmarks, we test every card at a mix of high and ultra settings, depending on the game. We test across three resolutions: 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. <br><br>All the scores are expressed as percentages relative to the top-ranking 1080p ultra card, which is of course the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-geforce-rtx-5090-review">GeForce RTX 5090</a>.<br><br>Our 2026 test suite comprises the following games. 11 are raster titles, and of those, four have RT support. We test another four games that either require RT to run (<em>DOOM: The Dark Ages </em>and <em>Indiana Jones and the Great Circle</em>) or look best with RT (<em>Assassin's Creed Shadows </em>and <em>Grand Theft Auto V Enhanced</em>.) </p><ul><li><em>Black Myth Wukong</em> (+RT)</li><li><em>Alan Wake II </em>(+RT)</li><li><em>Apex Legends</em></li><li><em>Counter-Strike 2 </em></li><li><em>Fortnite</em></li><li><em>Arc Raiders</em></li><li><em>Stalker 2</em></li><li><em>DOOM: The Dark Ages </em>(RT required)</li><li><em>Grand Theft Auto V Enhanced </em>(RT only)<em> </em></li><li><em>Marvel's Spider-Man 2 </em>(+RT)</li><li><em>Indiana Jones and the Great Circle </em>(RT required)</li><li><em>Marvel Rivals</em></li><li><em>Assassin's Creed Shadows </em>(RT only)</li><li><em>Cyberpunk 2077 </em>(+RT)<em> </em></li><li><em>Clair Obscur: Expedition 33</em></li></ul><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-gpu-benchmarks-hierarchy-2026-raster-gaming"><span>GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026: Raster gaming </span></h3><p>The FPS score is the geometric mean (equal weighting) of all 11 games. Note that the specifications column links directly to our original review for the various GPUs.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/77yhF8ajKTTosserzsARYN.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - Raster Gaming " /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cCbGspLq5yrwLNtkmB8vYN.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - Raster Gaming " /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/oUxzMouhsE3X4GJbF62FZN.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - Raster Gaming " /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure></figure><h2 id="rasterization-gpu-benchmarks-key-findings">Rasterization GPU Benchmarks, Key Findings</h2><ul><li>Unsurprisingly, the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-geforce-rtx-5090-review">RTX 5090</a> takes the top spot across the board, but prices remain stratospheric in mid-2026. It's also difficult to fully engage the GB202 GPU for pure raster gaming unless you're playing at 4K.</li><li>Among current cards, the RX 9060 XT 8GB and RTX 5060 duke it out for the best performance per dollar at 1080p.</li><li>The Radeon RX 9070 is the 1440p raster value champ. The recently introduced RX 9070 GRE sits just behind, and the RTX 5070 is a somewhat distant third.</li><li>At 4K, the RX 9070 XT is the cheapest way to get into 4K 60 FPS native gaming. But the RX 9070 and RTX 5070 are also strong options among current GPUs if you're willing to enable a dash of upscaling.</li></ul><p>Overall, if you're only interested in native raster gaming, Radeons are a strong choice in 2026. But Nvidia offers superior DLSS 4.5 upscaling and Multi Frame Generation support across all RTX 50-series cards, which makes matching your GPU's performance to your monitor's refresh rate a snap. </p><p>FSR 4.x upscaling isn't on par with DLSS 4.5 yet, and FSR ML Frame Generation is limited to a 2x framerate boost where it's available.</p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-rasterization-gpu-benchmarks-rankings-2026"><span>Rasterization GPU Benchmarks Rankings 2026</span></h3><div ><table><caption>GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy — Rasterization Performance</caption><thead><tr><th class="firstcol " ><p>Graphics Card</p></th><th  ><p>MSRP</p></th><th  ><p>1080p Ultra</p></th><th  ><p>1440p Ultra</p></th><th  ><p>4K Ultra</p></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+5090" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 5090</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>1999.99</p></td><td  ><p>100.0% (203.8)</p></td><td  ><p>100.0% (167.3)</p></td><td  ><p>100.0% (110.8)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+4090" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 4090</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>1599.99</p></td><td  ><p>90.1% (183.6)</p></td><td  ><p>85.7% (143.4)</p></td><td  ><p>80.4% (89.1)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+5080" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 5080</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>999.99</p></td><td  ><p>81.9% (166.9)</p></td><td  ><p>76.7% (128.3)</p></td><td  ><p>69.8% (77.4)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+7900+XTX" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 7900 XTX</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>999.99</p></td><td  ><p>79.3% (161.5)</p></td><td  ><p>73.1% (122.3)</p></td><td  ><p>63.7% (70.6)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+4080+Super" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 4080 Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>999.99</p></td><td  ><p>78.0% (158.9)</p></td><td  ><p>70.9% (118.6)</p></td><td  ><p>62.6% (69.4)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+4080" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 4080</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>1199.99</p></td><td  ><p>77.2% (157.3)</p></td><td  ><p>70.3% (117.5)</p></td><td  ><p>60.9% (67.5)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+5070+Ti" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 5070 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>749.99</p></td><td  ><p>76.2% (155.4)</p></td><td  ><p>69.8% (116.8)</p></td><td  ><p>61.9% (68.6)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+9070+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 9070 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>599.99</p></td><td  ><p>76.9% (156.6)</p></td><td  ><p>69.7% (116.5)</p></td><td  ><p>59.4% (65.8)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+7900+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 7900 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>899.99</p></td><td  ><p>71.3% (145.4)</p></td><td  ><p>64.6% (108.0)</p></td><td  ><p>54.0% (59.8)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+4070+Ti+Super" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 4070 Ti Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>799.99</p></td><td  ><p>69.3% (141.2)</p></td><td  ><p>62.1% (104.0)</p></td><td  ><p>52.8% (58.5)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+9070" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 9070</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>549.99</p></td><td  ><p>69.1% (140.9)</p></td><td  ><p>62.1% (104.0)</p></td><td  ><p>52.1% (57.7)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+3090+Ti" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 3090 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>1999.99</p></td><td  ><p>64.7% (131.7)</p></td><td  ><p>59.7% (99.9)</p></td><td  ><p>53.5% (59.3)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+4070+Ti" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 4070 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>799.99</p></td><td  ><p>66.3% (135.1)</p></td><td  ><p>58.6% (97.9)</p></td><td  ><p>48.6% (53.9)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+5070" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 5070</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>549.99</p></td><td  ><p>65.1% (132.6)</p></td><td  ><p>57.6% (96.4)</p></td><td  ><p>49.0% (54.3)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+3090" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 3090</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>1499.99</p></td><td  ><p>60.3% (122.9)</p></td><td  ><p>54.7% (91.5)</p></td><td  ><p>47.9% (53.1)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+4070+Super" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 4070 Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>599.99</p></td><td  ><p>62.2% (126.7)</p></td><td  ><p>54.5% (91.2)</p></td><td  ><p>44.4% (49.2)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+6950+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 6950 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>1099.99</p></td><td  ><p>60.5% (123.3)</p></td><td  ><p>53.5% (89.5)</p></td><td  ><p>43.6% (48.3)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+3080+Ti" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 3080 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>1199.99</p></td><td  ><p>58.7% (119.6)</p></td><td  ><p>53.3% (89.1)</p></td><td  ><p>46.0% (51.0)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+9070+GRE" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 9070 GRE</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>549.99</p></td><td  ><p>59.2% (120.6)</p></td><td  ><p>51.8% (86.6)</p></td><td  ><p>41.8% (46.3)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+7800+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 7800 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>499.99</p></td><td  ><p>58.1% (118.4)</p></td><td  ><p>50.7% (84.7)</p></td><td  ><p>40.7% (45.1)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+6900+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 6900 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>999.99</p></td><td  ><p>57.4% (117.1)</p></td><td  ><p>50.2% (83.9)</p></td><td  ><p>40.5% (44.9)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+3080" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 3080</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>699.99</p></td><td  ><p>54.8% (111.6)</p></td><td  ><p>49.0% (82.0)</p></td><td  ><p>39.6% (43.9)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+6800+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 6800 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>649.99</p></td><td  ><p>54.9% (111.8)</p></td><td  ><p>47.6% (79.6)</p></td><td  ><p>38.1% (42.2)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+4070" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 4070</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>549.99</p></td><td  ><p>54.7% (111.5)</p></td><td  ><p>46.5% (77.8)</p></td><td  ><p>37.2% (41.3)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+5060+Ti+16GB" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>429.99</p></td><td  ><p>51.6% (105.2)</p></td><td  ><p>43.9% (73.4)</p></td><td  ><p>36.3% (40.2)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+7700+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 7700 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>449.99</p></td><td  ><p>50.5% (102.9)</p></td><td  ><p>43.4% (72.7)</p></td><td  ><p>34.3% (38.0)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+9060+XT+16GB" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 9060 XT 16GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>349.99</p></td><td  ><p>48.2% (98.3)</p></td><td  ><p>40.2% (67.3)</p></td><td  ><p>31.7% (35.2)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+5060+Ti+8GB" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 8GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>379.99</p></td><td  ><p>49.3% (100.4)</p></td><td  ><p>41.0% (68.6)</p></td><td  ><p>25.4% (28.1)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+3070+Ti" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 3070 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>599.99</p></td><td  ><p>46.4% (94.6)</p></td><td  ><p>40.0% (66.9)</p></td><td  ><p>23.5% (26.0)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+9060+XT+8GB" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 9060 XT 8GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>299.99</p></td><td  ><p>45.7% (93.2)</p></td><td  ><p>37.3% (62.5)</p></td><td  ><p>26.8% (29.7)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+4060+Ti+16GB" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>499.99</p></td><td  ><p>43.8% (89.3)</p></td><td  ><p>36.2% (60.5)</p></td><td  ><p>28.2% (31.3)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+7600+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 7600 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>329.99</p></td><td  ><p>50.1% (102.1)</p></td><td  ><p>30.0% (50.2)</p></td><td  ><p>23.1% (25.5)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+3070" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 3070</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>499.99</p></td><td  ><p>42.8% (87.2)</p></td><td  ><p>34.8% (58.2)</p></td><td  ><p>23.6% (26.2)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+4060+Ti+8GB" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 8GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>399.99</p></td><td  ><p>43.2% (88.0)</p></td><td  ><p>35.2% (58.9)</p></td><td  ><p>21.5% (23.9)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+6750+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 6750 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>549.99</p></td><td  ><p>40.8% (83.2)</p></td><td  ><p>34.4% (57.6)</p></td><td  ><p>26.7% (29.6)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+5060" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 5060</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>299.99</p></td><td  ><p>43.4% (88.5)</p></td><td  ><p>35.8% (59.8)</p></td><td  ><p>19.6% (21.8)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+6700+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 6700 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>479.99</p></td><td  ><p>38.9% (79.2)</p></td><td  ><p>32.5% (54.3)</p></td><td  ><p>25.3% (28.0)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Intel+Arc+B580" target="_blank"><strong>Intel Arc B580</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>249.99</p></td><td  ><p>35.1% (71.5)</p></td><td  ><p>30.3% (50.7)</p></td><td  ><p>24.9% (27.6)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+3060+Ti" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 3060 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>399.99</p></td><td  ><p>36.4% (74.2)</p></td><td  ><p>30.5% (51.0)</p></td><td  ><p>17.5% (19.4)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+4060" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 4060</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>299.99</p></td><td  ><p>35.1% (71.5)</p></td><td  ><p>28.4% (47.6)</p></td><td  ><p>15.7% (17.4)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+7600" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 7600</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>269.99</p></td><td  ><p>34.3% (69.9)</p></td><td  ><p>27.2% (45.4)</p></td><td  ><p>16.6% (18.4)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+5050" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 5050</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>249.99</p></td><td  ><p>34.0% (69.3)</p></td><td  ><p>27.1% (45.2)</p></td><td  ><p>15.4% (17.0)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Intel+Arc+B570" target="_blank"><strong>Intel Arc B570</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>219.99</p></td><td  ><p>31.1% (63.5)</p></td><td  ><p>26.5% (44.3)</p></td><td  ><p>17.7% (19.6)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+3060+12GB" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 3060 12GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>329.99</p></td><td  ><p>30.2% (61.5)</p></td><td  ><p>25.0% (41.9)</p></td><td  ><p>20.0% (22.2)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+6650+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 6650 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>399.99</p></td><td  ><p>31.5% (64.3)</p></td><td  ><p>22.7% (38.0)</p></td><td  ><p>17.1% (19.0)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+6600+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 6600 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>379.99</p></td><td  ><p>30.8% (62.7)</p></td><td  ><p>24.3% (40.7)</p></td><td  ><p>15.6% (17.3)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+6600" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 6600</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>329.99</p></td><td  ><p>25.5% (51.9)</p></td><td  ><p>14.9% (24.8)</p></td><td  ><p>13.1% (14.5)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+3050" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 3050</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>249.99</p></td><td  ><p>21.9% (44.6)</p></td><td  ><p>17.8% (29.8)</p></td><td  ><p>11.4% (12.6)</p></td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>Remember that we're not including any upscaling or framegen results in the above table. DLSS, FSR, and XeSS offer differing image quality, and we want to keep things directly comparable.</p><p>Don't buy any of the cards at the top of our hierarchy without a high-refresh-rate 2560x1440 or 4K monitor to match. Even one of our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html" target="_blank">best gaming CPUs</a>, like the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-ryzen-7-9800x3d-review-devastating-gaming-performance" target="_blank">Ryzen 7 9800X3D</a>, can only do so much when a powerful card becomes CPU-bound. </p><p>In general, if you're still running a 60 Hz fixed-refresh-rate monitor, it's entirely possible that you're not seeing all the frames your graphics card can generate. Practically any current-gen graphics card from the RTX 5060 on up is good enough for high-refresh-rate gaming at 1080p in 2026 even without upscaling or framegen, and the RTX 5070 or RX 9070 will give you the same experience at 1440p. </p><p>In this era of upscaling and framegen, a high-resolution monitor is no longer an obstacle to the best gaming experience. Upscalers work best with higher-than-1080p output resolutions, and the advent of the DLSS 4.5 upscaling model especially means that you can get both smooth performance and crisp image quality from surprisingly modest graphics cards. </p><p>But if you don't have a high-refresh-rate 1440p or 4K monitor to begin with, you can't take full advantage of the free boost to both performance and image quality that AI-powered upscaling offers, nor can you enjoy the full smoothness boost of framegen. Check out our list of <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gaming-monitors,4533.html" target="_blank">the best gaming monitors</a> for a potential upgrade if you're still rocking a 1080p 60 Hz display from the 2010s.</p><p>On to our 2026 raster results. Among currently available graphics cards, Blackwell rules the top three spots. The RX 9070 XT ends up fourth, just behind the potent (but much more expensive, as of June 2026) RTX 5070 Ti. </p><p>Moving into the midrange, the RX 9070's strong raster performance gives it the edge over the RTX 5070, but it's close. And the 5070 has the full arsenal of DLSS 4.5 features at its disposal in virtually every modern game. </p><p>Given the image quality and smoothness advantage of DLSS 4.5 upscaling and MFG, the 5070 got the nod in our most recent round of <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gpus,4380.html" target="_blank">best graphics card picks</a> after our 2026 retests. </p><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/amd-radeon-rx-9070-gre-review" target="_blank">The recently introduced RX 9070 GRE</a> lands between the 5070 and the lower-end 5060 Ti and 9060 XT, a position for which Nvidia has no current-gen answer (and no easy path to one.) But AMD may have priced the GRE too high at $549, and we're already seeing big price drops on that product that might make it uniquely appealing in a market where the RTX 5060 Ti is its direct price competition. </p><p>The formerly midrange RTX 5060 Ti 16GB is hopelessly overpriced for the performance it offers in mid-2026, and the formerly somewhat affordable 8GB model is also selling for elevated prices now, making the entire 5060 Ti family impossible to recommend.</p><p>The RX 9060 XT 16GB  holds down the entry-midrange 16GB position by itself, and its $459 price tag isn't <em>so </em>absurd as to make it un-recommendable. But as RX 9070 GREs start going on sale for $500-ish, the step up is going to look mighty tempting. </p><p>As we move further down the stack, the $300-ish Arc B580 represents Intel's best card right now, but it remains very much a budget part in mid-2026, trading blows with the RTX 3060 Ti and RTX 4060. The only reason it lands as high as it does in our results is that its 12GB of VRAM prevents its performance from totally plummeting at 4K, as it does for those older 8GB cards. </p><p>The RTX 5060 is 24% faster than the Arc B580 at 1080p and 17% faster at 1440p, and its prices are proportionately higher. The scarce RX 9060 XT 8GB is a whole 30% faster at 1080p and 23% faster at 1440p, for similarly more money. </p><p>We don't think the potential longevity afforded by the B580's 12GB of VRAM is worth the massive performance tradeoff versus current-gen 8GB GPUs. Save up a few more bucks and grab an RTX 5060 or RX 9060 8GB instead (and enjoy the more widely adopted DLSS 4.5 or FSR 4 versus XeSS while you're at it). </p><p>The $250 Arc B570 is still a good value in mid-2026, and as the only modern, decent graphics card available for (well) under $300, it's still worth a look if you can't stretch to an RTX 5050. But recent software ills that took months to fix have led us to consider it more of a gamble than a product worthy of a recommendation, even though those issues did eventually get corrected. </p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:3840px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="ybX9f4CedFGQKEuGreXGXA" name="2160p PT 1" alt="Comparison screenshot for Pragmata RT vs PT" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ybX9f4CedFGQKEuGreXGXA.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="3840" height="2160" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="caption-text">Pragmata </span><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Future)</span></figcaption></figure><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-ray-tracing-gpu-benchmarks-2026"><span>Ray Tracing GPU Benchmarks 2026</span></h3><p>For 2026, we're testing a range of RT titles that present a progressively more difficult workload to the GPUs under test. </p><p><em>Grand Theft Auto V Enhanced</em>, <em>DOOM: The Dark Ages</em>, and <em>Indiana Jones and the Great Circle </em>are all relatively lightweight RT titles that will run on a wide range of RT-ready hardware. <em>Spider-Man 2</em>, <em>Cyberpunk 2077</em>, and <em>Assassin's Creed Shadows </em>represent greater challenges to compute resources, VRAM, or both. And <em>Black Myth Wukong </em>and <em>Alan Wake II </em>still bring even the most powerful graphics cards to their knees at native resolutions. </p><p>Our results for those more demanding games represent more of a jumping-off point for upscaling and framegen rather than native performance. But lighter RT titles mean that you can explore the differences in image quality that ray tracing offers without crushing your GPU flat. </p><p>In any case, graphics cards at the top of our RT tests are ready for practically any RT game. But as you'll see, that's still quite the high bar to clear in 2026. </p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FaLNjDeMw53EarPU8rK5YJ.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - RT Performance" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RFGzsAft8vmdw53AsRVyXJ.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - RT Performance" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qijRhhx3r3eghXJxub74YJ.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - RT Performance" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure></figure><h2 id="ray-tracing-gpu-benchmarks-key-findings-and-notes">Ray Tracing GPU Benchmarks, Key Findings and Notes</h2><ul><li>The <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-geforce-rtx-5090-review">RTX 5090</a> really comes into its own with RT enabled, as expected.</li><li>AMD's <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/amd-radeon-rx-9070-xt-review/2">RX 9070 XT</a> outperforms the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-7900-xtx-and-xt-review-shooting-for-the-top/4">RX 7900 XTX</a> in our RT tests, showing that the ray-tracing improvements in RDNA 4 deliver.</li><li>Even with those improvements, the RX 9070 XT can only manage a tie with the RTX 4070 Ti with RT in play, coming in eighth place overall.</li><li>Maintaining 60 FPS in RT titles (as a good foundation for upscaling and framegen enhancements) is a very tall order. Among recent products, you'll want:<ul><li>an RTX 5060 Ti 16GB, RTX 5070, or RX 9070 GRE to handle ~60 FPS RT at 1080p without running out of VRAM</li><li>An RTX 4070, an RTX 5070 or RX 9070 at 1440p, or an RX 9070 XT or RTX 5070 Ti for the best possible experience</li><li>An RTX 5080, RTX 4090, or RTX 5090 at 4K </li></ul></li></ul><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-ray-tracing-gpu-benchmarks-rankings-2026"><span>Ray Tracing GPU Benchmarks Rankings 2026</span></h3><div ><table><caption>GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy — Ray Tracing Performance</caption><thead><tr><th class="firstcol " ><p>Graphics Card</p></th><th  ><p>MSRP</p></th><th  ><p>1080p Ultra</p></th><th  ><p>1440p Ultra</p></th><th  ><p>4K Ultra</p></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+5090" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 5090</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$1,999.99</p></td><td  ><p>100.0% (125.7)</p></td><td  ><p>100.0% (100.8)</p></td><td  ><p>100.0% (64.1)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+4090" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 4090</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$1,599.99</p></td><td  ><p>89.4% (112.3)</p></td><td  ><p>87.0% (87.7)</p></td><td  ><p>81.4% (52.2)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+5080" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 5080</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$999.99</p></td><td  ><p>78.2% (98.3)</p></td><td  ><p>73.4% (74.0)</p></td><td  ><p>65.7% (42.1)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+4080+Super" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 4080 Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$999.99</p></td><td  ><p>75.0% (94.3)</p></td><td  ><p>68.9% (69.5)</p></td><td  ><p>60.1% (38.5)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+4080" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 4080</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$1,199.99</p></td><td  ><p>73.9% (92.8)</p></td><td  ><p>67.8% (68.4)</p></td><td  ><p>58.3% (37.4)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+5070+Ti" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 5070 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$749.99</p></td><td  ><p>71.9% (90.4)</p></td><td  ><p>65.7% (66.2)</p></td><td  ><p>57.3% (36.7)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+4070+Ti+Super" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 4070 Ti Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$799.99</p></td><td  ><p>69.9% (87.9)</p></td><td  ><p>59.5% (60.0)</p></td><td  ><p>50.2% (32.2)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=Radeon+RX+9070+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 9070 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$599.99</p></td><td  ><p>61.9% (77.8)</p></td><td  ><p>55.1% (55.5)</p></td><td  ><p>47.0% (30.1)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+4070+Ti" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 4070 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$799.99</p></td><td  ><p>62.4% (78.5)</p></td><td  ><p>54.8% (55.3)</p></td><td  ><p>37.2% (23.9)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+3090+Ti" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 3090 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$1,999.99</p></td><td  ><p>57.5% (72.3)</p></td><td  ><p>51.8% (52.2)</p></td><td  ><p>45.8% (29.4)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+5070" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 5070</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$549.99</p></td><td  ><p>58.9% (74.1)</p></td><td  ><p>51.1% (51.5)</p></td><td  ><p>35.4% (22.7)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=Radeon+RX+7900+XTX" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 7900 XTX</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$999.99</p></td><td  ><p>56.0% (70.4)</p></td><td  ><p>50.1% (50.5)</p></td><td  ><p>42.6% (27.3)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=Radeon+RX+9070" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 9070</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$549.99</p></td><td  ><p>53.8% (67.6)</p></td><td  ><p>47.2% (47.6)</p></td><td  ><p>40.2% (25.8)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+3090" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 3090</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$1,499.99</p></td><td  ><p>52.9% (66.5)</p></td><td  ><p>47.0% (47.4)</p></td><td  ><p>41.0% (26.3)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+4070+Super" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 4070 Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$599.99</p></td><td  ><p>57.7% (72.5)</p></td><td  ><p>43.2% (43.6)</p></td><td  ><p>34.4% (22.1)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+3080+Ti" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 3080 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$1,199.99</p></td><td  ><p>51.4% (64.6)</p></td><td  ><p>45.8% (46.2)</p></td><td  ><p>28.1% (18.0)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=Radeon+RX+7900+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 7900 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$899.99</p></td><td  ><p>49.1% (61.7)</p></td><td  ><p>43.1% (43.5)</p></td><td  ><p>36.0% (23.1)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+4070" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 4070</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$549.99</p></td><td  ><p>50.7% (63.8)</p></td><td  ><p>38.3% (38.6)</p></td><td  ><p>30.1% (19.3)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+5060+Ti+16GB" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$429.99</p></td><td  ><p>44.7% (56.2)</p></td><td  ><p>38.6% (38.9)</p></td><td  ><p>32.1% (20.6)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=Radeon+RX+9070+GRE" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 9070 GRE</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$549.99</p></td><td  ><p>46.5% (58.4)</p></td><td  ><p>37.0% (37.3)</p></td><td  ><p>24.2% (15.5)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+3080" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 3080</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$699.99</p></td><td  ><p>40.8% (51.3)</p></td><td  ><p>34.4% (34.7)</p></td><td  ><p>21.5% (13.8)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+4060+Ti+16GB" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$499.99</p></td><td  ><p>38.4% (48.3)</p></td><td  ><p>32.5% (32.7)</p></td><td  ><p>26.3% (16.8)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=Radeon+RX+7800+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 7800 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$499.99</p></td><td  ><p>38.5% (48.4)</p></td><td  ><p>33.3% (33.5)</p></td><td  ><p>23.5% (15.1)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=Radeon+RX+6950+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 6950 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$1,099.99</p></td><td  ><p>37.3% (46.9)</p></td><td  ><p>32.6% (32.8)</p></td><td  ><p>24.3% (15.6)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=Radeon+RX+6900+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 6900 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$999.99</p></td><td  ><p>36.0% (45.2)</p></td><td  ><p>31.8% (32.1)</p></td><td  ><p>23.6% (15.1)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=Radeon+RX+9060+XT+16GB" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 9060 XT 16GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$349.99</p></td><td  ><p>36.0% (45.3)</p></td><td  ><p>30.8% (31.0)</p></td><td  ><p>23.3% (14.9)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=Radeon+RX+6800+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 6800 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$649.99</p></td><td  ><p>33.4% (42.0)</p></td><td  ><p>29.4% (29.6)</p></td><td  ><p>21.9% (14.1)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+5060+Ti+8GB" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 8GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$379.99</p></td><td  ><p>36.6% (46.0)</p></td><td  ><p>26.3% (26.6)</p></td><td  ><p>11.3% (7.2)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+3070+Ti" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 3070 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$599.99</p></td><td  ><p>33.5% (42.1)</p></td><td  ><p>27.5% (27.7)</p></td><td  ><p>13.7% (8.8)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=Radeon+RX+7700+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 7700 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$449.99</p></td><td  ><p>33.1% (41.6)</p></td><td  ><p>25.1% (25.3)</p></td><td  ><p>15.2% (9.8)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+4060+Ti+8GB" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 8GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$399.99</p></td><td  ><p>32.5% (40.8)</p></td><td  ><p>25.5% (25.7)</p></td><td  ><p>12.6% (8.1)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+3070" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 3070</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$499.99</p></td><td  ><p>31.6% (39.7)</p></td><td  ><p>26.0% (26.2)</p></td><td  ><p>12.9% (8.3)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+5060" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 5060</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$299.99</p></td><td  ><p>32.6% (40.9)</p></td><td  ><p>24.4% (24.6)</p></td><td  ><p>10.7% (6.8)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+3060+Ti" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 3060 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$399.99</p></td><td  ><p>26.4% (33.2)</p></td><td  ><p>22.2% (22.3)</p></td><td  ><p>11.5% (7.4)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=Intel+Arc+B580" target="_blank"><strong>Intel Arc B580</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$249.99</p></td><td  ><p>27.7% (34.9)</p></td><td  ><p>22.9% (23.1)</p></td><td  ><p>5.9% (3.8)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+4060" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 4060</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$299.99</p></td><td  ><p>26.7% (33.6)</p></td><td  ><p>21.1% (21.3)</p></td><td  ><p>10.6% (6.8)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+3060+12GB" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 3060 12GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$329.99</p></td><td  ><p>24.2% (30.4)</p></td><td  ><p>20.6% (20.7)</p></td><td  ><p>14.8% (9.5)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=Radeon+RX+9060+XT+8GB" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 9060 XT 8GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$299.99</p></td><td  ><p>26.3% (33.0)</p></td><td  ><p>20.1% (20.2)</p></td><td  ><p>11.4% (7.3)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+5050" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 5050</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$249.99</p></td><td  ><p>24.9% (31.2)</p></td><td  ><p>18.5% (18.7)</p></td><td  ><p>9.6% (6.2)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=Radeon+RX+6750+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 6750 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$549.99</p></td><td  ><p>22.6% (28.5)</p></td><td  ><p>18.9% (19.1)</p></td><td  ><p>12.7% (8.1)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=Radeon+RX+7600+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 7600 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$329.99</p></td><td  ><p>21.4% (27.0)</p></td><td  ><p>18.0% (18.1)</p></td><td  ><p>13.2% (8.5)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=Radeon+RX+6700+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 6700 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$479.99</p></td><td  ><p>21.6% (27.1)</p></td><td  ><p>17.9% (18.0)</p></td><td  ><p>12.3% (7.9)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=GeForce+RTX+3050" target="_blank"><strong>GeForce RTX 3050</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$249.99</p></td><td  ><p>15.6% (19.6)</p></td><td  ><p>12.5% (12.6)</p></td><td  ><p>7.1% (4.5)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=Intel+Arc+B570" target="_blank"><strong>Intel Arc B570</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$219.99</p></td><td  ><p>15.7% (19.8)</p></td><td  ><p>12.9% (13.1)</p></td><td  ><p>5.1% (3.3)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=Radeon+RX+6600+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 6600 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$379.99</p></td><td  ><p>13.7% (17.2)</p></td><td  ><p>9.0% (9.1)</p></td><td  ><p>5.4% (3.4)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=Radeon+RX+7600" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 7600</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$269.99</p></td><td  ><p>12.7% (16.0)</p></td><td  ><p>9.3% (9.3)</p></td><td  ><p>6.5% (4.1)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=Radeon+RX+6650+XT" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 6650 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$399.99</p></td><td  ><p>12.4% (15.5)</p></td><td  ><p>9.1% (9.2)</p></td><td  ><p>5.3% (3.4)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s&k=Radeon+RX+6600" target="_blank"><strong>Radeon RX 6600</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>$329.99</p></td><td  ><p>10.2% (12.8)</p></td><td  ><p>7.6% (7.7)</p></td><td  ><p>4.8% (3.1)</p></td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>The RTX 5090 and RTX 4090 lead our RT results. But if you want to enjoy high-end RT without a 4090- or 5090-sized bankroll, the RTX 5070 Ti proves itself as the last card with a reasonable price-to-performance ratio before things get crazy. </p><p>The 5070 Ti leads the RX 9070 XT by a wide margin in our RT tests, and it's anywhere from 10%-15% behind the absurdly overpriced RTX 5080 across the board. But if you want the absolute best RT performance possible without stepping up to a 4090 or 5090, the extra cash for a 5080 is your best — and only — option. </p><p>That said, you should really explore DLSS 4.5 upscaling and MFG on the 5070 Ti before spending big to step up to a 5080. <br><br>The RX 9070 XT remains AMD's fastest RT GPU, outpacing the 7900 XTX across all tested resolutions. It leads the RDNA 3 halo card by about 10% across the board, which is an impressive generational leap considering its 33% deficit in CUs versus the XTX.</p><p>But the 9070 XT can only trade blows with the RTX 4070 Ti and RTX 5070 with Nvidia competition in the picture. It beats out the 5070 at 1080p and 1440p, but DLSS 4.5 upscaling and MFG give Blackwell gamers more flexible options for boosting performance with only minimal impact to image quality versus both RDNA 4 (and Ada).</p><p>Of course, the RX 9070 XT has FSR 4 upscaling and framegen at its disposal in compatible titles, but support for those features isn't as widespread as DLSS.  </p><p>Meanwhile, the RX 9070 comes in slightly behind the RTX 5070 at 1080p and 1440p for RT. Even though its 16GB of VRAM prevents the 9070's 4K RT performance from completely nosediving, the average frame rate at that resolution isn't high enough to make it a 4K RT choice. </p><p>At 1080p, the RX 9070 GRE presents an intriguing RT option for Radeon gamers, delivering a near-60-FPS average baseline that would make a great FSR 4 foundation. But its 12GB of VRAM quickly becomes a liability at 1440p versus the 9070, and 4K is out of the question. </p><p>Overall, our demanding 2026 RT test suite shows that the bar for entry to a good RT experience remains high, especially as elevated prices on the RTX 5060 Ti 16GB mean that the first "real" RT-ready Blackwell card at 1080p and up is the RTX 5070. And on the Radeon side, you really want an RX 9070 GRE or RX 9070 for the best experience. </p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-test-setup-and-hardware-for-gpu-benchmarks"><span>Test Setup and Hardware for GPU Benchmarks</span></h3><p>We've used several different PCs for our testing over the years. The latest update switches to an AMD Zen 5 processor: the unparalleled Ryzen 7 9800X3D and its 3D V-Cache-enhanced performance. </p><p>Here are the specifications for our latest GPU test PC.</p><p><strong>Tom's Hardware 2026 GPU Benchmarks Testbed</strong></p><p><strong>CPU: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-ryzen-7-9800x3d-review-devastating-gaming-performance">AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D</a><br><strong>CPU Cooler:</strong> <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Thermalright-Phantom-TL-C12B-Technilogy-Bearing/dp/B0BNDTJVPL">Thermalright Phantom Spirit 120 SE</a> <br><strong>Memory: </strong><a href="https://www.amazon.com/G-Skill-Trident-288-Pin-CL30-38-38-96-F5-6000J3038F16GX2-TZ5NR/dp/B0BF8FVLSL">G.Skill Trident Z5 32GB (2x16GB) DDR5-6000 CL30</a><br><strong>Motherboard: </strong>Asus TUF Gaming X670E-Plus Wifi <br><strong>SSD: </strong><a href="https://www.amazon.com/INLAND-Performance-Internal-7200MB-6800MB/dp/B09VSQ3V4P">Inland Performance Plus 4TB</a>  <br><strong>PSU: </strong><a href="https://www.newegg.com/msi-atx-3-1-1600-w-80-plus-titanium-certified-power-supplies-mpg-ai1600ts-pcie5/p/N82E16817701042">MSI MPG Ai1600TS 1600W</a><br><br>We test across the three most common gaming resolutions, 1080p, 1440p, and 4K, using a mix of high and ultra settings, depending on the title. Where possible, we use 'reference' cards for all of these tests, like Nvidia's Founders Edition models and AMD's reference designs. Most midrange and lower GPUs don't get reference models, however, and in some cases we only have factory-overclocked cards for testing. We do our best to select cards that are close to the reference specs in such cases.<br><br>For each graphics card, we follow the same testing procedure. We run one pass of each benchmark to "warm up" the GPU after launching the game, then perform our actual test runs across each resolution.<br><br>We carefully review our test data and check for anomalies. For example, we always expect the RTX 5080 to be faster than the RTX 5070 Ti. If it's not, and we're not in a CPU limited situation, we'll recheck both cards to ensure that our standings our accurate. We also check and retest in cases of subtler issues, as when a transient hitch or frame-time spike causes a large dip in 1% low FPS.<br><br>Due to the length of time required for testing each GPU, updated drivers and game patches inevitably come out that can impact performance. We periodically retest a few sample cards to verify our results are still valid, and if not, we go through and retest the affected game(s) and GPU(s). We may also add games to our test suite over time, if one comes out that is popular and conducive to testing. See <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/what-makes-a-good-game-benchmark" target="_blank">what makes a good game benchmark</a> for our selection criteria.</p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-gpu-benchmarks-individual-game-charts"><span>GPU Benchmarks: Individual Game Charts</span></h3><p>The above tables provide a summary of performance, but for those that want to see the individual game charts, for both the standard and ray tracing test suites, we've got those as well. These charts only cover current-gen GPUs for readability. <br><br><strong>These charts are up to date as of June 2026.</strong></p><h2 id="gpu-benchmarks-1080p">GPU Benchmarks — 1080p</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kf4hsg7rgpGBcYdQZEU77A.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1080 Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7rS3kA4uLQuFZ5syEu36EA.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1080 Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/38wZLaFCFhUW4szsF2PjEA.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1080 Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ssQtp9FMxccJqT5B87skRA.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1080 Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PwdiycmRUgtwjqNaXQdsaA.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1080 Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SFNPuwr5NQcSeVaiGKLcvA.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1080 Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/f8XjFNw4gVM8niumMMX57B.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1080 Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/h6GkvrXj4qhs6DemWV4y6B.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1080 Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aMjU4onfmBRAMStXpgex6B.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1080 Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BayuMTHUyrxJmi7Gpwez6B.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1080 Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rLh9x8fFocfuCphNByVM7B.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1080 Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HjovyzsRgYWNcBSYUQwi7B.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1080 Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DaKXxT6TxbwezfeHb9fY7B.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1080 Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4hHuhf8axfzvqmY5hkzc7B.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1080 Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8CL9DseHu7kbzpYzw8uh7B.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1080 Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/v3bqb3QFvRpYoH25SSQh7B.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1080 Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vLxyMsV5uPewDyLn6Nxn7B.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1080 Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6TfTxQiXtrvksuKZAGah7B.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1080 Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jCx8Bb8eiKtFDMh4mK2z7B.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1080 Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Xk4PyecAJGdeiCGB9tjj7B.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1080 Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jciivqZjUvoE9pB7WrXE8B.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1080 Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hhHZv6BsPtJixCRjVoEp8B.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1080 Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure></figure><h2 id="gpu-benchmarks-1440p">GPU Benchmarks — 1440p</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dKYnTmFRRtqDMQAEaHW9bd.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1440p Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Pu5CbaEps7WeY9bnZ2pmbd.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1440p Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/55vEhT9SddytD7PX372bcd.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1440p Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DQmUQ6KDVN2TC5QFt3VNgd.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1440p Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6ptHDxXQF6FwLmSp4qztkd.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1440p Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aMNmxnus8oUBUtjqYEKgmd.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1440p Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rxxeDAsozxVDswSB5gSdtd.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1440p Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GozvJzHzMJ2Zocqqjeautd.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1440p Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BgFbpdJDJFo4ufXgVUwdwd.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1440p Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PxFQe8R8hChAm4DhxBtZzd.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1440p Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/K8Ud4kLrJS59SKRa2Gkizd.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1440p Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/oqUtZXdprMEwgpVs9fXfAe.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1440p Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/At99PDJvYsiRRErcFRwZFe.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1440p Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/A67db96eoxJw3eGxVuZqYe.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1440p Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UjwZ6pFChPbUNBjARddpYe.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1440p Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/U6DcL6TBMKmT5yMtkMNAZe.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1440p Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/oLVR4o9G78usY4sdcagAZe.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1440p Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Gy7CAhfDjkpbzNT9gLvCZe.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1440p Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7CgZanEascfEUCBwKXWHZe.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1440p Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qPXPqEFwdKxBtkD3fA3XZe.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1440p Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YyzBPnyGxQsPUVD7cpmxZe.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1440p Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zuHrWcFAm9wY7dpSRsECae.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 1440p Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure></figure><h2 id="gpu-benchmarks-4k">GPU Benchmarks — 4K</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MpFANmrVpKpKkcnrwbhWPb.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 4K Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ug9KnefTRchDhAutJJovPb.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 4K Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jrCuaLaMiC6aMXRdT7bkSb.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 4K Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Hod22UEw99W6YAB968HzVb.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 4K Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cbyofZ8PZBwjrYBQcuuCab.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 4K Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3pCsoEWPddyrEuNzTnsrdb.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 4K Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/giVZSJu3DiUiuJRecFpGxb.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 4K Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5wSVdi8M7wxQJT5AVidUac.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 4K Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TosMiVWhHvBdpXM9qMFXdc.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 4K Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3LDF7ZudiU9fE5Ux8NFCfc.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 4K Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/soK8MZo255dEAFTBrzuPfc.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 4K Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8yoeCcRqyEoBnzTi4b44jc.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 4K Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/oxvJvUVdaLmET99nCdzKjc.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 4K Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/86WPHEbQxsvczctpmB2Gjc.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 4K Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/G5dWrYLhjNBhmPLwWmnBjc.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 4K Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WMyW3RMjfJTTjkfLaCwejc.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 4K Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rMvie2CMF7QkPt948Vfhjc.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 4K Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PDLgfZKjRU9cHoHTkzdpkc.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 4K Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/A4qMgXbjqSNfNC6WLrZUmc.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 4K Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7bjpJiiQzjcnJEb83MEGnc.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 4K Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DJZdPc8rwAnZak5RupsZnc.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 4K Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pRszfnNJPv6b9HBPACyknc.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - 4K Performance Results" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure></figure><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-gpu-benchmarks-power-clocks-and-temperatures"><span>GPU Benchmarks — Power, Clocks, and Temperatures</span></h3><p>Most of our discussion has focused on performance, but for those interested in power and other aspects of the GPUs, here are the appropriate charts. We'll run these from highest to lowest settings, as 4K ultra tends to be the most strenuous workload on most of these GPUs.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zii9jce6mYQoZNas59gfWV.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - Average Power" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vb98MaJpjZ6Js7M8RXunWV.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - Average Power" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tziwQ2uudwG85uMXpdbiWV.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - Average Power" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure></figure><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7GgMCmcRQ6NXpv4N9pAEAe.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - Average Clock Speed" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QxcxQV8gLNwLnZVqZLRgAe.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - Average Clock Speed" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jvMGXrCjEqYMx3BTca4qAe.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - Average Clock Speed" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure></figure><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JQNewBndceRdqhiHB6ee.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - Average Temperatures" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/oobbNvLbW2TY2GQrxXsp.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - Average Temperatures" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yB3UhPJkB55rztQzJRZK3.png" alt="GPU Benchmarks Hierarchy 2026 - Average Temperatures" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>If you're looking for the legacy GPU hierarchy, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gpu-hierarchy,4388-2.html">head over to page two</a>! We moved it to a separate page to help improve load times in our CMS as well as for the main website. And if you're looking to comment on the GPU benchmarks hierarchy, <a href="https://forums.tomshardware.com/threads/gpu-benchmarks-hierarchy-and-best-graphics-cards.3791856/" target="_blank">head over to our forums</a> and join the discussion!</p><h2 id="choosing-a-graphics-card">Choosing a Graphics Card</h2><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-choosing-a-graphics-card"><span>Choosing a Graphics Card</span></h3><h2 id="choosing-a-graphics-card-2">Choosing a Graphics Card</h2><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gpu-buying-guide,5844.html">Which graphics card do you need</a>? To help you decide, we created this GPU benchmarks hierarchy, comprising 48 GPUs from three generations of hardware for Nvidia and AMD and also including Intel's Battlemage cards. Not surprisingly, the fastest cards are using the latest GPU architectures, though they're not always a major upgrade over the prior generation.<br><br>Of course, it's not just about playing games. Many applications use the GPU for other work. But a good graphics card for gaming will typically do equally well in complex GPU computational workloads. Buy one of the top cards and you can run games at high resolutions and frame rates with the effects turned all the way up, and you'll be able to do content creation work as needed. Drop down to the middle and lower portions of the list and you'll need to start dialing down the settings to get acceptable performance in regular gameplay and GPU benchmarks.<br><br>If your main goal is gaming, you can't forget about the CPU. Getting the best possible gaming GPU won't help you much if your CPU is underpowered or many years out of date. So be sure to check out the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">Best CPUs for gaming</a> page, as well as our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">CPU Benchmarks</a> Hierarchy to make sure you have the right CPU for the level of gaming performance you're looking to achieve.</p><p>And don't forget about your monitor. Be sure to get a display whose refresh rate range matches the average frame rates of the graphics card that you want in the games that you play. Check out our list of <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gaming-monitors,4533.html" target="_blank">the best gaming monitors</a> for a starting point. </p><h2 id="gpu-benchmarks-from-2022-2024">GPU Benchmarks from 2022–2024</h2><p>Our 'legacy' GPU benchmarks used different hardware. Here are the details for the 2022–2024 configuration that used an Alder Lake 12900K CPU.</p><p><strong>Tom's Hardware 2022–2024 GPU Testbed</strong></p><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B09FXDLX95/">Intel Core i9-12900K</a><br><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B09GLC1SS4/">MSI Pro Z690-A WiFi DDR4</a><br><a href="https://www.corsair.com/us/en/Categories/Products/Memory/DOMINATOR-PLATINUM-RGB/p/CMT64GX4M4K3600C16">Corsair 2x16GB DDR4-3600 CL16</a><br><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B098WKQRDL/">Crucial P5 Plus 2TB</a><br><a href="https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16817171207">Cooler Master MWE 1250 V2 Gold</a><br><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B09PWVN9TP/">Cooler Master PL360 Flux</a><br><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/cooler-master-haf-500-masterbox-500-td300-cases">Cooler Master HAF500</a><br><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/windows-11-everything-you-need-to-know">Windows 11 Pro 64-bit</a></p><p>We have upgraded our test system and changed our test suite for 2025, effectively resetting our benchmarking and rankings. However, the old data — collected using a Core i9-12900K PC — remains valid. We aren't testing new GPUs with the old testbed, as that would double the time required for what is already a lengthy process, but we felt it would be helpful to some to keep the final data available.<br><br>We also had an interim system that never quite got wrapped up, which had a Core i9-13900K Raptor Lake CPU. Our original CPU was one of the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/intel-raptor-lake-instability-troubles-everything-you-need-to-know">impacted units that failed over time</a>, which explains in retrospect why so much of the data felt a bit questionable. Thankfully, the new Ryzen 7 9800X3D system seems to be running just fine. Here are the 12900K results.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qiWnVboCCfkk2JgVern39L.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/odX4dmxSVcAKwfs6pcqvJL.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3BUQTn5dZgQi7zL8Xs4WUL.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BAGV2GBMHHE4gkb7ZzTxwK.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>For these GPU benchmarks, we tested nearly every GPU released between 2016 and 2024, plus a few extras. All graphics cards were tested at 1080p medium and 1080p ultra, and we sorted the table by the 1080p ultra results. <em>Where it made sense</em>, we also tested at 1440p ultra and 4K ultra. All the scores are scaled relative to the top-ranking 1080p ultra card of the time, which in our suite is the RTX 4090 — especially at 4K and 1440p.<br><br>The above summary charts show the relative performance of the cards we've tested across the past several generations of hardware at 1080p ultra — swipe through the above gallery if you want to see the 1080p medium, 1440p, and 4K ultra images. There are a few missing options (e.g., the GT 1030, RX 550, and several Titan cards), but otherwise it's basically complete. Note that we also have data in the table below for some of the other older GPUs.<br><br>The eight games used for our standard GPU benchmarks hierarchy are <em>Borderlands 3</em> (DX12), <em>Far Cry 6 </em>(DX12), <em>Flight Simulator</em> (DX11 Nvidia, DX12 AMD/Intel), <em>Forza Horizon 5</em> (DX12), <em>Horizon Zero Dawn</em> (DX12), <em>Red Dead Redemption 2</em> (Vulkan), <em>Total War Warhammer 3</em> (DX11), and <em>Watch Dogs Legion</em> (DX12). The fps score is the geometric mean (equal weighting) of the eight games. Note that the specifications column links directly to our original review for the various GPUs.</p><div ><table><thead><tr><th class="firstcol " ><p>Graphics Card</p></th><th  ><p>1080p Ultra</p></th><th  ><p>1080p Medium</p></th><th  ><p>1440p Ultra</p></th><th  ><p>4K Ultra</p></th><th  ><p>Specifications (Links to Review)</p></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+4090"><strong>GeForce RTX 4090</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>100.0% (154.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>100.0% (195.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>100.0% (146.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>100.0% (114.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4090-review">AD102, 16384 shaders, 2520MHz, 24GB GDDR6X@21Gbps, 1008GB/s, 450W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+7900+XTX"><strong>Radeon RX 7900 XTX</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>96.7% (149.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>97.2% (190.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>92.6% (135.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>83.1% (95.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-7900-xtx-and-xt-review-shooting-for-the-top">Navi 31, 6144 shaders, 2500MHz, 24GB GDDR6@20Gbps, 960GB/s, 355W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+4080+Super"><strong>GeForce RTX 4080 Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>96.2% (148.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>98.5% (192.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>91.0% (133.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>80.3% (91.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4080-super-review">AD103, 10240 shaders, 2550MHz, 16GB GDDR6X@23Gbps, 736GB/s, 320W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+4080"><strong>GeForce RTX 4080</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>95.4% (147.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>98.1% (192.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>89.3% (130.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>78.0% (89.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4080-review">AD103, 9728 shaders, 2505MHz, 16GB GDDR6X@22.4Gbps, 717GB/s, 320W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+7900+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 7900 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>93.4% (143.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>95.8% (187.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>86.1% (125.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>71.0% (81.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-7900-xtx-and-xt-review-shooting-for-the-top">Navi 31, 5376 shaders, 2400MHz, 20GB GDDR6@20Gbps, 800GB/s, 315W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+4070+Ti+Super"><strong>GeForce RTX 4070 Ti Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>92.3% (142.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>96.8% (189.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>83.5% (122.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>68.7% (78.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-ti-super-review">AD103, 8448 shaders, 2610MHz, 16GB GDDR6X@21Gbps, 672GB/s, 285W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+4070+Ti"><strong>GeForce RTX 4070 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>89.8% (138.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>95.7% (187.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p>79.8% (116.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>63.8% (73.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-ti-review-a-costly-70-class-gpu">AD104, 7680 shaders, 2610MHz, 12GB GDDR6X@21Gbps, 504GB/s, 285W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+7900+GRE"><strong>Radeon RX 7900 GRE</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>88.1% (135.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>94.1% (184.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>78.0% (113.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>60.5% (69.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/amd-radeon-rx-7900-gre-review">Navi 31, 5120 shaders, 2245MHz, 16GB GDDR6@18Gbps, 576GB/s, 260W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+4070+Super"><strong>GeForce RTX 4070 Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>87.1% (134.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p>94.6% (185.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>75.2% (109.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>57.8% (66.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-super-review-boosted-clocks-and-core-counts-for-the-same-dollar599-as-the-vanilla-4070">AD104, 7168 shaders, 2475MHz, 12GB GDDR6X@21Gbps, 504GB/s, 220W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6950+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6950 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>84.7% (130.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>91.7% (179.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>75.3% (110.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>58.6% (67.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-6950-xt-review">Navi 21, 5120 shaders, 2310MHz, 16GB GDDR6@18Gbps, 576GB/s, 335W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+3090+Ti"><strong>GeForce RTX 3090 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>84.7% (130.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>90.5% (177.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>77.1% (112.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>66.3% (75.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/asus-geforce-rtx-3090-ti-review">GA102, 10752 shaders, 1860MHz, 24GB GDDR6X@21Gbps, 1008GB/s, 450W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+7800+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 7800 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>83.9% (129.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>91.5% (179.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>72.4% (105.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>54.4% (62.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-7800-xt-review">Navi 32, 3840 shaders, 2430MHz, 16GB GDDR6@19.5Gbps, 624GB/s, 263W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+3090"><strong>GeForce RTX 3090</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>81.4% (125.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>88.9% (174.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>72.5% (106.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>61.8% (70.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3090-review">GA102, 10496 shaders, 1695MHz, 24GB GDDR6X@19.5Gbps, 936GB/s, 350W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6900+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6900 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>80.9% (124.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>89.6% (175.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>69.9% (102.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>53.5% (61.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-6900-xt-review">Navi 21, 5120 shaders, 2250MHz, 16GB GDDR6@16Gbps, 512GB/s, 300W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+3080+Ti"><strong>GeForce RTX 3080 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>80.4% (123.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>87.8% (171.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>71.1% (103.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>60.1% (68.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3080-ti-review">GA102, 10240 shaders, 1665MHz, 12GB GDDR6X@19Gbps, 912GB/s, 350W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6800+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6800 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>79.6% (122.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>88.5% (173.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p>67.8% (99.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>50.6% (57.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/the-amd-radeon-rx-6800-xt-and-rx-6800-review">Navi 21, 4608 shaders, 2250MHz, 16GB GDDR6@16Gbps, 512GB/s, 300W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+3080+12GB"><strong>GeForce RTX 3080 12GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>79.2% (122.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>86.5% (169.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>70.0% (102.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>58.3% (66.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/msi-geforce-rtx-3080-12gb-suprim-x">GA102, 8960 shaders, 1845MHz, 12GB GDDR6X@19Gbps, 912GB/s, 400W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+4070"><strong>GeForce RTX 4070</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>79.2% (122.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>90.7% (177.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>66.9% (97.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>50.0% (57.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-review">AD104, 5888 shaders, 2475MHz, 12GB GDDR6X@21Gbps, 504GB/s, 200W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+3080"><strong>GeForce RTX 3080</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>76.0% (117.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>85.6% (167.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>66.0% (96.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>54.1% (62.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3080-review">GA102, 8704 shaders, 1710MHz, 10GB GDDR6X@19Gbps, 760GB/s, 320W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+7700+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 7700 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>75.3% (116.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>87.7% (171.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>63.4% (92.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>45.0% (51.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-7700-xt-review">Navi 32, 3456 shaders, 2544MHz, 12GB GDDR6@18Gbps, 432GB/s, 245W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6800"><strong>Radeon RX 6800</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>74.4% (114.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>86.2% (168.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>61.0% (89.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p>44.3% (50.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/the-amd-radeon-rx-6800-xt-and-rx-6800-review">Navi 21, 3840 shaders, 2105MHz, 16GB GDDR6@16Gbps, 512GB/s, 250W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+3070+Ti"><strong>GeForce RTX 3070 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>67.5% (104.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>81.6% (159.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>56.7% (82.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>41.7% (47.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3070-ti-review">GA104, 6144 shaders, 1770MHz, 8GB GDDR6X@19Gbps, 608GB/s, 290W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6750+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6750 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>66.8% (102.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>82.6% (161.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>52.9% (77.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p>37.4% (42.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-6750-xt-review">Navi 22, 2560 shaders, 2600MHz, 12GB GDDR6@18Gbps, 432GB/s, 250W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+4060+Ti+16GB"><strong>GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>65.3% (100.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>82.6% (161.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>51.8% (75.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>36.4% (41.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4060-ti-16gb-review">AD106, 4352 shaders, 2535MHz, 16GB GDDR6@18Gbps, 288GB/s, 160W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+4060+Ti"><strong>GeForce RTX 4060 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>65.1% (100.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>81.8% (160.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>51.7% (75.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>34.6% (39.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4060-ti-review">AD106, 4352 shaders, 2535MHz, 8GB GDDR6@18Gbps, 288GB/s, 160W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Titan+RTX"><strong>Titan RTX</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>64.5% (99.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>80.0% (156.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>54.4% (79.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>41.8% (47.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-titan-rtx-deep-learning-gaming-tensor,5971.html">TU102, 4608 shaders, 1770MHz, 24GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 672GB/s, 280W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6700+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6700 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>64.3% (99.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>80.8% (158.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>50.3% (73.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>35.3% (40.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-6700-xt-review">Navi 22, 2560 shaders, 2581MHz, 12GB GDDR6@16Gbps, 384GB/s, 230W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+3070"><strong>GeForce RTX 3070</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>64.1% (98.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>79.1% (154.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>53.2% (77.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>38.8% (44.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3070-founders-edition-review">GA104, 5888 shaders, 1725MHz, 8GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 448GB/s, 220W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+2080+Ti"><strong>GeForce RTX 2080 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>62.5% (96.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>77.2% (151.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>51.8% (75.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>38.0% (43.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-2080-ti-founders-edition,5805.html">TU102, 4352 shaders, 1545MHz, 11GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 616GB/s, 250W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+7600+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 7600 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>59.7% (91.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>77.3% (151.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p>45.1% (65.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>32.4% (37.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/amd-radeon-rx-7600-xt-review">Navi 33, 2048 shaders, 2755MHz, 16GB GDDR6@18Gbps, 288GB/s, 190W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+3060+Ti"><strong>GeForce RTX 3060 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>58.9% (90.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>75.0% (146.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>47.9% (70.0fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3060-ti-founders-edition-review">GA104, 4864 shaders, 1665MHz, 8GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 448GB/s, 200W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6700+10GB"><strong>Radeon RX 6700 10GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>55.9% (86.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>74.4% (145.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>43.0% (62.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>28.7% (32.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/sapphire-rx-6700-10gb-299-dollars">Navi 22, 2304 shaders, 2450MHz, 10GB GDDR6@16Gbps, 320GB/s, 175W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+2080+Super"><strong>GeForce RTX 2080 Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>55.8% (86.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>72.2% (141.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>45.2% (66.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>32.1% (36.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-2080-super-turing-ray-tracing,6243.html">TU104, 3072 shaders, 1815MHz, 8GB GDDR6@15.5Gbps, 496GB/s, 250W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+4060"><strong>GeForce RTX 4060</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>55.1% (84.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>72.7% (142.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>41.9% (61.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p>27.8% (31.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4060-review-asus-dual">AD107, 3072 shaders, 2460MHz, 8GB GDDR6@17Gbps, 272GB/s, 115W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+2080"><strong>GeForce RTX 2080</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>53.5% (82.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>69.8% (136.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>43.2% (63.2fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-2080-founders-edition,5809.html">TU104, 2944 shaders, 1710MHz, 8GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 448GB/s, 215W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+7600"><strong>Radeon RX 7600</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>53.2% (82.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>72.3% (141.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>39.2% (57.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>25.4% (29.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-7600-review">Navi 33, 2048 shaders, 2655MHz, 8GB GDDR6@18Gbps, 288GB/s, 165W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6650+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6650 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>50.4% (77.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>70.0% (137.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>37.3% (54.5fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-6650-xt-review">Navi 23, 2048 shaders, 2635MHz, 8GB GDDR6@18Gbps, 280GB/s, 180W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+2070+Super"><strong>GeForce RTX 2070 Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>50.3% (77.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>66.2% (129.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>40.0% (58.4fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-2060-super-geforce-rtx-2070-super,6207.html">TU104, 2560 shaders, 1770MHz, 8GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 448GB/s, 215W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Intel+Arc+A770+16GB"><strong>Intel Arc A770 16GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>49.9% (76.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>59.4% (116.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>41.0% (59.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>30.8% (35.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-arc-a770-limited-edition-review">ACM-G10, 4096 shaders, 2400MHz, 16GB GDDR6@17.5Gbps, 560GB/s, 225W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Intel+Arc+A770+8GB"><strong>Intel Arc A770 8GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>48.9% (75.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>59.0% (115.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>39.3% (57.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>29.0% (33.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p>ACM-G10, 4096 shaders, 2400MHz, 8GB GDDR6@16Gbps, 512GB/s, 225W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6600+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6600 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>48.5% (74.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>68.2% (133.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>35.7% (52.2fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-6600-xt-review">Navi 23, 2048 shaders, 2589MHz, 8GB GDDR6@16Gbps, 256GB/s, 160W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+5700+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 5700 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>47.6% (73.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>63.8% (124.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>36.3% (53.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>25.6% (29.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx_5700-rx_5700_xt,6216.html">Navi 10, 2560 shaders, 1905MHz, 8GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 448GB/s, 225W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+3060"><strong>GeForce RTX 3060</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>46.9% (72.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>61.8% (121.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>36.9% (54.0fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3060-review">GA106, 3584 shaders, 1777MHz, 12GB GDDR6@15Gbps, 360GB/s, 170W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Intel+Arc+A750"><strong>Intel Arc A750</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>45.9% (70.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>56.4% (110.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>36.7% (53.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>27.2% (31.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-arc-a750-limited-edition-review">ACM-G10, 3584 shaders, 2350MHz, 8GB GDDR6@16Gbps, 512GB/s, 225W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+2070"><strong>GeForce RTX 2070</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>45.3% (69.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>60.8% (119.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>35.5% (51.8fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-2070-founders-edition,5851.html">TU106, 2304 shaders, 1620MHz, 8GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 448GB/s, 175W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+VII"><strong>Radeon VII</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>45.1% (69.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>58.2% (113.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>36.3% (53.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>27.5% (31.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-vii-vega-20-7nm,5977.html">Vega 20, 3840 shaders, 1750MHz, 16GB HBM2@2.0Gbps, 1024GB/s, 300W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+GTX+1080+Ti"><strong>GeForce GTX 1080 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>43.1% (66.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>56.3% (110.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p>34.4% (50.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p>25.8% (29.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-ti,4972.html">GP102, 3584 shaders, 1582MHz, 11GB GDDR5X@11Gbps, 484GB/s, 250W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+2060+Super"><strong>GeForce RTX 2060 Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>42.5% (65.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>57.2% (112.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>33.1% (48.3fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-2060-super-geforce-rtx-2070-super,6207.html">TU106, 2176 shaders, 1650MHz, 8GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 448GB/s, 175W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6600"><strong>Radeon RX 6600</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>42.3% (65.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p>59.3% (116.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p>30.6% (44.8fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-6600-review-xfx">Navi 23, 1792 shaders, 2491MHz, 8GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 224GB/s, 132W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Intel+Arc+A580"><strong>Intel Arc A580</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>42.3% (65.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>51.6% (101.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>33.4% (48.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>24.4% (27.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-arc-a580-review-a-new-budget-contender">ACM-G10, 3072 shaders, 2300MHz, 8GB GDDR6@16Gbps, 512GB/s, 185W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+5700"><strong>Radeon RX 5700</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>41.9% (64.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>56.6% (110.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>31.9% (46.7fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx_5700-rx_5700_xt,6216.html">Navi 10, 2304 shaders, 1725MHz, 8GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 448GB/s, 180W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+5600+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 5600 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>37.5% (57.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>51.1% (100.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>28.8% (42.0fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx_5600_xt">Navi 10, 2304 shaders, 1750MHz, 8GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 336GB/s, 160W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+Vega+64"><strong>Radeon RX Vega 64</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>36.8% (56.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>48.2% (94.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>28.5% (41.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>20.5% (23.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-vega-64,5173.html">Vega 10, 4096 shaders, 1546MHz, 8GB HBM2@1.89Gbps, 484GB/s, 295W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+2060"><strong>GeForce RTX 2060</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>36.0% (55.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>51.4% (100.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>27.5% (40.1fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-2060-ray-tracing-turing,5960.html">TU106, 1920 shaders, 1680MHz, 6GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 336GB/s, 160W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+GTX+1080"><strong>GeForce GTX 1080</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>34.4% (53.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>45.9% (89.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>27.0% (39.4fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-nvidia-geforce-gtx-1080-graphics-cards,4725.html">GP104, 2560 shaders, 1733MHz, 8GB GDDR5X@10Gbps, 320GB/s, 180W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+3050"><strong>GeForce RTX 3050</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>33.7% (51.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>45.4% (88.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>26.4% (38.5fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3050-review-evga-xc-black">GA106, 2560 shaders, 1777MHz, 8GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 224GB/s, 130W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+GTX+1070+Ti"><strong>GeForce GTX 1070 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>33.1% (51.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>43.8% (85.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>26.0% (37.9fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1070-ti-8gb,5311.html">GP104, 2432 shaders, 1683MHz, 8GB GDDR5@8Gbps, 256GB/s, 180W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+Vega+56"><strong>Radeon RX Vega 56</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>32.8% (50.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>43.0% (84.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p>25.3% (37.0fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-rx-vega-56,5202.html">Vega 10, 3584 shaders, 1471MHz, 8GB HBM2@1.6Gbps, 410GB/s, 210W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+GTX+1660+Super"><strong>GeForce GTX 1660 Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>30.3% (46.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>43.7% (85.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>22.8% (33.3fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/evga-nvidia-geforce-gtx_1660_super-sc-ultra">TU116, 1408 shaders, 1785MHz, 6GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 336GB/s, 125W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+GTX+1660+Ti"><strong>GeForce GTX 1660 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>30.3% (46.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>43.3% (84.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>22.8% (33.3fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1660-ti-turing,6002.html">TU116, 1536 shaders, 1770MHz, 6GB GDDR6@12Gbps, 288GB/s, 120W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+GTX+1070"><strong>GeForce GTX 1070</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>29.0% (44.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>38.3% (75.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>22.7% (33.1fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1070-8gb-pascal-performance,4585.html">GP104, 1920 shaders, 1683MHz, 8GB GDDR5@8Gbps, 256GB/s, 150W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+GTX+1660"><strong>GeForce GTX 1660</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>27.7% (42.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>39.7% (77.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>20.8% (30.3fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1660-turing-tu116,6027.html">TU116, 1408 shaders, 1785MHz, 6GB GDDR5@8Gbps, 192GB/s, 120W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+5500+XT+8GB"><strong>Radeon RX 5500 XT 8GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>25.7% (39.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>36.8% (72.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>19.3% (28.2fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/asus-rog-strix-rx-5500-xt-o8g-gaming">Navi 14, 1408 shaders, 1845MHz, 8GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 224GB/s, 130W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+590"><strong>Radeon RX 590</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>25.5% (39.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>35.0% (68.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>19.9% (29.0fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-590,5907.html">Polaris 30, 2304 shaders, 1545MHz, 8GB GDDR5@8Gbps, 256GB/s, 225W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+GTX+980+Ti"><strong>GeForce GTX 980 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>23.3% (35.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>32.0% (62.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>18.2% (26.6fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-ti,4164.html">GM200, 2816 shaders, 1075MHz, 6GB GDDR5@7Gbps, 336GB/s, 250W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+580+8GB"><strong>Radeon RX 580 8GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>22.9% (35.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>31.5% (61.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>17.8% (26.0fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-580-review,5020.html">Polaris 20, 2304 shaders, 1340MHz, 8GB GDDR5@8Gbps, 256GB/s, 185W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+R9+Fury+X"><strong>Radeon R9 Fury X</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>22.9% (35.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p>32.6% (63.8fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-r9-fury-x,4196.html">Fiji, 4096 shaders, 1050MHz, 4GB HBM2@2Gbps, 512GB/s, 275W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+GTX+1650+Super"><strong>GeForce GTX 1650 Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>22.0% (33.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>34.6% (67.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>14.5% (21.2fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-gtx_1650-super-turing">TU116, 1280 shaders, 1725MHz, 4GB GDDR6@12Gbps, 192GB/s, 100W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+5500+XT+4GB"><strong>Radeon RX 5500 XT 4GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>21.6% (33.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>34.1% (66.8fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-5500-xt-4gb">Navi 14, 1408 shaders, 1845MHz, 4GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 224GB/s, 130W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+GTX+1060+6GB"><strong>GeForce GTX 1060 6GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>20.8% (32.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>29.5% (57.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>15.8% (23.0fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1060-pascal,4679.html">GP106, 1280 shaders, 1708MHz, 6GB GDDR5@8Gbps, 192GB/s, 120W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6500+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6500 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>19.9% (30.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>33.6% (65.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>12.3% (18.0fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-6500-xt-review-xfx">Navi 24, 1024 shaders, 2815MHz, 4GB GDDR6@18Gbps, 144GB/s, 107W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+R9+390"><strong>Radeon R9 390</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>19.3% (29.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>26.1% (51.1fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/sapphire-nitro-r9-390-8g-d5,4245.html">Grenada, 2560 shaders, 1000MHz, 8GB GDDR5@6Gbps, 384GB/s, 275W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+GTX+980"><strong>GeForce GTX 980</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>18.7% (28.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>27.4% (53.6fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-970-maxwell,3941.html">GM204, 2048 shaders, 1216MHz, 4GB GDDR5@7Gbps, 256GB/s, 165W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+GTX+1650+GDDR6"><strong>GeForce GTX 1650 GDDR6</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>18.7% (28.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>28.9% (56.6fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/evga-geforce-gtx-1650-gddr6">TU117, 896 shaders, 1590MHz, 4GB GDDR6@12Gbps, 192GB/s, 75W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Intel+Arc+A380"><strong>Intel Arc A380</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>18.4% (28.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>27.7% (54.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>13.3% (19.5fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-arc-a380-review">ACM-G11, 1024 shaders, 2450MHz, 6GB GDDR6@15.5Gbps, 186GB/s, 75W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+570+4GB"><strong>Radeon RX 570 4GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>18.2% (28.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>27.4% (53.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>13.6% (19.9fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-570-4gb,5028.html">Polaris 20, 2048 shaders, 1244MHz, 4GB GDDR5@7Gbps, 224GB/s, 150W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+GTX+1650"><strong>GeForce GTX 1650</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>17.5% (27.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>26.2% (51.3fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-1650-turing-gpu,6096.html">TU117, 896 shaders, 1665MHz, 4GB GDDR5@8Gbps, 128GB/s, 75W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+GTX+970"><strong>GeForce GTX 970</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>17.2% (26.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>25.0% (49.0fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-970-maxwell,3941.html">GM204, 1664 shaders, 1178MHz, 4GB GDDR5@7Gbps, 256GB/s, 145W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6400"><strong>Radeon RX 6400</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>15.7% (24.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>26.1% (51.1fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-6400-review-budget-in-almost-every-way">Navi 24, 768 shaders, 2321MHz, 4GB GDDR6@16Gbps, 128GB/s, 53W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+GTX+1050+Ti"><strong>GeForce GTX 1050 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>12.9% (19.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>19.4% (38.0fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1050-ti,4787.html">GP107, 768 shaders, 1392MHz, 4GB GDDR5@7Gbps, 112GB/s, 75W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+GTX+1060+3GB"><strong>GeForce GTX 1060 3GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p>26.8% (52.5fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1060-graphics-card-roundup,4724.html">GP106, 1152 shaders, 1708MHz, 3GB GDDR5@8Gbps, 192GB/s, 120W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+GTX+1630"><strong>GeForce GTX 1630</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>10.9% (16.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>17.3% (33.8fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1630-review">TU117, 512 shaders, 1785MHz, 4GB GDDR6@12Gbps, 96GB/s, 75W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+560+4GB"><strong>Radeon RX 560 4GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>9.6% (14.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>16.2% (31.7fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-560-4gb,5254.html">Baffin, 1024 shaders, 1275MHz, 4GB GDDR5@7Gbps, 112GB/s, 60-80W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+GTX+1050"><strong>GeForce GTX 1050</strong></a></p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p>15.2% (29.7fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1050-ti,4787.html">GP107, 640 shaders, 1455MHz, 2GB GDDR5@7Gbps, 112GB/s, 75W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+550+4GB"><strong>Radeon RX 550 4GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p>10.0% (19.5fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-550-2gb,5034.html">Lexa, 640 shaders, 1183MHz, 4GB GDDR5@7Gbps, 112GB/s, 50W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+GT+1030"><strong>GeForce GT 1030</strong></a></p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p>7.5% (14.6fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gt-1030-2gb,5110.html">GP108, 384 shaders, 1468MHz, 2GB GDDR5@6Gbps, 48GB/s, 30W</a></p></td></tr></tbody></table></div><p><em>*: GPU couldn't run all tests, so the overall score is slightly skewed at 1080p ultra.</em><br><br>While the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4090-review">RTX 4090</a> does technically take first place at 1080p ultra, it's the 1440p and especially 4K numbers that impress. It's less than 2% faster than the RTX 4080 Super at 1080p ultra, but that increases to 9% at 1440p and then 25% at 4K. Also note that the fps numbers in our table incorporate both the average and minimum fps into a single score — with the average given more weight than the 1% low fps.<br><br>Again, keep in mind that we're not including any ray tracing or DLSS results in the above table, as we use the same test suite with the same settings on all current and previous generation graphics cards. Since only RTX cards support DLSS (and RTX 40-series if you want DLSS 3), that would drastically limit which cards we could directly compare. You can see <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-review/7">DLSS 2/3 and FSR 2 upscaling results</a> in our RTX 4070 review if you want to check out how the various upscaling modes can help.<br><br>The RTX 4090 comes at a steep price, though on paper it's not that much worse than the previous generation <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3090-review">RTX 3090</a>. In fact, we'd say it's a lot better in some respects, as the 3090 was only a minor improvement in performance compared to the 3080 at the time of launch, but with more than double the VRAM. Nvidia pulled out all the stops with the 4090, increasing the core counts, clock speeds, and power limits to push it beyond all contenders. There are two problems with the 4090, however: It's not available at MSRP any longer, due to demand from the AI sector — it often costs $2,000 or more — and there are still concerns with pulling 450W of power over the 16-pin connector.<br><br>Stepping down from the RTX 4090, the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4080-super-review">RTX 4080 Super</a> and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-7900-xtx-and-xt-review-shooting-for-the-top">RX 7900 XTX</a> trade blows at higher resolutions, while CPU bottlenecks come into play at 1080p. We'll be switching our testbed in the near future, with the current results from our 13900K testing in the charts at the bottom of the page.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1600px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="AUVssB9ohAbRCiVZeS4vb9" name="intel-arc-a750-le-hero.png" alt="Intel" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/AUVssB9ohAbRCiVZeS4vb9.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1600" height="900" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Intel)</span></figcaption></figure><p>Outside of the latest releases from AMD and Nvidia, the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-big_navi-rdna2-all-we-know">RX 6000-</a> and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/features/nvidia-ampere-architecture-deep-dive">RTX 30-series</a> chips still perform reasonably well and if you're using such a card, there may not be any need to upgrade at present. Intel's Arc GPUs also fall into this category and are something of a wild card.<br><br>We've been testing and retesting GPUs periodically, and the Arc chips running the latest drivers now complete all of our benchmarks without any major anomalies. (<em>Minecraft</em> was previously a problem, though Intel has finally sorted that out.) They're not great on efficiency, but overall performance and pricing for the A750 is quite good.<br><br>Turning to the previous generation GPUs, the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-turing-gpu-architecture-explored,5801.html">RTX 20-series</a> and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1660-ti-turing,6002.html">GTX 16-series</a> chips end up scattered throughout the results, along with the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-radeon-rx-5000-series-navi-7nm-gpus,39451.html">RX 5000-series</a>. The general rule of thumb is that you get one or two "model upgrades" with the newer architectures, so for example the RTX 2080 Super comes in just below the RTX 3060 Ti, while the RX 5700 XT basically matches the newer and less expensive RX 6600 XT.<br><br>Go back far enough and you can see how modern games at ultra settings severely punish cards that don't have more than 4GB VRAM. We've been saying for a few years now that 4GB was just scraping by, and these days we'd avoid buying anything with less than 8GB of VRAM — 12GB or more is the minimum we'd want with a mainstream GPU, and 16GB or more for high-end and above. Old cards like the GTX 1060 3GB and GTX 1050 actually failed to run some of our tests, which skews their results a bit, even though they do better at 1080p medium.<br><br>Now let's switch over to the ray tracing hierarchy.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:3840px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="" name="Dying-Light-2-Settings-IQ-(50)-High-Quality-Raytracing.jpg" alt="Dying Light 2 settings and image quality comparisons" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CoRafe9dLaWhiDiW67vWVa.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="3840" height="2160" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Techland)</span></figcaption></figure><h2 id="ray-tracing-gpu-benchmarks-2022-2024">Ray Tracing GPU Benchmarks 2022–2024</h2><p>Enabling ray tracing, particularly with demanding games like many of those we're using in our DXR test suite, can cause framerates to drop off a cliff. We're testing with "medium" and "ultra" ray tracing settings. Medium generally means using the medium graphics preset but turning on ray tracing effects (set to "medium" if that's an option; otherwise, "on"), while ultra turns on all of the RT options at more or less maximum quality.<br><br>Because ray tracing is so much more demanding, we're sorting these results by the 1080p medium scores. That's also because the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-6500-xt-review-xfx">RX 6500 XT</a>, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-6400-review-budget-in-almost-every-way">RX 6400</a>, and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-arc-a380-review">Arc A380</a> basically can't handle ray tracing even at these settings, and testing at anything more than 1080p medium would be fruitless.<br><br>The five ray tracing games used are <em>Bright Memory Infinite</em>, <em>Control Ultimate Edition</em>, <em>Cyberpunk 2077</em>, <em>Metro Exodus Enhanced</em>, and <em>Minecraft</em> — all of these use the DirectX 12 / DX12 Ultimate API. The fps score is the geometric mean (equal weighting) of the five games, and the percentage is scaled relative to the fastest GPU in the list, which again is the GeForce RTX 4090.<br><br>If you want to see what the future may hold with ray tracing, check out our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/features/alan-wake-2-will-punish-your-gpu"><em>Alan Wake 2</em> benchmarks</a> where the full path tracing barely manages playable performance even with upscaling on non-Nvidia GPUs. However, and this is a critical point, the number of games where RT truly makes a striking difference in visuals is <em>extremely</em> limited. For most games, we still feel running pure rasterization rendering makes more sense.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ebVqFaNGy5XDHYHA8nEcpL.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ULrbyCTag3qxHD3cMgWxzL.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GQofC5RFonswVPJ7E5VqBM.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/x9q9MqQroCPqDLdL9CvPeL.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><div ><table><thead><tr><th class="firstcol " ><p>Graphics Card</p></th><th  ><p>1080p Medium</p></th><th  ><p>1080p Ultra</p></th><th  ><p>1440p Ultra</p></th><th  ><p>4K Ultra</p></th><th  ><p>Specifications (Links to Review)</p></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+4090"><strong>GeForce RTX 4090</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>100.0% (165.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>100.0% (136.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>100.0% (103.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>100.0% (55.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4090-review">AD102, 16384 shaders, 2520MHz, 24GB GDDR6X@21Gbps, 1008GB/s, 450W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+4080+Super"><strong>GeForce RTX 4080 Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>86.8% (144.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>85.3% (116.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>75.6% (78.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>70.5% (39.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4080-super-review">AD103, 10240 shaders, 2550MHz, 16GB GDDR6X@23Gbps, 736GB/s, 320W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+4080"><strong>GeForce RTX 4080</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>85.4% (141.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>83.4% (113.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>73.1% (76.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>67.7% (37.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4080-review">AD103, 9728 shaders, 2505MHz, 16GB GDDR6X@22.4Gbps, 717GB/s, 320W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+4070+Ti+Super"><strong>GeForce RTX 4070 Ti Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>77.3% (128.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p>73.5% (100.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>63.5% (66.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>58.4% (32.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-ti-super-review">AD103, 8448 shaders, 2610MHz, 16GB GDDR6X@21Gbps, 672GB/s, 285W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+3090+Ti"><strong>GeForce RTX 3090 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>71.9% (119.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>68.4% (93.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p>59.6% (62.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>56.9% (31.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/asus-geforce-rtx-3090-ti-review">GA102, 10752 shaders, 1860MHz, 24GB GDDR6X@21Gbps, 1008GB/s, 450W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+4070+Ti"><strong>GeForce RTX 4070 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>71.5% (118.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>67.1% (91.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>56.9% (59.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>52.3% (29.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-ti-review-a-costly-70-class-gpu">AD104, 7680 shaders, 2610MHz, 12GB GDDR6X@21Gbps, 504GB/s, 285W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+4070+Super"><strong>GeForce RTX 4070 Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>68.1% (113.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>62.7% (85.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>52.4% (54.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>47.8% (26.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-super-review-boosted-clocks-and-core-counts-for-the-same-dollar599-as-the-vanilla-4070">AD104, 7168 shaders, 2475MHz, 12GB GDDR6X@21Gbps, 504GB/s, 220W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+3090"><strong>GeForce RTX 3090</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>67.7% (112.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>63.5% (86.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>55.1% (57.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p>51.8% (28.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3090-review">GA102, 10496 shaders, 1695MHz, 24GB GDDR6X@19.5Gbps, 936GB/s, 350W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+3080+Ti"><strong>GeForce RTX 3080 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>66.5% (110.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>62.2% (84.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>53.2% (55.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>48.6% (27.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3080-ti-review">GA102, 10240 shaders, 1665MHz, 12GB GDDR6X@19Gbps, 912GB/s, 350W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+7900+XTX"><strong>Radeon RX 7900 XTX</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>66.1% (109.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>61.7% (84.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>53.2% (55.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>48.6% (27.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-7900-xtx-and-xt-review-shooting-for-the-top">Navi 31, 6144 shaders, 2500MHz, 24GB GDDR6@20Gbps, 960GB/s, 355W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+3080+12GB"><strong>GeForce RTX 3080 12GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>64.9% (107.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>59.9% (81.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>50.8% (52.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>46.3% (25.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/msi-geforce-rtx-3080-12gb-suprim-x">GA102, 8960 shaders, 1845MHz, 12GB GDDR6X@19Gbps, 912GB/s, 400W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+4070"><strong>GeForce RTX 4070</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>61.2% (101.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>54.2% (73.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>45.1% (46.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>40.7% (22.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4070-review">AD104, 5888 shaders, 2475MHz, 12GB GDDR6X@21Gbps, 504GB/s, 200W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+7900+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 7900 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>60.4% (100.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>55.3% (75.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>46.7% (48.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>41.6% (23.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-7900-xtx-and-xt-review-shooting-for-the-top">Navi 31, 5376 shaders, 2400MHz, 20GB GDDR6@20Gbps, 800GB/s, 315W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+3080"><strong>GeForce RTX 3080</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>60.2% (99.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>54.5% (74.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>46.1% (47.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>41.8% (23.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3080-review">GA102, 8704 shaders, 1710MHz, 10GB GDDR6X@19Gbps, 760GB/s, 320W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+7900+GRE"><strong>Radeon RX 7900 GRE</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>52.9% (87.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>46.8% (63.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>39.6% (41.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p>35.7% (19.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/amd-radeon-rx-7900-gre-review">Navi 31, 5120 shaders, 2245MHz, 16GB GDDR6@18Gbps, 576GB/s, 260W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+3070+Ti"><strong>GeForce RTX 3070 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>50.6% (84.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>43.0% (58.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>35.7% (37.1fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3070-ti-review">GA104, 6144 shaders, 1770MHz, 8GB GDDR6X@19Gbps, 608GB/s, 290W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6950+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6950 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>48.3% (80.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>41.4% (56.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>34.3% (35.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>31.0% (17.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-6950-xt-review">Navi 21, 5120 shaders, 2310MHz, 16GB GDDR6@18Gbps, 576GB/s, 335W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+3070"><strong>GeForce RTX 3070</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>47.2% (78.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p>39.9% (54.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>32.8% (34.1fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3070-founders-edition-review">GA104, 5888 shaders, 1725MHz, 8GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 448GB/s, 220W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+7800+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 7800 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>46.7% (77.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>41.9% (57.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>34.9% (36.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>31.0% (17.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-7800-xt-review">Navi 32, 3840 shaders, 2430MHz, 16GB GDDR6@19.5Gbps, 624GB/s, 263W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6900+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6900 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>45.4% (75.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>38.3% (52.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>32.1% (33.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>28.8% (16.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-6900-xt-review">Navi 21, 5120 shaders, 2250MHz, 16GB GDDR6@16Gbps, 512GB/s, 300W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+4060+Ti"><strong>GeForce RTX 4060 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>45.2% (75.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>38.7% (52.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>32.3% (33.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>24.8% (13.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4060-ti-review">AD106, 4352 shaders, 2535MHz, 8GB GDDR6@18Gbps, 288GB/s, 160W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+4060+Ti+16GB"><strong>GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>45.2% (75.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>38.8% (53.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>32.7% (34.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>29.5% (16.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4060-ti-16gb-review">AD106, 4352 shaders, 2535MHz, 16GB GDDR6@18Gbps, 288GB/s, 160W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Titan+RTX"><strong>Titan RTX</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>44.8% (74.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>39.1% (53.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>33.7% (35.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>31.2% (17.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-titan-rtx-deep-learning-gaming-tensor,5971.html">TU102, 4608 shaders, 1770MHz, 24GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 672GB/s, 280W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+2080+Ti"><strong>GeForce RTX 2080 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>42.7% (70.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>37.2% (50.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>31.6% (32.9fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-2080-ti-founders-edition,5805.html">TU102, 4352 shaders, 1545MHz, 11GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 616GB/s, 250W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6800+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6800 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>42.2% (70.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>35.6% (48.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>29.9% (31.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>26.8% (15.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/the-amd-radeon-rx-6800-xt-and-rx-6800-review">Navi 21, 4608 shaders, 2250MHz, 16GB GDDR6@16Gbps, 512GB/s, 300W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+3060+Ti"><strong>GeForce RTX 3060 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>41.9% (69.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>35.0% (47.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>28.8% (30.0fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3060-ti-founders-edition-review">GA104, 4864 shaders, 1665MHz, 8GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 448GB/s, 200W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+7700+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 7700 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>41.3% (68.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>36.5% (49.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>30.6% (31.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>27.2% (15.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-7700-xt-review">Navi 32, 3456 shaders, 2544MHz, 12GB GDDR6@18Gbps, 432GB/s, 245W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6800"><strong>Radeon RX 6800</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>36.3% (60.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>30.2% (41.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p>25.4% (26.3fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/the-amd-radeon-rx-6800-xt-and-rx-6800-review">Navi 21, 3840 shaders, 2105MHz, 16GB GDDR6@16Gbps, 512GB/s, 250W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+2080+Super"><strong>GeForce RTX 2080 Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>35.8% (59.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>30.8% (42.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>26.1% (27.1fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-2080-super-turing-ray-tracing,6243.html">TU104, 3072 shaders, 1815MHz, 8GB GDDR6@15.5Gbps, 496GB/s, 250W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+4060"><strong>GeForce RTX 4060</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>35.4% (58.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>30.6% (41.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>24.9% (25.8fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4060-review-asus-dual">AD107, 3072 shaders, 2460MHz, 8GB GDDR6@17Gbps, 272GB/s, 115W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+2080"><strong>GeForce RTX 2080</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>34.4% (57.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>29.1% (39.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>24.6% (25.5fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-2080-founders-edition,5809.html">TU104, 2944 shaders, 1710MHz, 8GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 448GB/s, 215W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Intel+Arc+A770+8GB"><strong>Intel Arc A770 8GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>32.7% (54.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p>28.4% (38.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>24.0% (24.9fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p>ACM-G10, 4096 shaders, 2400MHz, 8GB GDDR6@16Gbps, 512GB/s, 225W</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Intel+Arc+A770+16GB"><strong>Intel Arc A770 16GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>32.6% (54.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>28.3% (38.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>25.3% (26.2fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-arc-a770-limited-edition-review">ACM-G10, 4096 shaders, 2400MHz, 16GB GDDR6@17.5Gbps, 560GB/s, 225W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+3060"><strong>GeForce RTX 3060</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>31.7% (52.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>25.7% (35.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>21.1% (22.0fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3060-review">GA106, 3584 shaders, 1777MHz, 12GB GDDR6@15Gbps, 360GB/s, 170W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+2070+Super"><strong>GeForce RTX 2070 Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>31.6% (52.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>26.8% (36.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>22.3% (23.1fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-2060-super-geforce-rtx-2070-super,6207.html">TU104, 2560 shaders, 1770MHz, 8GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 448GB/s, 215W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Intel+Arc+A750"><strong>Intel Arc A750</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>30.7% (51.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>26.8% (36.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>22.6% (23.5fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-arc-a750-limited-edition-review">ACM-G10, 3584 shaders, 2350MHz, 8GB GDDR6@16Gbps, 512GB/s, 225W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6750+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6750 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>30.0% (49.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>25.3% (34.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>20.7% (21.5fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-6750-xt-review">Navi 22, 2560 shaders, 2600MHz, 12GB GDDR6@18Gbps, 432GB/s, 250W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6700+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6700 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>28.1% (46.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>23.7% (32.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>19.1% (19.9fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-6700-xt-review">Navi 22, 2560 shaders, 2581MHz, 12GB GDDR6@16Gbps, 384GB/s, 230W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+2070"><strong>GeForce RTX 2070</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>27.9% (46.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>23.5% (32.1fps)</p></td><td  ><p>19.7% (20.4fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-2070-founders-edition,5851.html">TU106, 2304 shaders, 1620MHz, 8GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 448GB/s, 175W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Intel+Arc+A580"><strong>Intel Arc A580</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>27.5% (45.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>24.0% (32.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>20.3% (21.1fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-arc-a580-review-a-new-budget-contender">ACM-G10, 3072 shaders, 2300MHz, 8GB GDDR6@16Gbps, 512GB/s, 185W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+2060+Super"><strong>GeForce RTX 2060 Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>26.8% (44.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>22.4% (30.5fps)</p></td><td  ><p>18.5% (19.3fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-2060-super-geforce-rtx-2070-super,6207.html">TU106, 2176 shaders, 1650MHz, 8GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 448GB/s, 175W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+7600+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 7600 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>26.6% (44.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p>22.6% (30.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>18.3% (19.0fps)</p></td><td  ><p>16.0% (8.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/amd-radeon-rx-7600-xt-review">Navi 33, 2048 shaders, 2755MHz, 16GB GDDR6@18Gbps, 288GB/s, 190W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6700+10GB"><strong>Radeon RX 6700 10GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>25.9% (42.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>21.4% (29.2fps)</p></td><td  ><p>16.8% (17.5fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/sapphire-rx-6700-10gb-299-dollars">Navi 22, 2304 shaders, 2450MHz, 10GB GDDR6@16Gbps, 320GB/s, 175W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+2060"><strong>GeForce RTX 2060</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>23.2% (38.4fps)</p></td><td  ><p>18.6% (25.4fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-2060-ray-tracing-turing,5960.html">TU106, 1920 shaders, 1680MHz, 6GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 336GB/s, 160W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+7600"><strong>Radeon RX 7600</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>23.1% (38.3fps)</p></td><td  ><p>18.9% (25.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>14.7% (15.2fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-7600-review">Navi 33, 2048 shaders, 2655MHz, 8GB GDDR6@18Gbps, 288GB/s, 165W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6650+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6650 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>22.7% (37.6fps)</p></td><td  ><p>18.8% (25.6fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-6650-xt-review">Navi 23, 2048 shaders, 2635MHz, 8GB GDDR6@18Gbps, 280GB/s, 180W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=GeForce+RTX+3050"><strong>GeForce RTX 3050</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>22.3% (36.9fps)</p></td><td  ><p>18.0% (24.6fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3050-review-evga-xc-black">GA106, 2560 shaders, 1777MHz, 8GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 224GB/s, 130W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6600+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6600 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>22.1% (36.7fps)</p></td><td  ><p>18.2% (24.8fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-6600-xt-review">Navi 23, 2048 shaders, 2589MHz, 8GB GDDR6@16Gbps, 256GB/s, 160W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6600"><strong>Radeon RX 6600</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>18.6% (30.8fps)</p></td><td  ><p>15.2% (20.7fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-6600-review-xfx">Navi 23, 1792 shaders, 2491MHz, 8GB GDDR6@14Gbps, 224GB/s, 132W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Intel+Arc+A380"><strong>Intel Arc A380</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>11.0% (18.3fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-arc-a380-review">ACM-G11, 1024 shaders, 2450MHz, 6GB GDDR6@15.5Gbps, 186GB/s, 75W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6500+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6500 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>5.9% (9.9fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-6500-xt-review-xfx">Navi 24, 1024 shaders, 2815MHz, 4GB GDDR6@18Gbps, 144GB/s, 107W</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?rh=n%3A17923671011%2Cn%3A284822&k=Radeon+RX+6400"><strong>Radeon RX 6400</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>5.0% (8.3fps)</p></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-radeon-rx-6400-review-budget-in-almost-every-way">Navi 24, 768 shaders, 2321MHz, 4GB GDDR6@16Gbps, 128GB/s, 53W</a></p></td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>If you felt the RTX 4090 performance was impressive at 4K in our standard test suite, just take a look at the results with ray tracing. Nvidia put even more ray tracing enhancements into the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/features/nvidia-ada-lovelace-and-geforce-rtx-40-series-everything-we-know">Ada Lovelace architecture</a>, and those start to show up here. There are still further potential performance improvements for ray tracing with SER, OMM, and DMM — not to mention DLSS 3, though that ends up being a bit of a mixed bag, since the generated frames don't include new user input and add latency.<br><br>If you want a real kick in the pants, we also ran many of the faster ray tracing GPUs through <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/features/cyberpunk-2077-rt-overdrive-path-tracing-full-path-tracing-fully-unnecessary"><em>Cyberpunk 2077</em>'s RT Overdrive</a> mode, which implements full "path tracing" (full ray tracing, without any rasterization) — as well as <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/features/alan-wake-2-will-punish-your-gpu"><em>Alan Wake 2</em></a>, which uses path tracing at higher settings, and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-bundles-black-myth-wukong-with-rtx-40-series-gpus"><em>Black Myth: Wukong</em></a> that supports full ray tracing. Those games provide a glimpse of how future games could behave, and why upscaling and AI techniques like frame generation are here to stay.<br><br>Even at 1080p medium, a relatively tame setting for DXR (DirectX Raytracing), the RTX 4090 roars past all contenders and leads the previous generation RTX 3090 Ti by 41%. At 1080p ultra, the lead grows to 53%, and it's nearly 64% at 1440p. Nvidia made claims before the RTX 4090 launch that it was "2x to 4x faster than the RTX 3090 Ti" — factoring in DLSS 3's Frame Generation technology — but even without DLSS 3, the 4090 is 72% faster than the 3090 Ti at 4K.<br><br>AMD continued to relegate DXR and ray tracing to secondary status, focusing more on improving rasterization performance — and on reducing manufacturing costs through the use of <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-rdna-3-gpu-architecture-deep-dive-the-ryzen-moment-for-gpus">chiplets on the new RDNA 3 GPUs</a>. As such, the ray tracing performance from AMD isn't particularly impressive. The top RX 7900 XTX basically matches Nvidia's previous generation RTX 3080 12GB, which puts it barely ahead of the RTX 4070 — and that's not even in all DXR games. There are some minor improvements for RT performance in RDNA 3, though, as the 7800 XT for example ends up basically tied with the RX 6800 XT in rasterization performance but is 10% faster in DXR performance.<br><br>Intel's Arc A7-series parts show a decent blend of performance in general, with the A750 coming in ahead of the RTX 3060 overall. With the latest drivers (and with vsync forced off in the options.txt file), <em>Minecraft</em> performance also looks much more in line with the other Arc DXR results.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:3840px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="" name="Nvidia-RTX-4090-FE-(105).jpg" alt="Nvidia GeForce RTX 4090 Founders Edition" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dVcdGw9eAbveYkJas6nf5b.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="3840" height="2160" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>You can also see what DLSS Quality mode did for performance in DXR games on the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4090-review/3">RTX 4090 in our review</a>, but the short summary is that it boosted performance by 78% at 4K ultra. DLSS 3 frame generation improved framerates another 30% to 100% in our testing, though we recommend exercising (extreme) caution when looking at FPS with the feature enabled. It can boost framerates in benchmarks, but when actually playing games it often doesn't feel much faster than without the feature.<br><br>Overall, with DLSS 2, the 4090 in our ray tracing test suite is nearly four times as fast as AMD's RX 7900 XTX. Ouch. <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-fsr2-deathloop-vs-dlss">AMD's FSR 2</a> and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/amd-fsr-3-now-in-a-dozen-games-including-starfield-too-bad-the-latter-has-hemorrhaged-players-since-launch">FSR 3</a> can help as well, and AMD continues to work on increasing the rate of adoption, but it still trails DLSS both in the number of games supported and in the overall image quality. Only two of the games in our DXR suite have FSR2 support. By comparison, all of the DXR games we're testing support DLSS2 — and one also supports DLSS3.<br><br>Without FSR2, AMD's fastest GPUs can only clear 60 fps at 1080p ultra, while remaining decently playable at 1440p with 40–50 fps on average. But native 4K DXR remains out of reach for just about every GPU, with only the 3090 Ti and above breaking the 30 fps mark on the composite score — and a couple of games still come up short on the 3090 Ti.<br><br>AMD also has FSR 3 frame generation. Like DLSS3, it adds latency, and AMD requires the integration of Anti-Lag+ support in games that use FSR 3. But Anti-Lag+ only works with AMD GPUs, which means non-AMD cards will likely incur a larger latency penalty. We've tested it in <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/testing-gpus-with-amd-fsr3-and-avatar-frontiers-of-pandora-16-graphics-cards-and-hundreds-of-benchmarks"><em>Avatar: Frontiers of Pandora</em></a> and found it worked pretty well, but that was not the case in <em>Forspoken</em> and <em>Immortals of Aveum</em>. It has since gained a lot more traction, though quality and latency remain quite variable — it can look and run well in one game, and then fall flat in another.<br><br>The midrange GPUs like the RTX 3070 and RX 6700 XT basically manage 1080p ultra and not much more, while the bottom tier of DXR-capable GPUs barely manage 1080p medium — and the RX 6500 XT can't even do that, with single digit framerates in most of our test suite, and one game that wouldn't even work at our chosen "medium" settings. (<em>Control</em> requires at least 6GB VRAM to let you enable ray tracing.)<br><br>Intel's Arc A380 ends up just ahead of the RX 6500 XT in ray tracing performance, which is interesting considering it only has 8 RTUs going up against AMD's 16 Ray Accelerators. Intel posted a <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/arc-a770-beats-rtx-3060-in-ray-tracing-performance-in-new-intel-benchmarks">deep dive into its ray tracing hardware</a>, and Arc seems reasonably impressive, except for the fact that the number of RTUs severely limits performance. The top-end A770 still only has 32 RTUs, which proves sufficient for it to pull ahead (barely) of the RTX 3060 in DXR testing, but it can't go much further than that. Arc A750 and above also ends up ahead of AMD's RX 6750 XT in DXR performance, showing just how poor AMD's RDNA 2 hardware is when it comes to ray tracing.<br><br>It's also interesting to look at the generational performance of Nvidia's RTX cards. The slowest 20-series GPU, the RTX 2060, still outperforms the newer RTX 3050 by a bit, but the fastest RTX 2080 Ti comes in a bit behind the RTX 3070. Where the 2080 Ti basically doubled the performance of the 2060, the 3090 delivers about triple the performance of the 3050.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1920px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="" name="Alder-Lake-testbed-(1).jpg" alt="Tom's Hardware 2022–2024 GPU Testbed" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fCLgtUvbCPcxRkKbshMcfE.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1920" height="1080" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="caption-text">Tom's Hardware 2022–2024 GPU Testbed </span><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><h2 id="test-system-and-how-we-test-for-gpu-benchmarks">Test System and How We Test for GPU Benchmarks</h2><p>For each graphics card, we follow the same testing procedure. We run one pass of each benchmark to "warm up" the GPU after launching the game, then run at least two passes at each setting/resolution combination. If the two runs are basically identical (within 0.5% or less difference), we use the faster of the two runs. If there's more than a small difference, we run the test at least twice more to determine what "normal" performance is supposed to be.<br><br>We also look at all the data and check for anomalies, so for example RTX 3070 Ti, RTX 3070, and RTX 3060 Ti all generally going to perform within a narrow range — 3070 Ti is about 5% faster than 3070, which is about 5% faster than 3060 Ti. If we see games where there are clear outliers (i.e. performance is more than 10% higher for the cards just mentioned), we'll go back and retest whatever cards are showing the anomaly and figure out what the "correct" result would be.<br><br>Due to the length of time required for testing each GPU, updated drivers and game patches inevitably will come out that can impact performance. We periodically retest a few sample cards to verify our results are still valid, and if not, we go through and retest the affected game(s) and GPU(s). We may also add games to our test suite over the coming year, if one comes out that is popular and conducive to testing — see our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/what-makes-a-good-game-benchmark">what makes a good game benchmark</a> for our selection criteria.</p><h2 id="gpu-benchmarks-individual-game-charts">GPU Benchmarks: Individual Game Charts</h2><p>The above tables provide a summary of performance, but for those that want to see the individual game charts, for both the standard and ray tracing test suites, we've got those as well. We're only including more recent GPUs in these charts, as otherwise things get very messy. These are also using a newer test suite and a 13900K CPU, which changes the performance slightly from the above table, simply because our newest tests are more relevant (but haven't been run on a lot of the older GPUs shown in the tables).<br><br><strong>These charts were up to date as of November 11, 2024.</strong></p><h2 id="gpu-benchmarks-1080p-medium">GPU Benchmarks — 1080p Medium</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XZG38QCwgwduXfLe2fnUzD.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CE8TdG2mSztthniqbs4YsE.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/iAc7ATnjZ8Lc4gXMMf4FkF.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/s7AhzbToiWgQsoKtALuGEK.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bfnNw9RMAExw5YQccHVL7L.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZYjovHPoLAF5rz6UgaaWoT.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4erNU52qxikA4qhXeBtriS.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qFQvqdkVtGctuz89RFxyBV.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/P3TbrtCEjhicn67dLmYSsV.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pf2r9PDRFsr7ZiM5viYWXW.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SZzpyiLLYD3QypFaPYU4BX.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tRN3b6ch6JYMBEuNGoMGEY.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QmGiC3sqh6AR77thYQd78Z.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/29E6fC4Hnm6muuDBfV3HxZ.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/73yHcc6dACiFbKhaoYjw4b.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/m9soW2Bdx7vxpeTjTfsMec.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YzHtKdZXNv9wQFHto3LjZP.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cC4YNHJ9sqYVwrFbqu4AVd.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PWzTkZZWYkGyQqPFvorfmb.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WEGtin47emgmNmB2xLh2Me.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2zz2j6QhfVWyEVc2CuMRCf.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KAXM8oqYKMYNPPmew3BC5g.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><h2 id="gpu-benchmarks-1080p-ultra">GPU Benchmarks — 1080p Ultra</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9RyegtqtH8tgKNCJSXNrEE.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XKc2BBi4Lv9S2zRwTaJy6F.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BQaLvA5zacQyGvrKVaCwxF.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/raSLsHJwZnuzztyeMZhAfK.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9JAoCeomMyNe4YJtRNcsKL.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9rXCpYEitaaUwXNwcWYw2U.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KudRNfjYNeQ8CVtYUj2V9T.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yPNFZHjrZPJFMsdRDsMsjU.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/oeEYgtL6HD2izkSbAUuGfV.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pq7gyWRF9ueimAzUwSAtwW.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4DZQd9uGxxmEMbMyj3BDnX.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NrRSK3aXo6BqJXRYWbsjeY.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bdcezdoHoWP6XtDJwbqALZ.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/J8mdH52Uxz6jN9knz4jRBa.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JEoMYZuv6ney8HM6bM5HJb.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7kdvNnPAKBumRMg5WVNPrc.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Sbu37bhzjpB4dEhGGKFNnP.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fJwaWdzQF75tTCKM3dKXhd.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Q3GNysjJomePyfdUaxEPzb.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bNjHaJXQVwaNKCCsqxZZZe.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SKRA6YNwdpahR8yqXAnqQf.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cWvTju538KSdsntnx5ShGg.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><h2 id="gpu-benchmarks-1440p-ultra">GPU Benchmarks — 1440p Ultra</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yEePBiSeor6ypbj86oLGTE.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eDN4KsamKWZRezewSfQHKF.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mCQdqJyjw6pFXMTMinHZCG.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bh24Ec4bBoX7bNLVYeeaSK.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/r7T3nNVWhgyQSXdhF7c7bL.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hpawEc27tm6prtsuQ2R7FU.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/REHrXECKuo7Rf5ZzSM9rMT.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KGHmYZyr2M7bR9gHgZpTxU.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GHiDgxzQFpEKq2LiuuLk6W.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ix8msjiNkQM6y8yu4o6vjW.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZfW8oK4ZCnQ5CpAbhxWvZX.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mFRXpdZGg4S2UsYVKtaeSY.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gr9CsZBAchqqY3zkH8uhXZ.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qbF44BZcYPBnaBcMuhimPa.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8KtboTw9i2gEbMypdpxUqa.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dcYx9eEmYGQYMbCaLcKi5d.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dQtuqoDtdWgkvDB9z6Q42Q.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/o5eUbwzH4v5UhToJJ7wjud.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tbi3kUSbjGFtF2uwYjpeDc.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gLYBX7mMPvQRB2inyURkme.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RE3qEWobanWhEK3eChuSdf.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Bifzo88UnP6rxE5CuKHkUg.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><h2 id="gpu-benchmarks-4k-ultra">GPU Benchmarks — 4K Ultra</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZDwt7wik5ePX2kB2vkTJfE.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dQfQpYzTPeb3dQkuph5zXF.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/763WADaaYYCvNHvTk4wxPG.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aScyTuTh7xXWWH3uaotWtK.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EUTbxTxPrfujFcHoCsx2oL.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YnbLCfwSnLp7KnuTVi4PWU.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/99iL99qNMphJYvEMaDCQaT.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LbzcP7rvpXCLPVQrmzyJQV.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zmto4RgLTFScvKGqUTh5KW.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Q3gpo6D4ybzw45uhN5bQNX.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2fJ8iMAQdkpD4VrS7BEizX.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/J5eoCYqeiuVS3tRYwy4itY.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hfNJYT9MMniEzaj6Fbn2kZ.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YrjmYA5c9prvbv7jsojoca.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/46LbDwhSWW8u6NAvsnU6Zb.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TUhKyhNqwmdd8hw4woanGd.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2vtwZ3uemZ7V2BrEzz8FEQ.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Lkg3z6gGFNcGLW5Denfw8e.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FariNs8xGTbi4RgU7zdJSc.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/g49YjkhabRVAG2TFPRsVye.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NC2yMvdFjdqDUAvcnSYgqf.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GK6J3Q2b5PuTvGbf6NLigg.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><h2 id="gpu-benchmarks-power-clocks-and-temperatures">GPU Benchmarks — Power, Clocks, and Temperatures</h2><p>Most of our discussion has focused on performance, but for those interested in power and other aspects of the GPUs, here are the appropriate charts.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/U8dDdsdu2mm2qtUHz8JPcG.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FTXc8umXeNgZjNdGgTeVqG.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hkF3owHwFG4GciiDKkdD4H.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yXdMTPY7sib6n6DSEutzFH.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MbDno3HuKWoCnoiss7cbUH.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UQT7tES3H5hWNhRAvvPMhH.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/krVH7JGPvSAeVBWfsKUTuH.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DxAFhdJE65jaNNrE8MF2AJ.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/boqpih7hyKhunpZHNt6LNJ.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kFUpCC8Te2j82MgLnYddaJ.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4hoZqYCE2ZrnVrGz2xVCoJ.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qPBnDNMgzfDS9ZaunTd22K.png" alt="GPU benchmarks hierarchy and best graphics cards charts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:2560px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="" name="RTX-3050-GPU-collection-(2).jpg" alt="A collection of new and old graphics cards" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/J7e5SkswoMun2EsKqkUMe8.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="2560" height="1440" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="caption-text">A collection of new and old graphics cards </span><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>Our even older 2020–2021 'legacy' GPU benchmarks used another set of hardware with different games. Here are the details for the Coffee Lake 9900K and Z390 PC.</p><p><strong>Tom's Hardware 2020–2021 GPU Testbed</strong></p><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Intel-i9-9900K-Desktop-Processor-Unlocked/dp/B005404P9I">Intel Core i9-9900K</a><br><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B077FZPCRH/">Corsair H150i Pro RGB</a><br><a href="https://www.amazon.com/MSI-MEG-Z390-ACE-Motherboard/dp/B07HM3M86B/">MSI MEG Z390 Ace</a><br><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07GTG2T7L/">Corsair 2x16GB DDR4-3200</a><br><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07TY2TN64/">XPG SX8200 Pro 2TB</a><br><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Microsoft-Windows-10-Pro-Download/dp/B01019BOEA">Windows 10 Pro</a> (21H1)</p><p>The results below combine results from nine games with six resolution and setting combinations. All of the scores are combined (via a geometric mean calculation) into a single overall result, which tends to penalize the fastest and slowest GPUs — CPU bottlenecks come into play at 1080p medium, while VRAM limitations can kill performance at 4K ultra.<br><br>These results have not been updated since early 2022, when we added the RTX 3050 and RX 6500 XT to the list. We won't be adding future GPUs to this table, so there's no RTX 40-series, RX 7000-series, Arc, 3090 Ti, 6950 XT, 6750 XT, or 6650 XT, but it does help to provide a look at a slightly less demanding suite of games, where 6GB or more VRAM isn't generally required at 1080p ultra settings. You can use these older results to help inform your purchase decisions, if you don't typically run the latest games at maxed out settings.</p><div ><table><caption>2020–2021 GPU Hierarchy (No Longer Updated)</caption><thead><tr><th class="firstcol empty" ></th><th  ><p>Score</p></th><th  ><p>GPU</p></th><th  ><p>Base/Boost</p></th><th  ><p>Memory</p></th><th  ><p>Power</p></th><th  ><p>Buy</p></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+RTX+3090">Nvidia GeForce RTX 3090</a></p></td><td  ><p>100.0%</p></td><td  ><p>GA102</p></td><td  ><p>1400/1695 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>24GB GDDR6X</p></td><td  ><p>350W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.bestbuy.com/site/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3090-24gb-gddr6x-pci-express-4-0-graphics-card-titanium-and-black/6429434.p?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Nvidia GeForce RTX 3090</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+RTX+3080+Ti">Nvidia GeForce RTX 3080 Ti</a></p></td><td  ><p>97.9%</p></td><td  ><p>GA102</p></td><td  ><p>1370/1665 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>12GB GDDR6X</p></td><td  ><p>350W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://shop-links.co/link?publisher_slug=future&exclusive=1&u1=tomshardware-us-1039622113527301200&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bestbuy.com%2Fsite%2Fnvidia-geforce-rtx-3080-ti-12gb-gddr6x-pci-express-4-0-graphics-card-titanium-and-black%2F6462956.p&article_name=Toms%20Hardware&article_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.tomshardware.com">Nvidia GeForce RTX 3080 Ti</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+RX+6900+XT">AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT</a></p></td><td  ><p>97.0%</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 21</p></td><td  ><p>1825/2250 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>16GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>300W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/asus-tuf-rx6900xt-o16g-gaming/p/N82E16814126487?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+RX+6800+XT">AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT</a></p></td><td  ><p>93.5%</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 21</p></td><td  ><p>1825/2250 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>16GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>300W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.bestbuy.com/site/xfx-amd-radeon-rx-6800xt-16gb-gddr6-pci-express-4-0-gaming-graphics-card-black/6441226.p?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+RTX+3080">Nvidia GeForce RTX 3080</a></p></td><td  ><p>93.2%</p></td><td  ><p>GA102</p></td><td  ><p>1440/1710 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>10GB GDDR6X</p></td><td  ><p>320W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.bestbuy.com/site/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3080-10gb-gddr6x-pci-express-4-0-graphics-card-titanium-and-black/6429440.p?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Nvidia GeForce RTX 3080</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+RX+6800">AMD Radeon RX 6800</a></p></td><td  ><p>85.7%</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 21</p></td><td  ><p>1700/2105 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>16GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>250W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://shop-links.co/link?publisher_slug=future&exclusive=1&u1=tomshardware-us-1380391777239238100&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bestbuy.com%2Fsite%2Fgigabyte-amd-radeon-rx-6800-gaming-oc-16gb-gddr6-pci-express-4-0-graphics-card%2F6453897.p&article_name=Toms%20Hardware&article_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.tomshardware.com">AMD Radeon RX 6800</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+RTX+3070">Nvidia GeForce RTX 3070 Ti</a></p></td><td  ><p>81.5%</p></td><td  ><p>GA104</p></td><td  ><p>1575/1770 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>8GB GDDR6X</p></td><td  ><p>290W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://shop-links.co/link?publisher_slug=future&exclusive=1&u1=tomshardware-us-2239069533949134300&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bestbuy.com%2Fsite%2Fnvidia-geforce-rtx-3070-ti-8gb-gddr6x-pci-express-4-0-graphics-card-dark-platinum-and-black%2F6465789.p&article_name=Toms%20Hardware&article_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.tomshardware.com">Nvidia GeForce RTX 3070 Ti</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+Titan+RTX">Nvidia Titan RTX</a></p></td><td  ><p>79.5%</p></td><td  ><p>TU102</p></td><td  ><p>1350/1770 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>24GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>280W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/nvidia-Titan-Graphic-Cards-900-1G150-2500-000/dp/B07L8YGDL5?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Nvidia Titan RTX</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+RTX+2080+Ti">Nvidia GeForce RTX 2080 Ti</a></p></td><td  ><p>77.4%</p></td><td  ><p>TU102</p></td><td  ><p>1350/1635 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>11GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>260W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://click.linksynergy.com/deeplink?id=Cty0dj6o3sg&mid=38606&u1=TomsHardware&murl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bestbuy.com%2Fsite%2Fnvidia-geforce-rtx-2080-ti-founders-edition-11gb-gddr6-pci-express-3-0-graphics-card%2F6291646.p%3FskuId%3D6291646">Nvidia GeForce RTX 2080 Ti</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+RTX+3070">Nvidia GeForce RTX 3070</a></p></td><td  ><p>76.3%</p></td><td  ><p>GA104</p></td><td  ><p>1500/1730 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>8GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>220W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.bestbuy.com/site/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3070-8gb-gddr6-pci-express-4-0-graphics-card-dark-platinum-and-black/6429442.p?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Nvidia GeForce RTX 3070</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+RX+6700+XT">AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT</a></p></td><td  ><p>73.3%</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 22</p></td><td  ><p>2321/2424 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>12GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>230W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://shop-links.co/link?publisher_slug=future&exclusive=1&u1=tomshardware-us-4557773548909726700&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bestbuy.com%2Fsite%2Fgigabyte-amd-radeon-rx-6700-xt-gaming-oc-12gb-gddr6-pci-express-4-0-gaming-graphics-card%2F6457993.p&article_name=Toms%20Hardware&article_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.tomshardware.com">AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+RTX+3060+Ti">Nvidia GeForce RTX 3060 Ti</a></p></td><td  ><p>69.6%</p></td><td  ><p>GA104</p></td><td  ><p>1410/1665 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>8GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>200W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/asus-geforce-rtx-3060-ti-tuf-rtx3060ti-o8g-gaming/p/N82E16814126471?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Nvidia GeForce RTX 3060 Ti</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+Titan+V">Nvidia Titan V</a></p></td><td  ><p>68.7%</p></td><td  ><p>GV100</p></td><td  ><p>1200/1455 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>12GB HBM2</p></td><td  ><p>250W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/NVIDIA-Titan-900-1G500-2500-000-PCIe3-0x16-Graphics/dp/B07WMMDV82?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Nvidia Titan V</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+RTX+2080+Super">Nvidia GeForce RTX 2080 Super</a></p></td><td  ><p>66.8%</p></td><td  ><p>TU104</p></td><td  ><p>1650/1815 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>8GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>250W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/GIGABYTE-GeForce-Graphics-256-Bit-GV-N208STURBO-8GC/dp/B07V1DJ9KG?ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">GeForce RTX 2080 Super</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+RTX+2080">Nvidia GeForce RTX 2080</a></p></td><td  ><p>62.5%</p></td><td  ><p>TU104</p></td><td  ><p>1515/1800 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>8GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>225W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://click.linksynergy.com/deeplink?id=Cty0dj6o3sg&mid=38606&u1=TomsHardware&murl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bestbuy.com%2Fsite%2Fnvidia-geforce-rtx-2080-founders-edition-8gb-gddr6-pci-express-3-0-graphics-card%2F6291648.p%3FskuId%3D6291648">GeForce RTX 2080</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+Titan+Xp">Nvidia Titan Xp</a></p></td><td  ><p>61.1%</p></td><td  ><p>GP102</p></td><td  ><p>1405/1480 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>12GB GDDR5X</p></td><td  ><p>250W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/EVGA-GeForce-GAMING-Graphics-12G-P4-2990-KR/dp/B00UVN21RQ?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware-deal&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">GeForce GTX Titan X</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+RTX+2070+Super">Nvidia GeForce RTX 2070 Super</a></p></td><td  ><p>59.6%</p></td><td  ><p>TU104</p></td><td  ><p>1605/1770 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>8GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>215W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/graphics-cards/rtx-2070-super/">GeForce RTX 2070 Super</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+VII">AMD Radeon VII</a></p></td><td  ><p>58.9%</p></td><td  ><p>Vega 20</p></td><td  ><p>1400/1750 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>16GB HBM2</p></td><td  ><p>300W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="http://www.tkqlhce.com/click-8900246-12920453?sid=tomshardware-&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16814202330">Radeon VII</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+GTX+1080+Ti">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 Ti</a></p></td><td  ><p>57.8%</p></td><td  ><p>GP102</p></td><td  ><p>1480/1582 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>11GB GDDR5X</p></td><td  ><p>250W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/msi-geforce-gtx-1080-ti-armor-11g-oc/p/N82E16814137111">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 Ti</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+RX+6600+XT">AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT</a></p></td><td  ><p>57.7%</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 23</p></td><td  ><p>1968/2589 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>8GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>160W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+RX+6600+XT">AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+RX+5700+XT">AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT</a></p></td><td  ><p>57.0%</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 10</p></td><td  ><p>1605/1905 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>8GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>225W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/XFX-Radeon-5700-GDDR6-3xDP/dp/B07TB5FBV6?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware-deal&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+RTX+3060+12GB">Nvidia GeForce RTX 3060 12GB</a></p></td><td  ><p>54.7%</p></td><td  ><p>GA106</p></td><td  ><p>1320/1777 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>12GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>170W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/ASUS-Graphics-DisplayPort-Axial-tech-2-7-Slot/dp/B08WGTL4CW?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Nvidia GeForce RTX 3060 12GB</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+RTX+2070">Nvidia GeForce RTX 2070</a></p></td><td  ><p>53.1%</p></td><td  ><p>TU106</p></td><td  ><p>1410/1710 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>8GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>185W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.bestbuy.com/site/nvidia-geforce-rtx-2070-founders-edition-8gb-gddr6-pci-express-3-1-graphics-card/6291650.p?skuId=6291650">RTX 2070</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+RX+5700">AMD Radeon RX 5700</a></p></td><td  ><p>51.4%</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 10</p></td><td  ><p>1465/1725 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>8GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>185W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/XFX-Radeon-5700-GDDR6-3xDP/dp/B07T81CGFY?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware-deal&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">AMD Radeon RX 5700</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+RTX+2060+Super">Nvidia GeForce RTX 2060 Super</a></p></td><td  ><p>50.6%</p></td><td  ><p>TU106</p></td><td  ><p>1470/1650 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>8GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>175W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/graphics-cards/rtx-2060-super/">GeForce RTX 2060 Super</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+RX+6600">AMD Radeon RX 6600</a></p></td><td  ><p>49.2%</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 23</p></td><td  ><p>1626/2491 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>8GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>132W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+RX+6600">AMD Radeon RX 6600</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+RX+Vega+64">AMD Radeon RX Vega 64</a></p></td><td  ><p>48.4%</p></td><td  ><p>Vega 10</p></td><td  ><p>1274/1546 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>8GB HBM2</p></td><td  ><p>295W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/gigabyte-radeon-rx-vega-64-gv-rxvega64gaming-oc-8gd/p/N82E16814932031">Gigabyte Radeon RX Vega 64</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+RX+5600+XT">AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT</a></p></td><td  ><p>46.6%</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 10</p></td><td  ><p>?/1615 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>6GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>150W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16814137263">Radeon RX 5600 XT</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+GTX+1080">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080</a></p></td><td  ><p>45.2%</p></td><td  ><p>GP104</p></td><td  ><p>1607/1733 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>8GB GDDR5X</p></td><td  ><p>180W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3ehttps://www.amazon.com/EVGA-GeForce-Support-Graphics-08G-P4-6183-KR/dp/B07K8SDFQV0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16814487318&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+RTX+2060">Nvidia GeForce RTX 2060</a></p></td><td  ><p>44.9%</p></td><td  ><p>TU106</p></td><td  ><p>1365/1680 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>6GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>160W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/msi-geforce-rtx-2060-rtx-2060-ventus-6g-oc/p/N82E16814137380">Nvidia GeForce RTX 2060 FE</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+RX+Vega+56">AMD Radeon RX Vega 56</a></p></td><td  ><p>42.7%</p></td><td  ><p>Vega 10</p></td><td  ><p>1156/1471 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>8GB HBM2</p></td><td  ><p>210W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16814137263">Radeon RX Vega 56</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+GTX+1070+Ti">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1070 Ti</a></p></td><td  ><p>41.8%</p></td><td  ><p>GP104</p></td><td  ><p>1607/1683 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>8GB GDDR5</p></td><td  ><p>180W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16814932012">GeForce GTX 1070 Ti</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+RTX+3050">Nvidia GeForce RTX 3050</a></p></td><td  ><p>40.5%</p></td><td  ><p>GA106</p></td><td  ><p>1552/1777 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>8GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>130W</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+GTX+1660+Super">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1660 Super</a></p></td><td  ><p>37.9%</p></td><td  ><p>TU116</p></td><td  ><p>1530/1785 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>6GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>125W</p></td><td  ><p>GeForce GTX 1660 Super</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+GTX+1660+Ti">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1660 Ti</a></p></td><td  ><p>37.8%</p></td><td  ><p>TU116</p></td><td  ><p>1365/1680 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>6GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>120W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="http://www.tkqlhce.com/click-8900246-12920453?sid=tomshardware-&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16814487430">GeForce GTX 1660 Ti 6GB</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+GTX+1070">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1070</a></p></td><td  ><p>36.7%</p></td><td  ><p>GP104</p></td><td  ><p>1506/1683 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>8GB GDDR5</p></td><td  ><p>150W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16814127951">MSI GTX 1070</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GTX+Titan+X+(Maxwell)">Nvidia GTX Titan X (Maxwell)</a></p></td><td  ><p>35.3%</p></td><td  ><p>GM200</p></td><td  ><p>1000/1075 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>12GB GDDR5</p></td><td  ><p>250</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/EVGA-GeForce-GAMING-Graphics-12G-P4-2990-KR/dp/B00UVN21RQ?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Nvidia GTX Titan X</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+GTX+980+Ti">Nvidia GeForce GTX 980 Ti</a></p></td><td  ><p>32.9%</p></td><td  ><p>GM200</p></td><td  ><p>1000/1075 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>6GB GDDR5</p></td><td  ><p>250W</p></td><td  ><p>GeForce GTX 980 Ti</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+GTX+1660">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1660</a></p></td><td  ><p>32.8%</p></td><td  ><p>TU116</p></td><td  ><p>1530/1785 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>6GB GDDR5</p></td><td  ><p>120W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="http://www.tkqlhce.com/click-8900246-12920453?sid=tomshardware-&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16814932138">Geforce GTX 1660</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+R9+Fury+X">AMD Radeon R9 Fury X</a></p></td><td  ><p>32.7%</p></td><td  ><p>Fiji</p></td><td  ><p>1050 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>4GB HBM</p></td><td  ><p>275W</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Radeon R9 Fury X</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+RX+590">AMD Radeon RX 590</a></p></td><td  ><p>32.4%</p></td><td  ><p>Polaris 30</p></td><td  ><p>1469/1545 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>8GB GDDR5</p></td><td  ><p>225W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/XFX-RX-590P8DFD6-Radeon-1580MHz-Graphic/dp/B07JQDKNXS?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware-deal&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Radeon RX 590</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+RX+5500+XT+8GB">AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT 8GB</a></p></td><td  ><p>31.8%</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 14</p></td><td  ><p>?/1717 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>8GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>130W</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT 8GB</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+RX+580+8GB">AMD Radeon RX 580 8GB</a></p></td><td  ><p>30.9%</p></td><td  ><p>Polaris 20</p></td><td  ><p>1257/1340 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>8GB GDDR5</p></td><td  ><p>185W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/https://www.amazon.com/MSI-Radeon-RX-580-8G/dp/B078Q78L93?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware-deal&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">AMD Radeon RX 580</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+GTX+1650+Super">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1650 Super</a></p></td><td  ><p>28.5%</p></td><td  ><p>TU116</p></td><td  ><p>1530/1725 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>4GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>100W</p></td><td  ><p>Nvidia GeForce GTX 1650 Super</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+RX+5500+XT+4GB">AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT 4GB</a></p></td><td  ><p>28.4%</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 14</p></td><td  ><p>?/1717 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>4GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>130W</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT 4GB</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+RX+6500+XT">AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT</a></p></td><td  ><p>27.7%</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 24</p></td><td  ><p>2610/2815 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>4GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>107W</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+R9+390">AMD Radeon R9 390</a></p></td><td  ><p>27.2%</p></td><td  ><p>Hawaii</p></td><td  ><p>1000 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>8GB GDDR5</p></td><td  ><p>275W</p></td><td  ><p>AMD Radeon R9 390</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+GTX+1060+6GB">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060 6GB</a></p></td><td  ><p>26.5%</p></td><td  ><p>GP106</p></td><td  ><p>1506/1708 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>6GB GDDR5</p></td><td  ><p>120W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/EVGA-GeForce-Support-Graphics-06G-P4-6262-KR/dp/B01LZ3VNG0?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060 6GB</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+GTX+980">Nvidia GeForce GTX 980</a></p></td><td  ><p>26.4%</p></td><td  ><p>GM204</p></td><td  ><p>1126/1216 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>4GB GDDR5</p></td><td  ><p>165W</p></td><td  ><p>Nvidia GeForce GTX 980</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+RX+570+4GB">AMD Radeon RX 570 4GB</a></p></td><td  ><p>25.2%</p></td><td  ><p>Polaris 20</p></td><td  ><p>1168/1244 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>4GB GDDR5</p></td><td  ><p>150W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16814125966">Radeon RX 570</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GTX+1650+GDDR6">Nvidia GTX 1650 GDDR6</a></p></td><td  ><p>23.8%</p></td><td  ><p>TU117</p></td><td  ><p>1410/1590 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>4GB GDDR6</p></td><td  ><p>75W</p></td><td  ><p>GeForce GTX 1650 GDDR6</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+GTX+1060+3GB">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060 3GB</a></p></td><td  ><p>22.3%</p></td><td  ><p>GP106</p></td><td  ><p>1506/1708 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>3GB GDDR5</p></td><td  ><p>120W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16814487263">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060 3GB</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+GTX+970">Nvidia GeForce GTX 970</a></p></td><td  ><p>22.1%</p></td><td  ><p>GM204</p></td><td  ><p>1050/1178 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>4GB GDDR5</p></td><td  ><p>145W</p></td><td  ><p>Nvidia GeForce GTX 970</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+GTX+1650">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1650</a></p></td><td  ><p>20.9%</p></td><td  ><p>TU117</p></td><td  ><p>1485/1665 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>4GB GDDR5</p></td><td  ><p>75W</p></td><td  ><p>GeForce GTX 1650 Gaming OC 4G</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+GTX+1050+Ti">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1050 Ti</a></p></td><td  ><p>16.1%</p></td><td  ><p>GP107</p></td><td  ><p>1290/1392 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>4GB GDDR5</p></td><td  ><p>75W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="http://redirect.viglink.com?key=6c0b046b3e0ec746fbbe9b03fac3f09b&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newegg.com%2FProduct%2FProduct.aspx%3FItem%3DN82E16814126170">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1050 Ti</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+RX+560+4GB">AMD Radeon RX 560 4GB</a></p></td><td  ><p>12.5%</p></td><td  ><p>Polaris 21</p></td><td  ><p>1175/1275 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>4GB GDDR5</p></td><td  ><p>80W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/powercolor-radeon-rx-560-axrx-560-4gbd5-dha/p/N82E16814131732">PowerColor Red Dragon Radeon RX 560</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+GTX+1050">Nvidia GeForce GTX 1050</a></p></td><td  ><p>12.2%</p></td><td  ><p>GP107</p></td><td  ><p>1354/1455 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>2GB GDDR5</p></td><td  ><p>75W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/gigabyte-geforce-gtx-1050-gv-n1050oc-2gd/p/N82E16814125919">Gigabyte GeForce GTX 1050</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Ryzen+7+5700G">AMD Vega 8 (R7 5700G)</a></p></td><td  ><p>9.5%</p></td><td  ><p>Vega 8</p></td><td  ><p>2000 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>Shared</p></td><td  ><p>N/A</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Ryzen+5+5600G">AMD Vega 7 (R5 5600G)</a></p></td><td  ><p>8.8%</p></td><td  ><p>Vega 7</p></td><td  ><p>1900 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>Shared</p></td><td  ><p>N/A</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Radeon+RX+550">AMD Radeon RX 550</a></p></td><td  ><p>8.0%</p></td><td  ><p>Polaris 22</p></td><td  ><p>1100/1183 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>4GB GDDR5</p></td><td  ><p>50W</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/powercolor-radeon-rx-550-axrx-550-2gbd5-dha-oc/p/N82E16814131738">PowerColor Radeon RX 550</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+GeForce+GT+1030">Nvidia GeForce GT 1030</a></p></td><td  ><p>6.7%</p></td><td  ><p>GP108</p></td><td  ><p>1228/1468 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>2GB GDDR5</p></td><td  ><p>30W</p></td><td  ><p>Nvidia GeForce GT 1030</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Ryzen+5+3400G">AMD Vega 11 (R5 3400G)</a></p></td><td  ><p>5.5%</p></td><td  ><p>Vega 11</p></td><td  ><p>1400 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>Shared</p></td><td  ><p>N/A</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-3400G-8-Thread-Processor/dp/B07SXNDKNM?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">AMD Ryzen 5 3400G</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=AMD+Ryzen+3+3200G">AMD Vega 8 (R3 3200G)</a></p></td><td  ><p>4.9%</p></td><td  ><p>Vega 8</p></td><td  ><p>1250 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>Shared</p></td><td  ><p>N/A</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-3200G-Unlocked-Processor/dp/B07STGHZK8?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">AMD Ryzen 3 3200G</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.bestbuy.com/site/cyberpowerpc-gaming-desktop-intel-core-i5-11400f-8gb-memory-intel-iris-xe-500gb-ssd-black/6462676.p?skuId=6462676">Intel Iris Xe DG1</a></p></td><td  ><p>4.4%</p></td><td  ><p>Xe DG1</p></td><td  ><p>1550 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>4GB LPDDR4X</p></td><td  ><p>30W</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Intel+Core+i7-1065G7">Intel Iris Plus (i7-1065G7)</a></p></td><td  ><p>3.0%</p></td><td  ><p>Gen11 ICL-U</p></td><td  ><p>1100 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>Shared</p></td><td  ><p>N/A</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/HP-15-Micro-Edge-Touchscreen-Quard-Core/dp/B08QM7YWSG?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Intel Core i7-1065G7</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Intel+Core+i7-10700K">Intel UHD Graphics 630 (i7-10700K)</a></p></td><td  ><p>1.8%</p></td><td  ><p>Gen9.5 CFL</p></td><td  ><p>1200 MHz</p></td><td  ><p>2x8GB DDR4-3200</p></td><td  ><p>N/A</p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Intel-i7-10700K-Processor-Unlocked-BX8070110700K/dp/B086ML4XSB?tag=hawk-future-20&ascsubtag=tomshardware&ascsubtag=%site%%transactionId%-gclid-%gclid%-Fallback">Intel Core i7-10700K</a></p></td></tr></tbody></table></div><h2 id="ancient-legacy-gpu-hierarchy">Ancient Legacy GPU Hierarchy</h2><p>Below is our legacy desktop GPU hierarchy dating back to the late 1990s. We have not tested most of these cards in many years, driver support has ended on most models, and the relative rankings are pretty coarse. Note that we also don't factor in memory bandwidth or features like AMD's Infinity Cache or Nvidia's larger L2 cache on Ada Lovelace. The list below is mostly intended to show relative performance between architectures from a similar time period.<br><br>We sorted the table by the theoretical GFLOPS, though on architectures that don't support unified shaders, we only have data for "Gops/s" (giga operations per second). That's GeForce 7 and Radeon X1000 and earlier — basically anything from before 2007. We've put an asterisk (*) next to the GPU names for those cards, and they comprise the latter part of the table. Comparing pre-2007 GPUs against each other should be relatively meaningful, but trying to compare those older GPUs against newer GPUs gets a bit convoluted.<br><br>These results are, at best, merely theoretical and we don't have any recent benchmarks for most of the GPUs. As one recent example, AMD's RX 7900 GRE ranks above the RTX 4070 Ti Super, even though Nvidia's card nearly matches the RX 7900 XT in rasterization performance and easily beats even the 7900 XTX in ray tracing performance. Take the following with a healthy dose of skepticism and a liberal sprinkling of salt, in other words, but it does contain a list of just about every major desktop GPU from the past 25 years.</p><div ><table><caption>Legacy GPU Hierarchy (Sorted by GigaFLOPS)</caption><thead><tr><th class="firstcol " ><p>GPU</p></th><th  ><p>Release Date</p></th><th  ><p>Architecture</p></th><th  ><p>Shaders</p></th><th  ><p>Clockspeed</p></th><th  ><p>GFLOPS (GOps)</p></th><th  ><p>MSRP (Revised)</p></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+5090"><strong>GeForce RTX 5090</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2025</p></td><td  ><p>GB202</p></td><td  ><p>21760</p></td><td  ><p>2407</p></td><td  ><p>104,753</p></td><td  ><p>$1,999</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+4090"><strong>GeForce RTX 4090</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2022</p></td><td  ><p>AD102</p></td><td  ><p>16384</p></td><td  ><p>2520</p></td><td  ><p>82,575</p></td><td  ><p>$1,599 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+4090D"><strong>GeForce RTX 4090D</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2023</p></td><td  ><p>AD102</p></td><td  ><p>14592</p></td><td  ><p>2520</p></td><td  ><p>73,544</p></td><td  ><p>$1,599 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+7900+XTX"><strong>Radeon RX 7900 XTX</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2022</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 31</p></td><td  ><p>6144</p></td><td  ><p>2500</p></td><td  ><p>61,440</p></td><td  ><p>$999 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+5080"><strong>GeForce RTX 5080</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2025</p></td><td  ><p>GB203</p></td><td  ><p>10752</p></td><td  ><p>2617</p></td><td  ><p>56,726</p></td><td  ><p>$999</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+4080+Super"><strong>GeForce RTX 4080 Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2024</p></td><td  ><p>AD103</p></td><td  ><p>10240</p></td><td  ><p>2550</p></td><td  ><p>52,224</p></td><td  ><p>$999 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+7900+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 7900 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2022</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 31</p></td><td  ><p>5376</p></td><td  ><p>2400</p></td><td  ><p>51,610</p></td><td  ><p>$899 ($749)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+9070+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 9070 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2025</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 48</p></td><td  ><p>4096</p></td><td  ><p>2970</p></td><td  ><p>48,660</p></td><td  ><p>$599</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+4080"><strong>GeForce RTX 4080</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2022</p></td><td  ><p>AD103</p></td><td  ><p>9728</p></td><td  ><p>2505</p></td><td  ><p>48,737</p></td><td  ><p>$1,199 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+7900+GRE"><strong>Radeon RX 7900 GRE</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2024</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 31</p></td><td  ><p>5120</p></td><td  ><p>2245</p></td><td  ><p>45,978</p></td><td  ><p>$549 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+4070+Ti+Super"><strong>GeForce RTX 4070 Ti Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2024</p></td><td  ><p>AD103</p></td><td  ><p>8448</p></td><td  ><p>2610</p></td><td  ><p>44,099</p></td><td  ><p>$799 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+5070+Ti"><strong>GeForce RTX 5070 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2025</p></td><td  ><p>GB203</p></td><td  ><p>8960</p></td><td  ><p>2452</p></td><td  ><p>43,940</p></td><td  ><p>$749</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+4070+Ti"><strong>GeForce RTX 4070 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2023</p></td><td  ><p>AD103</p></td><td  ><p>7680</p></td><td  ><p>2610</p></td><td  ><p>40,090</p></td><td  ><p>$799 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+3090+Ti"><strong>GeForce RTX 3090 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2022</p></td><td  ><p>GA102</p></td><td  ><p>10752</p></td><td  ><p>1860</p></td><td  ><p>39,997</p></td><td  ><p>$1,999 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+7800+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 7800 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2023</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 32</p></td><td  ><p>3840</p></td><td  ><p>2430</p></td><td  ><p>37,325</p></td><td  ><p>$499 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+9070"><strong>Radeon RX 9070</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2025</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 48</p></td><td  ><p>3584</p></td><td  ><p>2520</p></td><td  ><p>36,127</p></td><td  ><p>$549</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+3090"><strong>GeForce RTX 3090</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2020</p></td><td  ><p>GA102</p></td><td  ><p>10496</p></td><td  ><p>1695</p></td><td  ><p>35,581</p></td><td  ><p>$1,499 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+4070+Super"><strong>GeForce RTX 4070 Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2024</p></td><td  ><p>AD104</p></td><td  ><p>7168</p></td><td  ><p>2475</p></td><td  ><p>35,482</p></td><td  ><p>$599 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+7700+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 7700 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2023</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 32</p></td><td  ><p>3456</p></td><td  ><p>2544</p></td><td  ><p>35,168</p></td><td  ><p>$449 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+3080+Ti"><strong>GeForce RTX 3080 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2021</p></td><td  ><p>GA102</p></td><td  ><p>10240</p></td><td  ><p>1665</p></td><td  ><p>34,099</p></td><td  ><p>$1,199 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+5070"><strong>GeForce RTX 5070</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2025</p></td><td  ><p>GB205</p></td><td  ><p>6144</p></td><td  ><p>2512</p></td><td  ><p>30,876</p></td><td  ><p>$549</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+3080+12GB"><strong>GeForce RTX 3080 12GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2022</p></td><td  ><p>GA102</p></td><td  ><p>8960</p></td><td  ><p>1710</p></td><td  ><p>30,643</p></td><td  ><p>$999 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+3080"><strong>GeForce RTX 3080</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2020</p></td><td  ><p>GA102</p></td><td  ><p>8704</p></td><td  ><p>1710</p></td><td  ><p>29,768</p></td><td  ><p>$699 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+4070"><strong>GeForce RTX 4070</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2023</p></td><td  ><p>AD104</p></td><td  ><p>5888</p></td><td  ><p>2475</p></td><td  ><p>29,146</p></td><td  ><p>$599 ($549)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+5060+Ti+16GB"><strong>GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2025</p></td><td  ><p>GB206</p></td><td  ><p>4608</p></td><td  ><p>2572</p></td><td  ><p>23,704</p></td><td  ><p>$429</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+5060+Ti+8GB"><strong>GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 8GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2025</p></td><td  ><p>GB206</p></td><td  ><p>4608</p></td><td  ><p>2572</p></td><td  ><p>23,704</p></td><td  ><p>$379</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+6950+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6950 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2022</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 21</p></td><td  ><p>5120</p></td><td  ><p>2310</p></td><td  ><p>23,654</p></td><td  ><p>$1,099 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+6900+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6900 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2020</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 21</p></td><td  ><p>5120</p></td><td  ><p>2250</p></td><td  ><p>23,040</p></td><td  ><p>$999 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+7600+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 7600 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2024</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 33</p></td><td  ><p>2048</p></td><td  ><p>2755</p></td><td  ><p>22,569</p></td><td  ><p>$329 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+4060+Ti+16GB"><strong>GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2023</p></td><td  ><p>AD106</p></td><td  ><p>4352</p></td><td  ><p>2540</p></td><td  ><p>22,108</p></td><td  ><p>$499 ($449)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+4060+Ti"><strong>GeForce RTX 4060 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2023</p></td><td  ><p>AD106</p></td><td  ><p>4352</p></td><td  ><p>2540</p></td><td  ><p>22,108</p></td><td  ><p>$399 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+7600"><strong>Radeon RX 7600</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2023</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 33</p></td><td  ><p>2048</p></td><td  ><p>2655</p></td><td  ><p>21,750</p></td><td  ><p>$269 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+3070+Ti"><strong>GeForce RTX 3070 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2021</p></td><td  ><p>GA104</p></td><td  ><p>6144</p></td><td  ><p>1770</p></td><td  ><p>21,750</p></td><td  ><p>$599 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+6800+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6800 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2020</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 21</p></td><td  ><p>4608</p></td><td  ><p>2250</p></td><td  ><p>20,736</p></td><td  ><p>$649 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+3070"><strong>GeForce RTX 3070</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2020</p></td><td  ><p>GA104</p></td><td  ><p>5888</p></td><td  ><p>1725</p></td><td  ><p>20,314</p></td><td  ><p>$499 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Intel+Arc+A770+16GB"><strong>Intel Arc A770 16GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2022</p></td><td  ><p>ACM-G10</p></td><td  ><p>4096</p></td><td  ><p>2400</p></td><td  ><p>19,661</p></td><td  ><p>$349 ($279)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Intel+Arc+A770+8GB"><strong>Intel Arc A770 8GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2022</p></td><td  ><p>ACM-G10</p></td><td  ><p>4096</p></td><td  ><p>2400</p></td><td  ><p>19,661</p></td><td  ><p>$329 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+5060"><strong>GeForce RTX 5060</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2025</p></td><td  ><p>GB206</p></td><td  ><p>3840</p></td><td  ><p>2497</p></td><td  ><p>19,177</p></td><td  ><p>$299</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Intel+Arc+A750"><strong>Intel Arc A750</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2022</p></td><td  ><p>ACM-G10</p></td><td  ><p>3584</p></td><td  ><p>2400</p></td><td  ><p>17,203</p></td><td  ><p>$289 ($199)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+Titan+RTX"><strong>Nvidia Titan RTX</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2018</p></td><td  ><p>TU102</p></td><td  ><p>4608</p></td><td  ><p>1770</p></td><td  ><p>16,312</p></td><td  ><p>$2,499 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+3060+Ti"><strong>GeForce RTX 3060 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2020</p></td><td  ><p>GA104</p></td><td  ><p>4864</p></td><td  ><p>1665</p></td><td  ><p>16,197</p></td><td  ><p>$399 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+6800"><strong>Radeon RX 6800</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2020</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 21</p></td><td  ><p>3840</p></td><td  ><p>2105</p></td><td  ><p>16,166</p></td><td  ><p>$579 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+4060"><strong>GeForce RTX 4060</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2023</p></td><td  ><p>AD107</p></td><td  ><p>3072</p></td><td  ><p>2460</p></td><td  ><p>15,114</p></td><td  ><p>$299 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+Titan+V"><strong>Nvidia Titan V</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2017</p></td><td  ><p>GV100</p></td><td  ><p>5120</p></td><td  ><p>1455</p></td><td  ><p>14,899</p></td><td  ><p>$2,999 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Intel+Arc+A580"><strong>Intel Arc A580</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2023</p></td><td  ><p>ACM-G10</p></td><td  ><p>3072</p></td><td  ><p>2350</p></td><td  ><p>14,438</p></td><td  ><p>$179 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+2080+Ti"><strong>GeForce RTX 2080 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2018</p></td><td  ><p>TU102</p></td><td  ><p>4352</p></td><td  ><p>1545</p></td><td  ><p>13,448</p></td><td  ><p>$1,199 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+VII"><strong>Radeon VII</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2019</p></td><td  ><p>Vega 20</p></td><td  ><p>3840</p></td><td  ><p>1750</p></td><td  ><p>13,440</p></td><td  ><p>$699 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+6750+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6750 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2022</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 22</p></td><td  ><p>2560</p></td><td  ><p>2600</p></td><td  ><p>13,312</p></td><td  ><p>$549 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+6700+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6700 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2021</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 22</p></td><td  ><p>2560</p></td><td  ><p>2581</p></td><td  ><p>13,215</p></td><td  ><p>$479 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+3060"><strong>GeForce RTX 3060</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2021</p></td><td  ><p>GA106</p></td><td  ><p>3584</p></td><td  ><p>1777</p></td><td  ><p>12,738</p></td><td  ><p>$329 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+Vega+64"><strong>Radeon RX Vega 64</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2017</p></td><td  ><p>Vega 10</p></td><td  ><p>4096</p></td><td  ><p>1546</p></td><td  ><p>12,665</p></td><td  ><p>$499 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R9+295X2"><strong>Radeon R9 295X2</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2014</p></td><td  ><p>Vesuvius (x2)</p></td><td  ><p>5632</p></td><td  ><p>1018</p></td><td  ><p>11,467</p></td><td  ><p>$1,499 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+Titan+Xp"><strong>Nvidia Titan Xp</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2017</p></td><td  ><p>GP102</p></td><td  ><p>3840</p></td><td  ><p>1480</p></td><td  ><p>11,366</p></td><td  ><p>$1,199 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+1080+Ti"><strong>GeForce GTX 1080 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2017</p></td><td  ><p>GP102</p></td><td  ><p>3584</p></td><td  ><p>1582</p></td><td  ><p>11,340</p></td><td  ><p>$699 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+2080+Super"><strong>GeForce RTX 2080 Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>July 2019</p></td><td  ><p>TU104</p></td><td  ><p>3072</p></td><td  ><p>1815</p></td><td  ><p>11,151</p></td><td  ><p>$699 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+Titan+X+(Pascal)"><strong>Nvidia Titan X (Pascal)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2016</p></td><td  ><p>GP102</p></td><td  ><p>3584</p></td><td  ><p>1531</p></td><td  ><p>10,974</p></td><td  ><p>$1,199 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+6650+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6650 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2022</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 23</p></td><td  ><p>2048</p></td><td  ><p>2635</p></td><td  ><p>10,793</p></td><td  ><p>$399 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+6600+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6600 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2021</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 23</p></td><td  ><p>2048</p></td><td  ><p>2589</p></td><td  ><p>10,605</p></td><td  ><p>$379 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+Vega+56"><strong>Radeon RX Vega 56</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2017</p></td><td  ><p>Vega 10</p></td><td  ><p>3584</p></td><td  ><p>1471</p></td><td  ><p>10,544</p></td><td  ><p>$399 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+Titan+Z"><strong>GeForce GTX Titan Z</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2014</p></td><td  ><p>2x GK110</p></td><td  ><p>5760</p></td><td  ><p>876</p></td><td  ><p>10,092</p></td><td  ><p>$2,999 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+2080"><strong>GeForce RTX 2080</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2018</p></td><td  ><p>TU104</p></td><td  ><p>2944</p></td><td  ><p>1710</p></td><td  ><p>10,068</p></td><td  ><p>$699 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+5700+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 5700 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>July 2019</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 10</p></td><td  ><p>2560</p></td><td  ><p>1905</p></td><td  ><p>9,754</p></td><td  ><p>$399 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+3050"><strong>GeForce RTX 3050</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2022</p></td><td  ><p>GA106</p></td><td  ><p>2560</p></td><td  ><p>1777</p></td><td  ><p>9,098</p></td><td  ><p>$249 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+2070+Super"><strong>GeForce RTX 2070 Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>July 2019</p></td><td  ><p>TU104</p></td><td  ><p>2560</p></td><td  ><p>1770</p></td><td  ><p>9,062</p></td><td  ><p>$499 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+6600"><strong>Radeon RX 6600</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2021</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 23</p></td><td  ><p>1792</p></td><td  ><p>2491</p></td><td  ><p>8,928</p></td><td  ><p>$329 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+1080"><strong>GeForce GTX 1080</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2016</p></td><td  ><p>GP104</p></td><td  ><p>2560</p></td><td  ><p>1733</p></td><td  ><p>8,873</p></td><td  ><p>$599 ($499)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R9+Fury+X"><strong>Radeon R9 Fury X</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2015</p></td><td  ><p>Fiji</p></td><td  ><p>4096</p></td><td  ><p>1050</p></td><td  ><p>8,602</p></td><td  ><p>$649 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R9+Nano"><strong>Radeon R9 Nano</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2015</p></td><td  ><p>Fiji</p></td><td  ><p>4096</p></td><td  ><p>1000</p></td><td  ><p>8,192</p></td><td  ><p>$649 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+7990"><strong>Radeon HD 7990</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2013</p></td><td  ><p>New Zealand (x2)</p></td><td  ><p>4096</p></td><td  ><p>1000</p></td><td  ><p>8,192</p></td><td  ><p>$1,000 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+1070+Ti"><strong>GeForce GTX 1070 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2017</p></td><td  ><p>GP104</p></td><td  ><p>2432</p></td><td  ><p>1683</p></td><td  ><p>8,186</p></td><td  ><p>$449 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+5600+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 5600 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2020</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 10</p></td><td  ><p>2304</p></td><td  ><p>1750</p></td><td  ><p>8,064</p></td><td  ><p>$279 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+5700"><strong>Radeon RX 5700</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>July 2019</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 10</p></td><td  ><p>2304</p></td><td  ><p>1725</p></td><td  ><p>7,949</p></td><td  ><p>$249 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+2070"><strong>GeForce RTX 2070</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2018</p></td><td  ><p>TU106</p></td><td  ><p>2304</p></td><td  ><p>1620</p></td><td  ><p>7,465</p></td><td  ><p>$499 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+2060+Super"><strong>GeForce RTX 2060 Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>July 2019</p></td><td  ><p>TU106</p></td><td  ><p>2176</p></td><td  ><p>1650</p></td><td  ><p>7,181</p></td><td  ><p>$399 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R9+Fury"><strong>Radeon R9 Fury</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>July 2015</p></td><td  ><p>Fiji</p></td><td  ><p>3584</p></td><td  ><p>1000</p></td><td  ><p>7,168</p></td><td  ><p>$549 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+590"><strong>Radeon RX 590</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2018</p></td><td  ><p>Polaris 30</p></td><td  ><p>2304</p></td><td  ><p>1545</p></td><td  ><p>7,119</p></td><td  ><p>$279 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+Titan+X+(Maxwell)"><strong>GeForce GTX Titan X (Maxwell)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2015</p></td><td  ><p>GM200</p></td><td  ><p>3072</p></td><td  ><p>1075</p></td><td  ><p>6,605</p></td><td  ><p>$999 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+1070"><strong>GeForce GTX 1070</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2016</p></td><td  ><p>GP104</p></td><td  ><p>1920</p></td><td  ><p>1683</p></td><td  ><p>6,463</p></td><td  ><p>$379 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+RTX+2060"><strong>GeForce RTX 2060</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2019</p></td><td  ><p>TU106</p></td><td  ><p>1920</p></td><td  ><p>1680</p></td><td  ><p>6,451</p></td><td  ><p>$349 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+690"><strong>GeForce GTX 690</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2012</p></td><td  ><p>2x GK104</p></td><td  ><p>3072</p></td><td  ><p>1019</p></td><td  ><p>6,261</p></td><td  ><p>$1,000 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+580+8GB"><strong>Radeon RX 580 8GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2017</p></td><td  ><p>Polaris 20</p></td><td  ><p>2304</p></td><td  ><p>1340</p></td><td  ><p>6,175</p></td><td  ><p>$229 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+580+4GB"><strong>Radeon RX 580 4GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2017</p></td><td  ><p>Polaris 20</p></td><td  ><p>2304</p></td><td  ><p>1340</p></td><td  ><p>6,175</p></td><td  ><p>$199 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+980+Ti"><strong>GeForce GTX 980 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2015</p></td><td  ><p>GM200</p></td><td  ><p>2816</p></td><td  ><p>1075</p></td><td  ><p>6,054</p></td><td  ><p>$649 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R9+390X"><strong>Radeon R9 390X</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2015</p></td><td  ><p>Grenada</p></td><td  ><p>2816</p></td><td  ><p>1050</p></td><td  ><p>5,914</p></td><td  ><p>$429 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+480+8GB"><strong>Radeon RX 480 8GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2016</p></td><td  ><p>Ellesmere</p></td><td  ><p>2304</p></td><td  ><p>1266</p></td><td  ><p>5,834</p></td><td  ><p>$239 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+480+4GB"><strong>Radeon RX 480 4GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2016</p></td><td  ><p>Ellesmere</p></td><td  ><p>2304</p></td><td  ><p>1266</p></td><td  ><p>5,834</p></td><td  ><p>$199 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+6500+XT"><strong>Radeon RX 6500 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2022</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 24</p></td><td  ><p>1024</p></td><td  ><p>2815</p></td><td  ><p>5,765</p></td><td  ><p>$199 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+Titan+Black"><strong>GeForce GTX Titan Black</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2014</p></td><td  ><p>GK110</p></td><td  ><p>2880</p></td><td  ><p>980</p></td><td  ><p>5,645</p></td><td  ><p>$999 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R9+290X"><strong>Radeon R9 290X</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2013</p></td><td  ><p>Hawaii</p></td><td  ><p>2816</p></td><td  ><p>1000</p></td><td  ><p>5,632</p></td><td  ><p>$549 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+1660+Ti"><strong>GeForce GTX 1660 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2019</p></td><td  ><p>TU116</p></td><td  ><p>1536</p></td><td  ><p>1770</p></td><td  ><p>5,437</p></td><td  ><p>$279 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+780+Ti"><strong>GeForce GTX 780 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2013</p></td><td  ><p>GK110</p></td><td  ><p>2880</p></td><td  ><p>928</p></td><td  ><p>5,345</p></td><td  ><p>$699 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+5500+XT+8GB"><strong>Radeon RX 5500 XT 8GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2019</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 14</p></td><td  ><p>1408</p></td><td  ><p>1845</p></td><td  ><p>5,196</p></td><td  ><p>$199 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+5500+XT+4GB"><strong>Radeon RX 5500 XT 4GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2019</p></td><td  ><p>Navi 14</p></td><td  ><p>1408</p></td><td  ><p>1845</p></td><td  ><p>5,196</p></td><td  ><p>$169 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R9+390"><strong>Radeon R9 390</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2015</p></td><td  ><p>Grenada</p></td><td  ><p>2560</p></td><td  ><p>1000</p></td><td  ><p>5,120</p></td><td  ><p>$329 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+6990"><strong>Radeon HD 6990</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2011</p></td><td  ><p>Antilles (2x)</p></td><td  ><p>3072</p></td><td  ><p>830</p></td><td  ><p>5,100</p></td><td  ><p>$699 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+570+8GB"><strong>Radeon RX 570 8GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2017</p></td><td  ><p>Polaris 20</p></td><td  ><p>2048</p></td><td  ><p>1244</p></td><td  ><p>5,095</p></td><td  ><p>$199 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+570+4GB"><strong>Radeon RX 570 4GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2017</p></td><td  ><p>Polaris 20</p></td><td  ><p>2048</p></td><td  ><p>1244</p></td><td  ><p>5,095</p></td><td  ><p>$169 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+1660+Super"><strong>GeForce GTX 1660 Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2019</p></td><td  ><p>TU116</p></td><td  ><p>1408</p></td><td  ><p>1785</p></td><td  ><p>5,027</p></td><td  ><p>$229 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+980"><strong>GeForce GTX 980</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2014</p></td><td  ><p>GM204</p></td><td  ><p>2048</p></td><td  ><p>1216</p></td><td  ><p>4,981</p></td><td  ><p>$549 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+470+4GB"><strong>Radeon RX 470 4GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2016</p></td><td  ><p>Ellesmere</p></td><td  ><p>2048</p></td><td  ><p>1206</p></td><td  ><p>4,940</p></td><td  ><p>$179 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Intel+Arc+A380"><strong>Intel Arc A380</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2022</p></td><td  ><p>ACM-G11</p></td><td  ><p>1024</p></td><td  ><p>2400</p></td><td  ><p>4,915</p></td><td  ><p>$139 ($119)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+1660"><strong>GeForce GTX 1660</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2019</p></td><td  ><p>TU116</p></td><td  ><p>1408</p></td><td  ><p>1725</p></td><td  ><p>4,858</p></td><td  ><p>$219 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R9+290"><strong>Radeon R9 290</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2013</p></td><td  ><p>Hawaii</p></td><td  ><p>2560</p></td><td  ><p>947</p></td><td  ><p>4,849</p></td><td  ><p>$399 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+Titan"><strong>GeForce GTX Titan</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2013</p></td><td  ><p>GK110</p></td><td  ><p>2688</p></td><td  ><p>876</p></td><td  ><p>4,709</p></td><td  ><p>$999 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+5970"><strong>Radeon HD 5970</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2009</p></td><td  ><p>Hemlock (2x)</p></td><td  ><p>3200</p></td><td  ><p>725</p></td><td  ><p>4,640</p></td><td  ><p>$599 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+1060+6GB"><strong>GeForce GTX 1060 6GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>July 2016</p></td><td  ><p>GP106</p></td><td  ><p>1280</p></td><td  ><p>1708</p></td><td  ><p>4,372</p></td><td  ><p>$249 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+7970+GHz+Edition"><strong>Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2012</p></td><td  ><p>Tahiti</p></td><td  ><p>2048</p></td><td  ><p>1050</p></td><td  ><p>4,301</p></td><td  ><p>$500 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+780"><strong>GeForce GTX 780</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2013</p></td><td  ><p>GK110</p></td><td  ><p>2304</p></td><td  ><p>900</p></td><td  ><p>4,147</p></td><td  ><p>$649 ($499)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R9+280X"><strong>Radeon R9 280X</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2013</p></td><td  ><p>Tahiti</p></td><td  ><p>2048</p></td><td  ><p>1000</p></td><td  ><p>4,096</p></td><td  ><p>$299 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+1650+Super"><strong>GeForce GTX 1650 Super</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2019</p></td><td  ><p>TU116</p></td><td  ><p>1280</p></td><td  ><p>1590</p></td><td  ><p>4,070</p></td><td  ><p>$159 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R9+380X"><strong>Radeon R9 380X</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2015</p></td><td  ><p>Tonga</p></td><td  ><p>2048</p></td><td  ><p>970</p></td><td  ><p>3,973</p></td><td  ><p>$229 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+1060+3GB"><strong>GeForce GTX 1060 3GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2016</p></td><td  ><p>GP106</p></td><td  ><p>1152</p></td><td  ><p>1708</p></td><td  ><p>3,935</p></td><td  ><p>$199 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+970"><strong>GeForce GTX 970</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2014</p></td><td  ><p>GM204</p></td><td  ><p>1664</p></td><td  ><p>1178</p></td><td  ><p>3,920</p></td><td  ><p>$329 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R9+380"><strong>Radeon R9 380</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2015</p></td><td  ><p>Tonga</p></td><td  ><p>1792</p></td><td  ><p>970</p></td><td  ><p>3,476</p></td><td  ><p>$199 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R9+280"><strong>Radeon R9 280</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2014</p></td><td  ><p>Tahiti</p></td><td  ><p>1792</p></td><td  ><p>933</p></td><td  ><p>3,344</p></td><td  ><p>$249 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+770"><strong>GeForce GTX 770</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2013</p></td><td  ><p>GK104</p></td><td  ><p>1536</p></td><td  ><p>1085</p></td><td  ><p>3,333</p></td><td  ><p>$399 ($329)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R9+285"><strong>Radeon R9 285</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2014</p></td><td  ><p>Tonga</p></td><td  ><p>1792</p></td><td  ><p>918</p></td><td  ><p>3,290</p></td><td  ><p>$249 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+680"><strong>GeForce GTX 680</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2012</p></td><td  ><p>GK104</p></td><td  ><p>1536</p></td><td  ><p>1058</p></td><td  ><p>3,250</p></td><td  ><p>$500 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+7870+XT"><strong>Radeon HD 7870 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2012</p></td><td  ><p>Tahiti</p></td><td  ><p>1536</p></td><td  ><p>975</p></td><td  ><p>2,995</p></td><td  ><p>$270 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+1650"><strong>GeForce GTX 1650</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2019</p></td><td  ><p>TU117</p></td><td  ><p>896</p></td><td  ><p>1665</p></td><td  ><p>2,984</p></td><td  ><p>$149 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+7950"><strong>Radeon HD 7950</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2012</p></td><td  ><p>Tahiti</p></td><td  ><p>1792</p></td><td  ><p>800</p></td><td  ><p>2,867</p></td><td  ><p>$450 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+1650+GDDR6"><strong>GeForce GTX 1650 GDDR6</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2020</p></td><td  ><p>TU117</p></td><td  ><p>896</p></td><td  ><p>1590</p></td><td  ><p>2,849</p></td><td  ><p>$149 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+5870"><strong>Radeon HD 5870</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2009</p></td><td  ><p>Cypress</p></td><td  ><p>1600</p></td><td  ><p>850</p></td><td  ><p>2,720</p></td><td  ><p>$379 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+6970"><strong>Radeon HD 6970</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2010</p></td><td  ><p>Cayman</p></td><td  ><p>1536</p></td><td  ><p>880</p></td><td  ><p>2,703</p></td><td  ><p>$369 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R9+270X"><strong>Radeon R9 270X</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2013</p></td><td  ><p>Pitcairn</p></td><td  ><p>1280</p></td><td  ><p>1050</p></td><td  ><p>2,688</p></td><td  ><p>$199 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+760+Ti"><strong>GeForce GTX 760 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2013</p></td><td  ><p>GK104</p></td><td  ><p>1344</p></td><td  ><p>980</p></td><td  ><p>2,634</p></td><td  ><p>OEM</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+670"><strong>GeForce GTX 670</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2012</p></td><td  ><p>GK104</p></td><td  ><p>1344</p></td><td  ><p>980</p></td><td  ><p>2,634</p></td><td  ><p>$400 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+660+Ti"><strong>GeForce GTX 660 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2012</p></td><td  ><p>GK104</p></td><td  ><p>1344</p></td><td  ><p>980</p></td><td  ><p>2,634</p></td><td  ><p>$300 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+560+4GB"><strong>Radeon RX 560 4GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2017</p></td><td  ><p>Baffin</p></td><td  ><p>1024</p></td><td  ><p>1275</p></td><td  ><p>2,611</p></td><td  ><p>$99 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R9+370X"><strong>Radeon R9 370X</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2015</p></td><td  ><p>Pitcairn</p></td><td  ><p>1280</p></td><td  ><p>1000</p></td><td  ><p>2,560</p></td><td  ><p>$179 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+7870"><strong>Radeon HD 7870</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2012</p></td><td  ><p>Pitcairn</p></td><td  ><p>1280</p></td><td  ><p>1000</p></td><td  ><p>2,560</p></td><td  ><p>$350 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+590"><strong>GeForce GTX 590</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2011</p></td><td  ><p>2x GF110</p></td><td  ><p>1024</p></td><td  ><p>607</p></td><td  ><p>2,486</p></td><td  ><p>$699 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+960"><strong>GeForce GTX 960</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2015</p></td><td  ><p>GM206</p></td><td  ><p>1024</p></td><td  ><p>1178</p></td><td  ><p>2,413</p></td><td  ><p>$199 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+4870+X2"><strong>Radeon HD 4870 X2</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2008</p></td><td  ><p>2x RV770</p></td><td  ><p>1600</p></td><td  ><p>750</p></td><td  ><p>2,400</p></td><td  ><p>$449 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+760"><strong>GeForce GTX 760</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2013</p></td><td  ><p>GK104</p></td><td  ><p>1152</p></td><td  ><p>1033</p></td><td  ><p>2,380</p></td><td  ><p>$249 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R9+270"><strong>Radeon R9 270</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2013</p></td><td  ><p>Pitcairn</p></td><td  ><p>1280</p></td><td  ><p>925</p></td><td  ><p>2,368</p></td><td  ><p>$179 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+6950+2GB"><strong>Radeon HD 6950 2GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2010</p></td><td  ><p>Cayman</p></td><td  ><p>1408</p></td><td  ><p>800</p></td><td  ><p>2,253</p></td><td  ><p>$299 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+6950+1GB"><strong>Radeon HD 6950 1GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2010</p></td><td  ><p>Cayman</p></td><td  ><p>1408</p></td><td  ><p>800</p></td><td  ><p>2,253</p></td><td  ><p>$259 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+460+4GB"><strong>Radeon RX 460 4GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2016</p></td><td  ><p>Baffin</p></td><td  ><p>896</p></td><td  ><p>1200</p></td><td  ><p>2,150</p></td><td  ><p>$139 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+460+2GB"><strong>Radeon RX 460 2GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2016</p></td><td  ><p>Baffin</p></td><td  ><p>896</p></td><td  ><p>1200</p></td><td  ><p>2,150</p></td><td  ><p>$109 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+1050+Ti"><strong>GeForce GTX 1050 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2016</p></td><td  ><p>GP107</p></td><td  ><p>768</p></td><td  ><p>1392</p></td><td  ><p>2,138</p></td><td  ><p>$139 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+560+4GB"><strong>Radeon RX 560 4GB</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2017</p></td><td  ><p>Baffin</p></td><td  ><p>896</p></td><td  ><p>1175</p></td><td  ><p>2,106</p></td><td  ><p>$99 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+5850"><strong>Radeon HD 5850</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2009</p></td><td  ><p>Cypress</p></td><td  ><p>1440</p></td><td  ><p>725</p></td><td  ><p>2,088</p></td><td  ><p>$259 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+6870"><strong>Radeon HD 6870</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2010</p></td><td  ><p>Barts</p></td><td  ><p>1120</p></td><td  ><p>900</p></td><td  ><p>2,016</p></td><td  ><p>$239 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+4850+X2"><strong>Radeon HD 4850 X2</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2008</p></td><td  ><p>2x RV770</p></td><td  ><p>1600</p></td><td  ><p>625</p></td><td  ><p>2,000</p></td><td  ><p>$339 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R9+370"><strong>Radeon R9 370</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2015</p></td><td  ><p>Pitcairn</p></td><td  ><p>1024</p></td><td  ><p>975</p></td><td  ><p>1,997</p></td><td  ><p>$149 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+660"><strong>GeForce GTX 660</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2012</p></td><td  ><p>GK106</p></td><td  ><p>960</p></td><td  ><p>1032</p></td><td  ><p>1,981</p></td><td  ><p>$230 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R7+260X"><strong>Radeon R7 260X</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2013</p></td><td  ><p>Bonaire</p></td><td  ><p>896</p></td><td  ><p>1100</p></td><td  ><p>1,971</p></td><td  ><p>$139 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+1050"><strong>GeForce GTX 1050</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2016</p></td><td  ><p>GP107</p></td><td  ><p>640</p></td><td  ><p>1518</p></td><td  ><p>1,943</p></td><td  ><p>$109 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R7+265"><strong>Radeon R7 265</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2014</p></td><td  ><p>Pitcairn</p></td><td  ><p>1024</p></td><td  ><p>925</p></td><td  ><p>1,894</p></td><td  ><p>$149 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+950"><strong>GeForce GTX 950</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2015</p></td><td  ><p>GM206</p></td><td  ><p>768</p></td><td  ><p>1188</p></td><td  ><p>1,825</p></td><td  ><p>$159 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+7790"><strong>Radeon HD 7790</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2013</p></td><td  ><p>Pitcairn</p></td><td  ><p>896</p></td><td  ><p>1000</p></td><td  ><p>1,792</p></td><td  ><p>$150 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+5830"><strong>Radeon HD 5830</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2010</p></td><td  ><p>Cypress</p></td><td  ><p>1120</p></td><td  ><p>800</p></td><td  ><p>1,792</p></td><td  ><p>$239 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+7850"><strong>Radeon HD 7850</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2012</p></td><td  ><p>Pitcairn</p></td><td  ><p>1024</p></td><td  ><p>860</p></td><td  ><p>1,761</p></td><td  ><p>$250 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R7+360"><strong>Radeon R7 360</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2015</p></td><td  ><p>Bonaire</p></td><td  ><p>768</p></td><td  ><p>1050</p></td><td  ><p>1,613</p></td><td  ><p>$109 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+650+Ti+Boost"><strong>GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2013</p></td><td  ><p>GK106</p></td><td  ><p>768</p></td><td  ><p>1032</p></td><td  ><p>1,585</p></td><td  ><p>$170 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+580"><strong>GeForce GTX 580</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2010</p></td><td  ><p>GF110</p></td><td  ><p>512</p></td><td  ><p>772</p></td><td  ><p>1,581</p></td><td  ><p>$499 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R7+260"><strong>Radeon R7 260</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2013</p></td><td  ><p>Bonaire</p></td><td  ><p>768</p></td><td  ><p>1000</p></td><td  ><p>1,536</p></td><td  ><p>$109 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+RX+550"><strong>Radeon RX 550</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2017</p></td><td  ><p>Lexa</p></td><td  ><p>640</p></td><td  ><p>1183</p></td><td  ><p>1,514</p></td><td  ><p>$79 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+6850"><strong>Radeon HD 6850</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2010</p></td><td  ><p>Barts</p></td><td  ><p>960</p></td><td  ><p>775</p></td><td  ><p>1,488</p></td><td  ><p>$179 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+650+Ti"><strong>GeForce GTX 650 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2012</p></td><td  ><p>GK106</p></td><td  ><p>768</p></td><td  ><p>928</p></td><td  ><p>1,425</p></td><td  ><p>$150 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+570"><strong>GeForce GTX 570</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2010</p></td><td  ><p>GF110</p></td><td  ><p>480</p></td><td  ><p>732</p></td><td  ><p>1,405</p></td><td  ><p>$349 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+750+Ti"><strong>GeForce GTX 750 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2014</p></td><td  ><p>GK107</p></td><td  ><p>640</p></td><td  ><p>1085</p></td><td  ><p>1,389</p></td><td  ><p>$149 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+6770"><strong>Radeon HD 6770</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2011</p></td><td  ><p>Juniper</p></td><td  ><p>800</p></td><td  ><p>850</p></td><td  ><p>1,360</p></td><td  ><p>$129 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+5770"><strong>Radeon HD 5770</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2009</p></td><td  ><p>Juniper</p></td><td  ><p>800</p></td><td  ><p>850</p></td><td  ><p>1,360</p></td><td  ><p>$159 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+4890"><strong>Radeon HD 4890</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2009</p></td><td  ><p>RV790</p></td><td  ><p>800</p></td><td  ><p>850</p></td><td  ><p>1,360</p></td><td  ><p>$249 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+480"><strong>GeForce GTX 480</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2010</p></td><td  ><p>GF100</p></td><td  ><p>480</p></td><td  ><p>701</p></td><td  ><p>1,346</p></td><td  ><p>$499 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+6790"><strong>Radeon HD 6790</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2011</p></td><td  ><p>Barts</p></td><td  ><p>800</p></td><td  ><p>840</p></td><td  ><p>1,344</p></td><td  ><p>$149 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+560+Ti+(448+Core)"><strong>GeForce GTX 560 Ti (448 Core)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2011</p></td><td  ><p>GF110</p></td><td  ><p>448</p></td><td  ><p>732</p></td><td  ><p>1,312</p></td><td  ><p>$289 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+7770"><strong>Radeon HD 7770</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2012</p></td><td  ><p>Cape Verde</p></td><td  ><p>640</p></td><td  ><p>1000</p></td><td  ><p>1,280</p></td><td  ><p>$160 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+560+Ti"><strong>GeForce GTX 560 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2011</p></td><td  ><p>GF114</p></td><td  ><p>384</p></td><td  ><p>822</p></td><td  ><p>1,263</p></td><td  ><p>$249 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+4870"><strong>Radeon HD 4870</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2008</p></td><td  ><p>RV770</p></td><td  ><p>800</p></td><td  ><p>750</p></td><td  ><p>1,200</p></td><td  ><p>$299 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GT+1030+(GDDR5)"><strong>GeForce GT 1030 (GDDR5)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2017</p></td><td  ><p>GP108</p></td><td  ><p>384</p></td><td  ><p>1468</p></td><td  ><p>1,127</p></td><td  ><p>$70 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+750"><strong>GeForce GTX 750</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2014</p></td><td  ><p>GK107</p></td><td  ><p>512</p></td><td  ><p>1085</p></td><td  ><p>1,111</p></td><td  ><p>$119 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+470"><strong>GeForce GTX 470</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2010</p></td><td  ><p>GF100</p></td><td  ><p>448</p></td><td  ><p>608</p></td><td  ><p>1,090</p></td><td  ><p>$349 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+560"><strong>GeForce GTX 560</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2011</p></td><td  ><p>GF114</p></td><td  ><p>336</p></td><td  ><p>810</p></td><td  ><p>1,089</p></td><td  ><p>$199 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GT+1030+(DDR4)"><strong>GeForce GT 1030 (DDR4)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2018</p></td><td  ><p>GP108</p></td><td  ><p>384</p></td><td  ><p>1379</p></td><td  ><p>1,059</p></td><td  ><p>$79 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+3870+X2"><strong>Radeon HD 3870 X2</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2008</p></td><td  ><p>2x R680</p></td><td  ><p>640</p></td><td  ><p>825</p></td><td  ><p>1,056</p></td><td  ><p>$449 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+6750"><strong>Radeon HD 6750</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2011</p></td><td  ><p>Juniper</p></td><td  ><p>720</p></td><td  ><p>700</p></td><td  ><p>1,008</p></td><td  ><p>OEM</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+5750"><strong>Radeon HD 5750</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2009</p></td><td  ><p>Juniper</p></td><td  ><p>720</p></td><td  ><p>700</p></td><td  ><p>1,008</p></td><td  ><p>$129 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+4850"><strong>Radeon HD 4850</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2008</p></td><td  ><p>RV770</p></td><td  ><p>800</p></td><td  ><p>625</p></td><td  ><p>1,000</p></td><td  ><p>$199 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+4770"><strong>Radeon HD 4770</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2009</p></td><td  ><p>RV740</p></td><td  ><p>640</p></td><td  ><p>750</p></td><td  ><p>960</p></td><td  ><p>$109 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R7+350"><strong>Radeon R7 350</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2016</p></td><td  ><p>Cape Verde</p></td><td  ><p>512</p></td><td  ><p>925</p></td><td  ><p>947</p></td><td  ><p>$89 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+7750+(GDDR5)"><strong>Radeon HD 7750 (GDDR5)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2012</p></td><td  ><p>Cape Verde</p></td><td  ><p>512</p></td><td  ><p>900</p></td><td  ><p>922</p></td><td  ><p>$110 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+7750+(DDR3)"><strong>Radeon HD 7750 (DDR3)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2012</p></td><td  ><p>Cape Verde</p></td><td  ><p>512</p></td><td  ><p>900</p></td><td  ><p>922</p></td><td  ><p>$110 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+460+(256-bit)"><strong>GeForce GTX 460 (256-bit)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>July 2010</p></td><td  ><p>GF104</p></td><td  ><p>336</p></td><td  ><p>675</p></td><td  ><p>907</p></td><td  ><p>$229 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+460+(192-bit)"><strong>GeForce GTX 460 (192-bit)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>July 2010</p></td><td  ><p>GF104</p></td><td  ><p>336</p></td><td  ><p>675</p></td><td  ><p>907</p></td><td  ><p>$199 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+465"><strong>GeForce GTX 465</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2010</p></td><td  ><p>GF100</p></td><td  ><p>352</p></td><td  ><p>608</p></td><td  ><p>856</p></td><td  ><p>$279 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+560+SE"><strong>GeForce GTX 560 SE</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2012</p></td><td  ><p>GF114</p></td><td  ><p>288</p></td><td  ><p>736</p></td><td  ><p>848</p></td><td  ><p>OEM</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R7+250E"><strong>Radeon R7 250E</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2013</p></td><td  ><p>Cape Verde</p></td><td  ><p>512</p></td><td  ><p>800</p></td><td  ><p>819</p></td><td  ><p>$109 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+650"><strong>GeForce GTX 650</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2012</p></td><td  ><p>GK107</p></td><td  ><p>384</p></td><td  ><p>1058</p></td><td  ><p>813</p></td><td  ><p>$110 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R7+250+(GDDR5)"><strong>Radeon R7 250 (GDDR5)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2013</p></td><td  ><p>Oland</p></td><td  ><p>384</p></td><td  ><p>1050</p></td><td  ><p>806</p></td><td  ><p>$99 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R7+250+(DDR3)"><strong>Radeon R7 250 (DDR3)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2013</p></td><td  ><p>Oland</p></td><td  ><p>384</p></td><td  ><p>1050</p></td><td  ><p>806</p></td><td  ><p>$89 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+6670+(GDDR5)"><strong>Radeon HD 6670 (GDDR5)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2011</p></td><td  ><p>Turks</p></td><td  ><p>480</p></td><td  ><p>800</p></td><td  ><p>768</p></td><td  ><p>$109 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+6670+(DDR3)"><strong>Radeon HD 6670 (DDR3)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2011</p></td><td  ><p>Turks</p></td><td  ><p>480</p></td><td  ><p>800</p></td><td  ><p>768</p></td><td  ><p>$99 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+9800+GX2"><strong>GeForce 9800 GX2</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2008</p></td><td  ><p>2x G92</p></td><td  ><p>256</p></td><td  ><p>1500</p></td><td  ><p>768</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GT+740+(GDDR5)"><strong>GeForce GT 740 (GDDR5)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2014</p></td><td  ><p>GK107</p></td><td  ><p>384</p></td><td  ><p>993</p></td><td  ><p>763</p></td><td  ><p>$99 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GT+740+(DDR3)"><strong>GeForce GT 740 (DDR3)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2014</p></td><td  ><p>GK107</p></td><td  ><p>384</p></td><td  ><p>993</p></td><td  ><p>763</p></td><td  ><p>$89 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+460+SE"><strong>GeForce GTX 460 SE</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2010</p></td><td  ><p>GF104</p></td><td  ><p>288</p></td><td  ><p>650</p></td><td  ><p>749</p></td><td  ><p>$160 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+4830"><strong>Radeon HD 4830</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2008</p></td><td  ><p>RV770</p></td><td  ><p>640</p></td><td  ><p>575</p></td><td  ><p>736</p></td><td  ><p>$130 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GT+640+(GDDR5)"><strong>GeForce GT 640 (GDDR5)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2012</p></td><td  ><p>GK107</p></td><td  ><p>384</p></td><td  ><p>950</p></td><td  ><p>730</p></td><td  ><p>OEM</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GT+730+(64-bit,+GDDR5)"><strong>GeForce GT 730 (64-bit, GDDR5)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2014</p></td><td  ><p>GK208</p></td><td  ><p>384</p></td><td  ><p>902</p></td><td  ><p>693</p></td><td  ><p>$79 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GT+730+(64-bit,+DDR3)"><strong>GeForce GT 730 (64-bit, DDR3)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2014</p></td><td  ><p>GK208</p></td><td  ><p>384</p></td><td  ><p>902</p></td><td  ><p>693</p></td><td  ><p>$69 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+550+Ti"><strong>GeForce GTX 550 Ti</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2011</p></td><td  ><p>GF116</p></td><td  ><p>192</p></td><td  ><p>900</p></td><td  ><p>691</p></td><td  ><p>$149 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+6570+(GDDR5)"><strong>Radeon HD 6570 (GDDR5)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2011</p></td><td  ><p>Turks</p></td><td  ><p>480</p></td><td  ><p>650</p></td><td  ><p>624</p></td><td  ><p>$89 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+6570+(DDR3)"><strong>Radeon HD 6570 (DDR3)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2011</p></td><td  ><p>Turks</p></td><td  ><p>480</p></td><td  ><p>650</p></td><td  ><p>624</p></td><td  ><p>$79 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+5670"><strong>Radeon HD 5670</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2010</p></td><td  ><p>Redwood</p></td><td  ><p>400</p></td><td  ><p>775</p></td><td  ><p>620</p></td><td  ><p>$99 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+7730+(GDDR5)"><strong>Radeon HD 7730 (GDDR5)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2013</p></td><td  ><p>Cape Verde</p></td><td  ><p>384</p></td><td  ><p>800</p></td><td  ><p>614</p></td><td  ><p>$60 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+7730+(DDR3)"><strong>Radeon HD 7730 (DDR3)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2013</p></td><td  ><p>Cape Verde</p></td><td  ><p>384</p></td><td  ><p>800</p></td><td  ><p>614</p></td><td  ><p>$60 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GT+640+(DDR3)"><strong>GeForce GT 640 (DDR3)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2012</p></td><td  ><p>GK107</p></td><td  ><p>384</p></td><td  ><p>797</p></td><td  ><p>612</p></td><td  ><p>OEM</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTS+450"><strong>GeForce GTS 450</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2010</p></td><td  ><p>GF106</p></td><td  ><p>192</p></td><td  ><p>783</p></td><td  ><p>601</p></td><td  ><p>$129 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+295"><strong>GeForce GTX 295</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2009</p></td><td  ><p>2x GT200</p></td><td  ><p>480</p></td><td  ><p>576</p></td><td  ><p>553</p></td><td  ><p>$500 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+5570+(GDDR5)"><strong>Radeon HD 5570 (GDDR5)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2010</p></td><td  ><p>Redwood</p></td><td  ><p>400</p></td><td  ><p>650</p></td><td  ><p>520</p></td><td  ><p>$80 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+5570+(DDR3)"><strong>Radeon HD 5570 (DDR3)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2010</p></td><td  ><p>Redwood</p></td><td  ><p>400</p></td><td  ><p>650</p></td><td  ><p>520</p></td><td  ><p>$80 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GT+545+(GDDR5)"><strong>GeForce GT 545 (GDDR5)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2011</p></td><td  ><p>GF116</p></td><td  ><p>144</p></td><td  ><p>870</p></td><td  ><p>501</p></td><td  ><p>OEM</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R7+240"><strong>Radeon R7 240</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2013</p></td><td  ><p>Oland</p></td><td  ><p>320</p></td><td  ><p>780</p></td><td  ><p>499</p></td><td  ><p>$69 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+3870"><strong>Radeon HD 3870</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2007</p></td><td  ><p>RV670</p></td><td  ><p>320</p></td><td  ><p>777</p></td><td  ><p>497</p></td><td  ><p>$349 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+4670"><strong>Radeon HD 4670</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2008</p></td><td  ><p>RV730</p></td><td  ><p>320</p></td><td  ><p>750</p></td><td  ><p>480</p></td><td  ><p>$79 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+2900+XT"><strong>Radeon HD 2900 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2007</p></td><td  ><p>R600</p></td><td  ><p>320</p></td><td  ><p>743</p></td><td  ><p>476</p></td><td  ><p>$399 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTS+250"><strong>GeForce GTS 250</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2009</p></td><td  ><p>G92b</p></td><td  ><p>128</p></td><td  ><p>1836</p></td><td  ><p>470</p></td><td  ><p>$150 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+9800+GTX+"><strong>GeForce 9800 GTX+</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>July 2008</p></td><td  ><p>G92b</p></td><td  ><p>128</p></td><td  ><p>1836</p></td><td  ><p>470</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+9800+GTX"><strong>GeForce 9800 GTX</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2008</p></td><td  ><p>G92</p></td><td  ><p>128</p></td><td  ><p>1688</p></td><td  ><p>432</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+3850+(512MB)"><strong>Radeon HD 3850 (512MB)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2007</p></td><td  ><p>RV670</p></td><td  ><p>320</p></td><td  ><p>668</p></td><td  ><p>428</p></td><td  ><p>$189 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+3850+(256MB)"><strong>Radeon HD 3850 (256MB)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2007</p></td><td  ><p>RV670</p></td><td  ><p>320</p></td><td  ><p>668</p></td><td  ><p>428</p></td><td  ><p>$179 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+3830"><strong>Radeon HD 3830</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2008</p></td><td  ><p>RV670</p></td><td  ><p>320</p></td><td  ><p>668</p></td><td  ><p>428</p></td><td  ><p>$129 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+4650+(DDR3)"><strong>Radeon HD 4650 (DDR3)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2008</p></td><td  ><p>RV730</p></td><td  ><p>320</p></td><td  ><p>650</p></td><td  ><p>416</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+8800+GTS+(512MB)"><strong>GeForce 8800 GTS (512MB)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2007</p></td><td  ><p>G92</p></td><td  ><p>128</p></td><td  ><p>1625</p></td><td  ><p>416</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GT+545+(DDR3)"><strong>GeForce GT 545 (DDR3)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2011</p></td><td  ><p>GF116</p></td><td  ><p>144</p></td><td  ><p>720</p></td><td  ><p>415</p></td><td  ><p>$149 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+4650+(DDR2)"><strong>Radeon HD 4650 (DDR2)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2008</p></td><td  ><p>RV730</p></td><td  ><p>320</p></td><td  ><p>600</p></td><td  ><p>384</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+2900+Pro"><strong>Radeon HD 2900 Pro</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2007</p></td><td  ><p>R600</p></td><td  ><p>320</p></td><td  ><p>600</p></td><td  ><p>384</p></td><td  ><p>$300 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+8800+Ultra"><strong>GeForce 8800 Ultra</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2007</p></td><td  ><p>G80</p></td><td  ><p>128</p></td><td  ><p>1500</p></td><td  ><p>384</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+5550+(GDDR5)"><strong>Radeon HD 5550 (GDDR5)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2010</p></td><td  ><p>Redwood</p></td><td  ><p>320</p></td><td  ><p>550</p></td><td  ><p>352</p></td><td  ><p>$70 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+5550+(DDR3)"><strong>Radeon HD 5550 (DDR3)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2010</p></td><td  ><p>Redwood</p></td><td  ><p>320</p></td><td  ><p>550</p></td><td  ><p>352</p></td><td  ><p>$70 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+5550+(DDR2)"><strong>Radeon HD 5550 (DDR2)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2010</p></td><td  ><p>Redwood</p></td><td  ><p>320</p></td><td  ><p>550</p></td><td  ><p>352</p></td><td  ><p>$70 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+8800+GTX"><strong>GeForce 8800 GTX</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2006</p></td><td  ><p>G80</p></td><td  ><p>128</p></td><td  ><p>1350</p></td><td  ><p>346</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GT+630+(DDR3)"><strong>GeForce GT 630 (DDR3)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2012</p></td><td  ><p>GK107</p></td><td  ><p>192</p></td><td  ><p>875</p></td><td  ><p>336</p></td><td  ><p>OEM</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+9800+GT"><strong>GeForce 9800 GT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>July 2008</p></td><td  ><p>G92a/G92b</p></td><td  ><p>112</p></td><td  ><p>1500</p></td><td  ><p>336</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+8800+GT+(512MB)"><strong>GeForce 8800 GT (512MB)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2007</p></td><td  ><p>G92</p></td><td  ><p>112</p></td><td  ><p>1500</p></td><td  ><p>336</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+8800+GT+(256MB)"><strong>GeForce 8800 GT (256MB)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2007</p></td><td  ><p>G92</p></td><td  ><p>112</p></td><td  ><p>1500</p></td><td  ><p>336</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+285"><strong>GeForce GTX 285</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2009</p></td><td  ><p>GT200</p></td><td  ><p>240</p></td><td  ><p>648</p></td><td  ><p>311</p></td><td  ><p>$400 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GT+630+(GDDR5)"><strong>GeForce GT 630 (GDDR5)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2012</p></td><td  ><p>GF108</p></td><td  ><p>96</p></td><td  ><p>810</p></td><td  ><p>311</p></td><td  ><p>$80 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GT+440+(GDDR5)"><strong>GeForce GT 440 (GDDR5)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2011</p></td><td  ><p>GF108</p></td><td  ><p>96</p></td><td  ><p>810</p></td><td  ><p>311</p></td><td  ><p>$100 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GT+440+(GDDR3)"><strong>GeForce GT 440 (GDDR3)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2011</p></td><td  ><p>GF108</p></td><td  ><p>96</p></td><td  ><p>810</p></td><td  ><p>311</p></td><td  ><p>$100 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+275"><strong>GeForce GTX 275</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2009</p></td><td  ><p>GT200</p></td><td  ><p>240</p></td><td  ><p>633</p></td><td  ><p>304</p></td><td  ><p>$250 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+280"><strong>GeForce GTX 280</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2008</p></td><td  ><p>GT200</p></td><td  ><p>240</p></td><td  ><p>602</p></td><td  ><p>289</p></td><td  ><p>$650 ($430)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+2900+GT"><strong>Radeon HD 2900 GT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2007</p></td><td  ><p>R600</p></td><td  ><p>240</p></td><td  ><p>600</p></td><td  ><p>288</p></td><td  ><p>$200 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GT+730+(128-bit,+DDR3)"><strong>GeForce GT 730 (128-bit, DDR3)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2014</p></td><td  ><p>GF108</p></td><td  ><p>96</p></td><td  ><p>700</p></td><td  ><p>269</p></td><td  ><p>$69 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GT+530"><strong>GeForce GT 530</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2011</p></td><td  ><p>GF118</p></td><td  ><p>96</p></td><td  ><p>700</p></td><td  ><p>269</p></td><td  ><p>OEM</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GT+430"><strong>GeForce GT 430</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2010</p></td><td  ><p>GF108</p></td><td  ><p>96</p></td><td  ><p>700</p></td><td  ><p>269</p></td><td  ><p>$79 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+9600+GSO"><strong>GeForce 9600 GSO</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2008</p></td><td  ><p>G92</p></td><td  ><p>96</p></td><td  ><p>1375</p></td><td  ><p>264</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+8800+GS"><strong>GeForce 8800 GS</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2008</p></td><td  ><p>G92</p></td><td  ><p>96</p></td><td  ><p>1375</p></td><td  ><p>264</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GT+240+(GDDR5)"><strong>GeForce GT 240 (GDDR5)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2009</p></td><td  ><p>GT215</p></td><td  ><p>96</p></td><td  ><p>1340</p></td><td  ><p>257</p></td><td  ><p>OEM</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GT+240+(DDR3)"><strong>GeForce GT 240 (DDR3)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2009</p></td><td  ><p>GT215</p></td><td  ><p>96</p></td><td  ><p>1340</p></td><td  ><p>257</p></td><td  ><p>OEM</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+260"><strong>GeForce GTX 260</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2008</p></td><td  ><p>GT200</p></td><td  ><p>216</p></td><td  ><p>576</p></td><td  ><p>249</p></td><td  ><p>$300 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+6450"><strong>Radeon HD 6450</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2011</p></td><td  ><p>Caicos</p></td><td  ><p>160</p></td><td  ><p>750</p></td><td  ><p>240</p></td><td  ><p>$55 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+8800+GTS+(640MB)"><strong>GeForce 8800 GTS (640MB)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2006</p></td><td  ><p>G80</p></td><td  ><p>96</p></td><td  ><p>1188</p></td><td  ><p>228</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+8800+GTS+(320MB)"><strong>GeForce 8800 GTS (320MB)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2007</p></td><td  ><p>G80</p></td><td  ><p>96</p></td><td  ><p>1188</p></td><td  ><p>228</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GTX+260"><strong>GeForce GTX 260</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2008</p></td><td  ><p>GT200</p></td><td  ><p>192</p></td><td  ><p>576</p></td><td  ><p>221</p></td><td  ><p>$400 ($270)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+9600+GT"><strong>GeForce 9600 GT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2008</p></td><td  ><p>G94</p></td><td  ><p>64</p></td><td  ><p>1625</p></td><td  ><p>208</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+R5+230"><strong>Radeon R5 230</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2014</p></td><td  ><p>Caicos</p></td><td  ><p>160</p></td><td  ><p>625</p></td><td  ><p>200</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+2600+XT"><strong>Radeon HD 2600 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2007</p></td><td  ><p>RV630</p></td><td  ><p>120</p></td><td  ><p>800</p></td><td  ><p>192</p></td><td  ><p>$149 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+3650+(DDR3)"><strong>Radeon HD 3650 (DDR3)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2008</p></td><td  ><p>RV635</p></td><td  ><p>120</p></td><td  ><p>725</p></td><td  ><p>174</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+3650+(DDR2)"><strong>Radeon HD 3650 (DDR2)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2008</p></td><td  ><p>RV635</p></td><td  ><p>120</p></td><td  ><p>725</p></td><td  ><p>174</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GT+520"><strong>GeForce GT 520</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2011</p></td><td  ><p>GF119</p></td><td  ><p>48</p></td><td  ><p>810</p></td><td  ><p>156</p></td><td  ><p>$59 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+2600+Pro"><strong>Radeon HD 2600 Pro</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2007</p></td><td  ><p>RV630</p></td><td  ><p>120</p></td><td  ><p>600</p></td><td  ><p>144</p></td><td  ><p>$99 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GT+220+(DDR3)"><strong>GeForce GT 220 (DDR3)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2009</p></td><td  ><p>GT216</p></td><td  ><p>48</p></td><td  ><p>1360</p></td><td  ><p>131</p></td><td  ><p>OEM</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GT+220+(DDR2)"><strong>GeForce GT 220 (DDR2)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2009</p></td><td  ><p>GT216</p></td><td  ><p>48</p></td><td  ><p>1335</p></td><td  ><p>128</p></td><td  ><p>OEM</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+5450"><strong>Radeon HD 5450</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2010</p></td><td  ><p>Cedar</p></td><td  ><p>80</p></td><td  ><p>650</p></td><td  ><p>104</p></td><td  ><p>$50 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+4550"><strong>Radeon HD 4550</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2008</p></td><td  ><p>RV710</p></td><td  ><p>80</p></td><td  ><p>600</p></td><td  ><p>96</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+4350"><strong>Radeon HD 4350</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2008</p></td><td  ><p>RV710</p></td><td  ><p>80</p></td><td  ><p>600</p></td><td  ><p>96</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+8600+GTS"><strong>GeForce 8600 GTS</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2007</p></td><td  ><p>G84</p></td><td  ><p>32</p></td><td  ><p>1450</p></td><td  ><p>93</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+9500+GT+(GDDR3)"><strong>GeForce 9500 GT (GDDR3)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>July 2008</p></td><td  ><p>G96</p></td><td  ><p>32</p></td><td  ><p>1400</p></td><td  ><p>90</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+9500+GT+(DDR2)"><strong>GeForce 9500 GT (DDR2)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>July 2008</p></td><td  ><p>G96</p></td><td  ><p>32</p></td><td  ><p>1400</p></td><td  ><p>90</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+8600+GT+(GDDR3)"><strong>GeForce 8600 GT (GDDR3)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2007</p></td><td  ><p>G84</p></td><td  ><p>32</p></td><td  ><p>1188</p></td><td  ><p>76</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+8600+GT+(DDR2)"><strong>GeForce 8600 GT (DDR2)</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2007</p></td><td  ><p>G84</p></td><td  ><p>32</p></td><td  ><p>1188</p></td><td  ><p>76</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+GT+420"><strong>GeForce GT 420</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2010</p></td><td  ><p>GF108</p></td><td  ><p>48</p></td><td  ><p>700</p></td><td  ><p>67</p></td><td  ><p>OEM</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+2400+XT"><strong>Radeon HD 2400 XT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2007</p></td><td  ><p>RV610</p></td><td  ><p>40</p></td><td  ><p>650</p></td><td  ><p>52</p></td><td  ><p>$55 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+9400+GT"><strong>GeForce 9400 GT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2008</p></td><td  ><p>G96</p></td><td  ><p>16</p></td><td  ><p>1400</p></td><td  ><p>45</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+2400+Pro"><strong>Radeon HD 2400 Pro</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2007</p></td><td  ><p>RV610</p></td><td  ><p>40</p></td><td  ><p>525</p></td><td  ><p>42</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+HD+2300"><strong>Radeon HD 2300</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2007</p></td><td  ><p>RV610</p></td><td  ><p>40</p></td><td  ><p>525</p></td><td  ><p>42</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+8600+GS"><strong>GeForce 8600 GS</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2007</p></td><td  ><p>G84</p></td><td  ><p>16</p></td><td  ><p>1180</p></td><td  ><p>38</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X1950+XTX+*"><strong>Radeon X1950 XTX *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2006</p></td><td  ><p>R580+</p></td><td  ><p>48</p></td><td  ><p>650</p></td><td  ><p>31.2</p></td><td  ><p>$449 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X1900+XTX+*"><strong>Radeon X1900 XTX *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2006</p></td><td  ><p>R580</p></td><td  ><p>48</p></td><td  ><p>650</p></td><td  ><p>31.2</p></td><td  ><p>$649 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X1950+XT+*"><strong>Radeon X1950 XT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2006</p></td><td  ><p>R580+</p></td><td  ><p>48</p></td><td  ><p>625</p></td><td  ><p>30.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X1900+XT+*"><strong>Radeon X1900 XT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2006</p></td><td  ><p>R580</p></td><td  ><p>48</p></td><td  ><p>625</p></td><td  ><p>30.0</p></td><td  ><p>$549 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+8500+GT"><strong>GeForce 8500 GT</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2007</p></td><td  ><p>G86</p></td><td  ><p>16</p></td><td  ><p>900</p></td><td  ><p>29</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+8400+GS"><strong>GeForce 8400 GS</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2007</p></td><td  ><p>G86</p></td><td  ><p>16</p></td><td  ><p>900</p></td><td  ><p>29</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+7950+GX2+*"><strong>GeForce 7950 GX2 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2006</p></td><td  ><p>2x G71</p></td><td  ><p>48</p></td><td  ><p>500</p></td><td  ><p>24.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+9300+GS"><strong>GeForce 9300 GS</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2008</p></td><td  ><p>G98</p></td><td  ><p>8</p></td><td  ><p>1400</p></td><td  ><p>22</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+9300+GE"><strong>GeForce 9300 GE</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2008</p></td><td  ><p>G98</p></td><td  ><p>8</p></td><td  ><p>1300</p></td><td  ><p>21</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X1950+Pro+*"><strong>Radeon X1950 Pro *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2006</p></td><td  ><p>RV570</p></td><td  ><p>36</p></td><td  ><p>575</p></td><td  ><p>20.7</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X1900+GT+*"><strong>Radeon X1900 GT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2006</p></td><td  ><p>R580</p></td><td  ><p>36</p></td><td  ><p>575</p></td><td  ><p>20.7</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X1950+GT+*"><strong>Radeon X1950 GT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2007</p></td><td  ><p>RV570</p></td><td  ><p>36</p></td><td  ><p>500</p></td><td  ><p>18.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+7900+GTX+*"><strong>GeForce 7900 GTX *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2006</p></td><td  ><p>G71</p></td><td  ><p>24</p></td><td  ><p>650</p></td><td  ><p>15.6</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+7900+GTO+*"><strong>GeForce 7900 GTO *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2006</p></td><td  ><p>G71</p></td><td  ><p>24</p></td><td  ><p>650</p></td><td  ><p>15.6</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+8300+GS"><strong>GeForce 8300 GS</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>July 2007</p></td><td  ><p>G86</p></td><td  ><p>8</p></td><td  ><p>900</p></td><td  ><p>14</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+7950+GT+*"><strong>GeForce 7950 GT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2006</p></td><td  ><p>G71</p></td><td  ><p>24</p></td><td  ><p>550</p></td><td  ><p>13.2</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+7800+GTX+(512MB)+*"><strong>GeForce 7800 GTX (512MB) *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2005</p></td><td  ><p>G70</p></td><td  ><p>24</p></td><td  ><p>550</p></td><td  ><p>13.2</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X1650+XT+*"><strong>Radeon X1650 XT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2006</p></td><td  ><p>RV560</p></td><td  ><p>24</p></td><td  ><p>525</p></td><td  ><p>12.6</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+7900+GT+*"><strong>GeForce 7900 GT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2006</p></td><td  ><p>G71</p></td><td  ><p>24</p></td><td  ><p>450</p></td><td  ><p>10.8</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+7800+GTX+(256MB)+*"><strong>GeForce 7800 GTX (256MB) *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2005</p></td><td  ><p>G70</p></td><td  ><p>24</p></td><td  ><p>430</p></td><td  ><p>10.3</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X1800+XT+*"><strong>Radeon X1800 XT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2005</p></td><td  ><p>R520</p></td><td  ><p>16</p></td><td  ><p>625</p></td><td  ><p>10.0</p></td><td  ><p>$549 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X1650+GT+*"><strong>Radeon X1650 GT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2007</p></td><td  ><p>RV560</p></td><td  ><p>24</p></td><td  ><p>400</p></td><td  ><p>9.6</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+7900+GS+*"><strong>GeForce 7900 GS *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2006</p></td><td  ><p>G71</p></td><td  ><p>20</p></td><td  ><p>450</p></td><td  ><p>9.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X850+XT+Platinum+*"><strong>Radeon X850 XT Platinum *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2004</p></td><td  ><p>R480</p></td><td  ><p>16</p></td><td  ><p>540</p></td><td  ><p>8.6</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X850+XT+*"><strong>Radeon X850 XT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2004</p></td><td  ><p>R480</p></td><td  ><p>16</p></td><td  ><p>520</p></td><td  ><p>8.3</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X800+XT+Platinum+*"><strong>Radeon X800 XT Platinum *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2004</p></td><td  ><p>R423</p></td><td  ><p>16</p></td><td  ><p>520</p></td><td  ><p>8.3</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X800+XT+*"><strong>Radeon X800 XT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2004</p></td><td  ><p>R423</p></td><td  ><p>16</p></td><td  ><p>500</p></td><td  ><p>8.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X1800+XL+*"><strong>Radeon X1800 XL *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2005</p></td><td  ><p>R520</p></td><td  ><p>16</p></td><td  ><p>500</p></td><td  ><p>8.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+7800+GT+*"><strong>GeForce 7800 GT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2005</p></td><td  ><p>G70</p></td><td  ><p>20</p></td><td  ><p>400</p></td><td  ><p>8.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X1650+Pro+*"><strong>Radeon X1650 Pro *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2006</p></td><td  ><p>RV535</p></td><td  ><p>12</p></td><td  ><p>600</p></td><td  ><p>7.2</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X1600+XT+*"><strong>Radeon X1600 XT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2005</p></td><td  ><p>RV530</p></td><td  ><p>12</p></td><td  ><p>590</p></td><td  ><p>7.1</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+7600+GT+*"><strong>GeForce 7600 GT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2006</p></td><td  ><p>G73</p></td><td  ><p>12</p></td><td  ><p>560</p></td><td  ><p>6.7</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X800+XL+*"><strong>Radeon X800 XL *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2004</p></td><td  ><p>R430</p></td><td  ><p>16</p></td><td  ><p>400</p></td><td  ><p>6.4</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+6800+Ultra+*"><strong>GeForce 6800 Ultra *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2004</p></td><td  ><p>NV45</p></td><td  ><p>16</p></td><td  ><p>400</p></td><td  ><p>6.4</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X850+Pro+*"><strong>Radeon X850 Pro *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2004</p></td><td  ><p>R480</p></td><td  ><p>12</p></td><td  ><p>507</p></td><td  ><p>6.1</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X1800+GTO+*"><strong>Radeon X1800 GTO *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2006</p></td><td  ><p>R520</p></td><td  ><p>12</p></td><td  ><p>500</p></td><td  ><p>6.0</p></td><td  ><p>$249 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X1600+Pro+*"><strong>Radeon X1600 Pro *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2005</p></td><td  ><p>RV530</p></td><td  ><p>12</p></td><td  ><p>500</p></td><td  ><p>6.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X1300+XT+*"><strong>Radeon X1300 XT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2006</p></td><td  ><p>RV530</p></td><td  ><p>12</p></td><td  ><p>500</p></td><td  ><p>6.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+7800+GS+*"><strong>GeForce 7800 GS *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2006</p></td><td  ><p>G70</p></td><td  ><p>16</p></td><td  ><p>375</p></td><td  ><p>6.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X800+Pro+*"><strong>Radeon X800 Pro *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2004</p></td><td  ><p>R423</p></td><td  ><p>12</p></td><td  ><p>475</p></td><td  ><p>5.7</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+6800+GT+*"><strong>GeForce 6800 GT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2004</p></td><td  ><p>NV45</p></td><td  ><p>16</p></td><td  ><p>350</p></td><td  ><p>5.6</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+6800+GS+(PCIe)+*"><strong>GeForce 6800 GS (PCIe) *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2005</p></td><td  ><p>NV42</p></td><td  ><p>12</p></td><td  ><p>425</p></td><td  ><p>5.1</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X800+GTO+(256MB)+*"><strong>Radeon X800 GTO (256MB) *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2005</p></td><td  ><p>R423/R480</p></td><td  ><p>12</p></td><td  ><p>400</p></td><td  ><p>4.8</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X800+GTO+(128MB)+*"><strong>Radeon X800 GTO (128MB) *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2005</p></td><td  ><p>R423/R480</p></td><td  ><p>12</p></td><td  ><p>400</p></td><td  ><p>4.8</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+7600+GS+*"><strong>GeForce 7600 GS *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2006</p></td><td  ><p>G73</p></td><td  ><p>12</p></td><td  ><p>400</p></td><td  ><p>4.8</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X800+*"><strong>Radeon X800 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2004</p></td><td  ><p>R430</p></td><td  ><p>12</p></td><td  ><p>392</p></td><td  ><p>4.7</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+6800+GS+(AGP)+*"><strong>GeForce 6800 GS (AGP) *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2005</p></td><td  ><p>NV40</p></td><td  ><p>12</p></td><td  ><p>350</p></td><td  ><p>4.2</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+6600+GT+*"><strong>GeForce 6600 GT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2004</p></td><td  ><p>NV43</p></td><td  ><p>8</p></td><td  ><p>500</p></td><td  ><p>4.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+6800+*"><strong>GeForce 6800 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>November 2004</p></td><td  ><p>NV41/NV42</p></td><td  ><p>12</p></td><td  ><p>325</p></td><td  ><p>3.9</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X800+GT+*"><strong>Radeon X800 GT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2005</p></td><td  ><p>R423/R480</p></td><td  ><p>8</p></td><td  ><p>475</p></td><td  ><p>3.8</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X800+SE+*"><strong>Radeon X800 SE *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2004</p></td><td  ><p>R420</p></td><td  ><p>8</p></td><td  ><p>425</p></td><td  ><p>3.4</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X700+Pro+*"><strong>Radeon X700 Pro *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2004</p></td><td  ><p>RV410</p></td><td  ><p>8</p></td><td  ><p>425</p></td><td  ><p>3.4</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+9800+XT+*"><strong>Radeon 9800 XT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2003</p></td><td  ><p>R360</p></td><td  ><p>8</p></td><td  ><p>412</p></td><td  ><p>3.3</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X700+*"><strong>Radeon X700 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2005</p></td><td  ><p>RV410</p></td><td  ><p>8</p></td><td  ><p>400</p></td><td  ><p>3.2</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+9800+Pro+*"><strong>Radeon 9800 Pro *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2003</p></td><td  ><p>R350</p></td><td  ><p>8</p></td><td  ><p>380</p></td><td  ><p>3.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+7300+GT+(GDDR3)+*"><strong>GeForce 7300 GT (GDDR3) *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2006</p></td><td  ><p>G73</p></td><td  ><p>8</p></td><td  ><p>350</p></td><td  ><p>2.8</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+7300+GT+(DDR2)+*"><strong>GeForce 7300 GT (DDR2) *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2006</p></td><td  ><p>G73</p></td><td  ><p>8</p></td><td  ><p>350</p></td><td  ><p>2.8</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+9800+SE+(128-bit)+*"><strong>Radeon 9800 SE (128-bit) *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2003</p></td><td  ><p>R350</p></td><td  ><p>8</p></td><td  ><p>325</p></td><td  ><p>2.6</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+9800+*"><strong>Radeon 9800 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2003</p></td><td  ><p>R350</p></td><td  ><p>8</p></td><td  ><p>325</p></td><td  ><p>2.6</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+9700+Pro+*"><strong>Radeon 9700 Pro *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>July 2002</p></td><td  ><p>R300</p></td><td  ><p>8</p></td><td  ><p>325</p></td><td  ><p>2.6</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+6800+XT+*"><strong>GeForce 6800 XT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2005</p></td><td  ><p>NV42</p></td><td  ><p>8</p></td><td  ><p>325</p></td><td  ><p>2.6</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+6800+LE+*"><strong>GeForce 6800 LE *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2005</p></td><td  ><p>NV41/NV42</p></td><td  ><p>8</p></td><td  ><p>325</p></td><td  ><p>2.6</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X1300+Pro+*"><strong>Radeon X1300 Pro *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2005</p></td><td  ><p>RV515</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>600</p></td><td  ><p>2.4</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+6600+(128-bit)+*"><strong>GeForce 6600 (128-bit) *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2004</p></td><td  ><p>NV43</p></td><td  ><p>8</p></td><td  ><p>300</p></td><td  ><p>2.4</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+9700+*"><strong>Radeon 9700 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2002</p></td><td  ><p>R300</p></td><td  ><p>8</p></td><td  ><p>275</p></td><td  ><p>2.2</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+9500+Pro+*"><strong>Radeon 9500 Pro *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2002</p></td><td  ><p>R300</p></td><td  ><p>8</p></td><td  ><p>275</p></td><td  ><p>2.2</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+7300+GS+*"><strong>GeForce 7300 GS *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2006</p></td><td  ><p>G72</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>550</p></td><td  ><p>2.2</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X600+XT+*"><strong>Radeon X600 XT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2004</p></td><td  ><p>RV380</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>500</p></td><td  ><p>2.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X1550+*"><strong>Radeon X1550 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2007</p></td><td  ><p>RV516</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>500</p></td><td  ><p>2.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+9600+XT+*"><strong>Radeon 9600 XT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2003</p></td><td  ><p>RV360</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>500</p></td><td  ><p>2.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+FX+5800+Ultra+*"><strong>GeForce FX 5800 Ultra *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2003</p></td><td  ><p>NV30</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>500</p></td><td  ><p>2.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+FX+5950+Ultra+*"><strong>GeForce FX 5950 Ultra *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2003</p></td><td  ><p>NV38</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>475</p></td><td  ><p>1.9</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+FX+5700+Ultra+*"><strong>GeForce FX 5700 Ultra *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2003</p></td><td  ><p>NV36</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>475</p></td><td  ><p>1.9</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+FX+5900+Ultra+*"><strong>GeForce FX 5900 Ultra *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2003</p></td><td  ><p>NV35</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>450</p></td><td  ><p>1.8</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+FX+5700+*"><strong>GeForce FX 5700 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2003</p></td><td  ><p>NV36</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>425</p></td><td  ><p>1.7</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X600+Pro+*"><strong>Radeon X600 Pro *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2004</p></td><td  ><p>RV370</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>400</p></td><td  ><p>1.6</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X600+Pro+*"><strong>Radeon X600 Pro *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2004</p></td><td  ><p>RV380</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>400</p></td><td  ><p>1.6</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X600+*"><strong>Radeon X600 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2004</p></td><td  ><p>RV370</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>400</p></td><td  ><p>1.6</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+9600+Pro+*"><strong>Radeon 9600 Pro *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2003</p></td><td  ><p>RV350</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>400</p></td><td  ><p>1.6</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+FX+5900+XT+*"><strong>GeForce FX 5900 XT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2003</p></td><td  ><p>NV35</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>390</p></td><td  ><p>1.6</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+FX+5900+*"><strong>GeForce FX 5900 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2003</p></td><td  ><p>NV35</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>400</p></td><td  ><p>1.6</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+FX+5800+*"><strong>GeForce FX 5800 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2003</p></td><td  ><p>NV30</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>400</p></td><td  ><p>1.6</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+FX+5600+Ultra+*"><strong>GeForce FX 5600 Ultra *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2003</p></td><td  ><p>NV31</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>400</p></td><td  ><p>1.6</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+9800+SE+(256-bit)+*"><strong>Radeon 9800 SE (256-bit) *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2003</p></td><td  ><p>R350</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>380</p></td><td  ><p>1.5</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+7300+LE+*"><strong>GeForce 7300 LE *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2006</p></td><td  ><p>G72</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>350</p></td><td  ><p>1.4</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+6200+TurboCache+*"><strong>GeForce 6200 TurboCache *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2004</p></td><td  ><p>NV44</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>350</p></td><td  ><p>1.4</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+9600+SE+*"><strong>Radeon 9600 SE *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2003</p></td><td  ><p>RV350</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>325</p></td><td  ><p>1.3</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+9600+*"><strong>Radeon 9600 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2003</p></td><td  ><p>RV350</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>325</p></td><td  ><p>1.3</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+FX+5600+*"><strong>GeForce FX 5600 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2003</p></td><td  ><p>NV31</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>325</p></td><td  ><p>1.3</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+FX+5200+Ultra+*"><strong>GeForce FX 5200 Ultra *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2003</p></td><td  ><p>NV34</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>325</p></td><td  ><p>1.3</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+6600+LE+*"><strong>GeForce 6600 LE *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 1905</p></td><td  ><p>NV43</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>325</p></td><td  ><p>1.3</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X300+SE+*"><strong>Radeon X300 SE *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2004</p></td><td  ><p>RV370</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>300</p></td><td  ><p>1.2</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+6200+*"><strong>GeForce 6200 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2004</p></td><td  ><p>NV43</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>300</p></td><td  ><p>1.2</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+4+Ti4800+*"><strong>GeForce 4 Ti4800 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2003</p></td><td  ><p>NV28</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>300</p></td><td  ><p>1.2</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+4+Ti4600+*"><strong>GeForce 4 Ti4600 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2002</p></td><td  ><p>NV25</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>300</p></td><td  ><p>1.2</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+9500+*"><strong>Radeon 9500 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2002</p></td><td  ><p>R300</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>275</p></td><td  ><p>1.1</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+8500+*"><strong>Radeon 8500 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2001</p></td><td  ><p>R200</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>275</p></td><td  ><p>1.1</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+FX+5500+*"><strong>GeForce FX 5500 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2004</p></td><td  ><p>NV34B</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>270</p></td><td  ><p>1.1</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+4+Ti4800+SE+*"><strong>GeForce 4 Ti4800 SE *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2003</p></td><td  ><p>NV28</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>275</p></td><td  ><p>1.1</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+4+Ti4400+*"><strong>GeForce 4 Ti4400 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2002</p></td><td  ><p>NV25</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>275</p></td><td  ><p>1.1</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X1050+(128-bit)+*"><strong>Radeon X1050 (128-bit) *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 2006</p></td><td  ><p>RV350</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>250</p></td><td  ><p>1.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+9550+*"><strong>Radeon 9550 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2004</p></td><td  ><p>RV350</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>250</p></td><td  ><p>1.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+9250+*"><strong>Radeon 9250 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2004</p></td><td  ><p>RV280</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>240</p></td><td  ><p>1.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+9200+*"><strong>Radeon 9200 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2003</p></td><td  ><p>RV280</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>250</p></td><td  ><p>1.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+9100+*"><strong>Radeon 9100 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2003</p></td><td  ><p>R200</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>250</p></td><td  ><p>1.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+9000+*"><strong>Radeon 9000 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2002</p></td><td  ><p>RV250</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>250</p></td><td  ><p>1.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+FX+5700+LE+*"><strong>GeForce FX 5700 LE *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2004</p></td><td  ><p>NV36</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>250</p></td><td  ><p>1.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+FX+5200+(64-bit)+*"><strong>GeForce FX 5200 (64-bit) *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2003</p></td><td  ><p>NV34</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>250</p></td><td  ><p>1.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+FX+5200+(128-bit)+*"><strong>GeForce FX 5200 (128-bit) *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2003</p></td><td  ><p>NV34</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>250</p></td><td  ><p>1.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+4+Ti4200+*"><strong>GeForce 4 Ti4200 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2002</p></td><td  ><p>NV25</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>250</p></td><td  ><p>1.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+3+Ti500+*"><strong>GeForce 3 Ti500 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2001</p></td><td  ><p>NV20</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>240</p></td><td  ><p>1.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+2+Ultra+*"><strong>GeForce 2 Ultra *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2000</p></td><td  ><p>NV16</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>250</p></td><td  ><p>1.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+2+Ti+*"><strong>GeForce 2 Ti *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2001</p></td><td  ><p>NV15</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>250</p></td><td  ><p>1.0</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+7200+GS+*"><strong>GeForce 7200 GS *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>January 2006</p></td><td  ><p>G72</p></td><td  ><p>2</p></td><td  ><p>450</p></td><td  ><p>0.9</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+X300+*"><strong>Radeon X300 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>September 2004</p></td><td  ><p>RV370</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>200</p></td><td  ><p>0.8</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+9200+SE+*"><strong>Radeon 9200 SE *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2003</p></td><td  ><p>RV280</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>200</p></td><td  ><p>0.8</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+3+*"><strong>GeForce 3 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2001</p></td><td  ><p>NV20</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>200</p></td><td  ><p>0.8</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+2+GTS+*"><strong>GeForce 2 GTS *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2000</p></td><td  ><p>NV15</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>200</p></td><td  ><p>0.8</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+3+Ti200+*"><strong>GeForce 3 Ti200 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 2001</p></td><td  ><p>NV20</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>175</p></td><td  ><p>0.7</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+7500+*"><strong>Radeon 7500 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 2001</p></td><td  ><p>RV200</p></td><td  ><p>2</p></td><td  ><p>290</p></td><td  ><p>0.6</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+4+MX460+*"><strong>GeForce 4 MX460 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2002</p></td><td  ><p>NV17</p></td><td  ><p>2</p></td><td  ><p>300</p></td><td  ><p>0.6</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+4+MX440+*"><strong>GeForce 4 MX440 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2002</p></td><td  ><p>NV17</p></td><td  ><p>2</p></td><td  ><p>275</p></td><td  ><p>0.6</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Rage+Fury+MAXX+*"><strong>Rage Fury MAXX *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 1999</p></td><td  ><p>2x ATI Rage</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>125</p></td><td  ><p>0.5</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+4+MX420+*"><strong>GeForce 4 MX420 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2002</p></td><td  ><p>NV17</p></td><td  ><p>2</p></td><td  ><p>250</p></td><td  ><p>0.5</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+256+SDR+*"><strong>GeForce 256 SDR *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 1999</p></td><td  ><p>NV10</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>120</p></td><td  ><p>0.5</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+256+DDR+*"><strong>GeForce 256 DDR *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>December 1999</p></td><td  ><p>NV10</p></td><td  ><p>4</p></td><td  ><p>120</p></td><td  ><p>0.5</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+2+MX400+*"><strong>GeForce 2 MX400 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2001</p></td><td  ><p>NV11</p></td><td  ><p>2</p></td><td  ><p>200</p></td><td  ><p>0.4</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=GeForce+2+MX200+*"><strong>GeForce 2 MX200 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 2001</p></td><td  ><p>NV11</p></td><td  ><p>2</p></td><td  ><p>175</p></td><td  ><p>0.4</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Rage+128+Ultra+*"><strong>Rage 128 Ultra *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 1999</p></td><td  ><p>ATI Rage</p></td><td  ><p>2</p></td><td  ><p>130</p></td><td  ><p>0.3</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Rage+128+Pro+*"><strong>Rage 128 Pro *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 1999</p></td><td  ><p>ATI Rage</p></td><td  ><p>2</p></td><td  ><p>125</p></td><td  ><p>0.3</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+SDR+*"><strong>Radeon SDR *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2000</p></td><td  ><p>R100</p></td><td  ><p>2</p></td><td  ><p>166</p></td><td  ><p>0.3</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+LE+*"><strong>Radeon LE *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>May 2001</p></td><td  ><p>R100</p></td><td  ><p>2</p></td><td  ><p>150</p></td><td  ><p>0.3</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+DDR+*"><strong>Radeon DDR *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2000</p></td><td  ><p>R100</p></td><td  ><p>2</p></td><td  ><p>166</p></td><td  ><p>0.3</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+7200+SDR+*"><strong>Radeon 7200 SDR *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 2000</p></td><td  ><p>R100</p></td><td  ><p>2</p></td><td  ><p>166</p></td><td  ><p>0.3</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+7200+DDR+*"><strong>Radeon 7200 DDR *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>April 2000</p></td><td  ><p>R100</p></td><td  ><p>2</p></td><td  ><p>166</p></td><td  ><p>0.3</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+Riva+TNT2+Ultra+*"><strong>Nvidia Riva TNT2 Ultra *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 1999</p></td><td  ><p>NV5</p></td><td  ><p>2</p></td><td  ><p>150</p></td><td  ><p>0.3</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+Riva+TNT2+Pro+*"><strong>Nvidia Riva TNT2 Pro *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>October 1999</p></td><td  ><p>NV5</p></td><td  ><p>2</p></td><td  ><p>143</p></td><td  ><p>0.3</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+Riva+TNT2+*"><strong>Nvidia Riva TNT2 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>March 1999</p></td><td  ><p>NV5</p></td><td  ><p>2</p></td><td  ><p>125</p></td><td  ><p>0.3</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Rage+128+GL+*"><strong>Rage 128 GL *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 1998</p></td><td  ><p>ATI Rage</p></td><td  ><p>2</p></td><td  ><p>103</p></td><td  ><p>0.2</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Radeon+7000+*"><strong>Radeon 7000 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>February 2001</p></td><td  ><p>RV100</p></td><td  ><p>1</p></td><td  ><p>183</p></td><td  ><p>0.2</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+Riva+TNT+*"><strong>Nvidia Riva TNT *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>June 1998</p></td><td  ><p>NV4</p></td><td  ><p>2</p></td><td  ><p>90</p></td><td  ><p>0.2</p></td><td  ><p> </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Nvidia+Riva+128+*"><strong>Nvidia Riva 128 *</strong></a></p></td><td  ><p>August 1997</p></td><td  ><p>NV3</p></td><td  ><p>1</p></td><td  ><p>100</p></td><td  ><p>0.1</p></td><td  ></td></tr></tbody></table></div><p><em>* - Denotes performance measured in "GOps" — gigaoperations per second — as opposed to GFLOPS. Older GPU architectures without unified shader support aren't directly comparable with newer architectures.</em></p><h2 id="finding-discounts-on-the-best-graphics-cards">Finding Discounts on the Best Graphics Cards</h2><p>With all the GPU shortages these days, you're unlikely to see huge sales on a graphics card, but you may find some savings by checking out the latest <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/coupons/newegg.com">Newegg promo codes</a>, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/coupons/bestbuy.com">Best Buy promo codes</a> and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/coupons/microcenter.com">Micro Center coupon codes</a>.</p><p>For even more information, check out our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gpu-buying-guide,5844.html"><strong>Graphics Card Buyer's Guide</strong></a>.</p><p><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gpus,4380.html"><strong>Best Graphics Cards for Gaming</strong></a></p><p><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/features/graphics-card-power-consumption-tested"><strong>Graphics Card Power Consumption Tested</strong></a></p><p><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/how-to-stress-test-graphics-cards,5449.html"><strong>How to Stress-Test Graphics Cards (Like We Do)</strong></a></p><p><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html"><strong>CPU Benchmarks</strong></a></p><p><em>Want to comment on this story? </em><a href="https://forums.tomshardware.com/threads/gpu-performance-hierarchy-2019-video-cards-ranked.3454941/"><em>Let us know what you think in the Tom's Hardware Forums</em></a><em>.</em></p><iframe src="https://content.jwplatform.com/players/SzkW6ASo.html" id="SzkW6ASo" title="Buy the Right Graphics Card" width="1920" height="1080" frameborder="0" scrolling="auto" allowfullscreen></iframe>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ The Best CPU for Gaming in 2026 ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Here is the best CPU for gaming for the money, based on our benchmarks after hundreds of hours of testing. Both AMD and Intel offer solid gaming processors across DDR5 and DDR4 options, but only a select few have made our list. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">Z6M58DxGcbtgTGXEZvt3GD</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mAzgJUnqw6hDfBfYtetLpJ-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Wed, 12 Mar 2025 14:35:09 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 25 Jun 2026 21:48:10 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[CPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Jake Roach ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/h6PRM8bTimCTnNfoAYfjAi.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Jake Roach has been bending pins and busting solder joints since the mid-2000s. From trying to run scratched CDs of &lt;em&gt;Delta Force &lt;/em&gt;and &lt;em&gt;Unreal Tournament &lt;/em&gt;to spitting out virtual machines on a Threadripper, Jake has been on the hunt for the latest hardware and highest performance for decades. That eventually spun up a career, with Jake serving as Lead Reporter at Digital Trends, as well as contributing to outlets like XDA, PC Invasion, Business Insider, and WIRED. At Tom’s Hardware, Jake is focused on consumer and workstation CPUs. Outside working hours, you’ll find him knee-deep in the latest roguelite taking over Steam, spending way too much money on &lt;em&gt;Magic: The Gathering, &lt;/em&gt;or forcing his lazy corgi onto walks.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                        <dc:contributor><![CDATA[ Paul Alcorn ]]></dc:contributor>
                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mAzgJUnqw6hDfBfYtetLpJ-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Tom&#039;s Hardware]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                        <media:description><![CDATA[Best CPU for Gaming]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Several CPUs on a table.]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Several CPUs on a table.]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mAzgJUnqw6hDfBfYtetLpJ-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p><em>Tom’s Hardware </em>has tested dozens of processors to find the best CPU for gaming. Our list of 2026 CPU gaming benchmarks currently comprises 17 of the most demanding titles available on the market, which we run each gaming processor through to see the chips that come out on top. We select our picks based on the data in our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html"><u>CPU benchmark hierarchy</u></a>, so all of the CPUs below are backed by hundreds of hours of real-world, hands-on testing where we gather extensive data on how a CPU performs and behaves while gaming. If you want a broader look at the CPU market, our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/features/amd-vs-intel-cpus"><u>AMD vs. Intel</u></a> article shows you where the current CPU duopoly stands, while our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/cpu-buying-guide"><u>CPU buying guide</u></a> can help you narrow down the best processor for you.</p><div  class="fancy-box"><div class="fancy_box-title">June 2026 Update</div><div class="fancy_box_body"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' ><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="yQxDP9b5mwjEYZ4Y37kD7X" name="image5" caption="" alt="AMD Ryzen 5 7600X3D" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yQxDP9b5mwjEYZ4Y37kD7X.jpg" mos="" link="" align="" fullscreen="" width="" height="" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pinterest-pin-exclude"></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=""><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p class="fancy-box__body-text">Computex is behind us, and we learned about two new processors coming down the pike: AMD’s Ryzen 7 7700X3D and the Ryzen 7 5800X3D 10th Anniversary Edition. These are the last major CPU releases we expect this year, with AMD focusing Zen 6 attention on the data center with Venice and Nova Lake seemingly cooking for an early launch in 2027 (though it may come sooner). Don’t expect a major shakeup in our rankings until then, barring some major shifts in pricing/availability.</p></div></div><p>Now in the back half of the year, we don’t expect major new releases from AMD or Intel. AMD has been on a tear with refreshes, particularly among X3D CPUs. We recently <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-ryzen-9-9950x3d2-review"><u>reviewed the Ryzen 9 9950X3D2 Dual Edition</u></a>, AMD’s first CPU with 3D V-Cache on both CCDs, and it’s the most powerful chip from Team Red currently available. It’s earned a spot on this list, though the (much cheaper) <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-ryzen-9-9950x3d-review/2"><u>Ryzen 9 9950X3D</u></a> isn’t far behind in overall performance. </p><p>We’ve also seen the Ryzen 7 9850X3D, which is technically the fastest gaming processor on the market, as you can see in our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-ryzen-7-9850x3d-review"><u>Ryzen 7 9850X3D review</u></a>. However, we’ve kept the base Ryzen 7 9800X3D as our top recommendation for the best CPU for gaming due to its price. It’s only marginally behind the refreshed model (about 3% on average), and much cheaper. For most gamers, the Ryzen 7 9800X3D makes more sense. </p><p>Intel has seen a recent boost in gaming performance with Arrow Lake Refresh, and both the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus and Core Ultra 7 270K Plus have earned spots on our list. AMD dominates in gaming at the moment, however. Our sights are set on Intel’s next-gen Nova Lake chips for a big gaming boost from Team Blue, as well as the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-reportedly-preparing-surprise-return-to-ddr4-systems-with-raptor-lake-next-ddr4-platform-slated-for-the-first-half-of-2027-on-the-lga-1700-socket-takes-a-page-from-amds-book-by-extending-budget-platform-longevity"><u>rumored ‘Raptor Lake Next’ lineup</u></a> that’s supposedly arriving early next year. </p><p>For the rest of the year, we have the Ryzen 7 7700X3D and Ryzen 7 5800X3D 10th Anniversary Edition to look forward to, which are arriving in July and June, respectively. We don’t anticipate they’ll make a major impact on our rankings here, but we plan on reviewing both CPUs as soon as they’re available. </p><p>In addition to the fastest CPUs from AMD and Intel, we’ve included a few DDR4 options on this list. The price of DRAM and NAND flash has made building even a budget PC prohibitively expensive, so DDR4 platforms are a great way to save money. Vendors are signaling a shift back toward DDR4 platforms at the moment, so we may reconsider some older CPUs for our rankings as pricing and availability allows. </p><p>Here are the gaming CPUs we recommend buying. We have a shortlist of the top options and some alternatives below, but you can click the ‘More’ links to read our thoughts about a particular CPU and where it stands in the current market.</p><h2 id="prime-day-exceptional-cpu-deals">Prime Day Exceptional CPU deals</h2><div class="product star-deal"><a data-dimension112="cab04ec1-152b-4743-8398-aa6c82fb68d3" data-action="Star Deal Block" data-label="If you're after the ultimate in gaming performance, there's no better option than the Ryzen 7 9800X3D. Thanks to its 93MB of L3 cache, this 8-core/16-thread processor can push out class-leading frame rates in every game out there. With only a 120W TDP, it even stays cooler than the competition, saving you a few extra bucks on that expensive AIO purchase.Click the coupon box for the $20 discount." data-dimension48="If you're after the ultimate in gaming performance, there's no better option than the Ryzen 7 9800X3D. Thanks to its 93MB of L3 cache, this 8-core/16-thread processor can push out class-leading frame rates in every game out there. With only a 120W TDP, it even stays cooler than the competition, saving you a few extra bucks on that expensive AIO purchase.Click the coupon box for the $20 discount." data-dimension25="$433" href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-9800X3D-16-Thread-Desktop-Processor/dp/B0DKFMSMYK" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:735px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:109.39%;"><img id="4rZqRFXXvpj73XFyQVmZmg" name="AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D.PNG" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4rZqRFXXvpj73XFyQVmZmg.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="735" height="804" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a><div><span class="product__star-deal-label">the best</span><p>If you're after the ultimate in gaming performance, there's no better option than the Ryzen 7 9800X3D. Thanks to its 93MB of L3 cache, this 8-core/16-thread processor can push out class-leading frame rates in every game out there. With only a 120W TDP, it even stays cooler than the competition, saving you a few extra bucks on that expensive AIO purchase.</p><p>Click the coupon box for the $20 discount.<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-9800X3D-16-Thread-Desktop-Processor/dp/B0DKFMSMYK" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="cab04ec1-152b-4743-8398-aa6c82fb68d3" data-action="Star Deal Block" data-label="If you're after the ultimate in gaming performance, there's no better option than the Ryzen 7 9800X3D. Thanks to its 93MB of L3 cache, this 8-core/16-thread processor can push out class-leading frame rates in every game out there. With only a 120W TDP, it even stays cooler than the competition, saving you a few extra bucks on that expensive AIO purchase.Click the coupon box for the $20 discount." data-dimension48="If you're after the ultimate in gaming performance, there's no better option than the Ryzen 7 9800X3D. Thanks to its 93MB of L3 cache, this 8-core/16-thread processor can push out class-leading frame rates in every game out there. With only a 120W TDP, it even stays cooler than the competition, saving you a few extra bucks on that expensive AIO purchase.Click the coupon box for the $20 discount." data-dimension25="$433">View Deal</a></p></div></div><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="74eef726-f472-4ac6-9dd9-b09aaf9735a8" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="Get Intel's latest and greatest processor, the 270K Plus, at an all-time low price. The 8p/16e core processor has plenty of oomph to plow through any workflow and games well, too." data-dimension48="Get Intel's latest and greatest processor, the 270K Plus, at an all-time low price. The 8p/16e core processor has plenty of oomph to plow through any workflow and games well, too." data-dimension25="$264.99" href="https://www.amazon.com/Intel%C2%AE-CoreTM-Processor-270K-P-cores/dp/B0GMLJCBBM" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:870px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:120.34%;"><img id="cTPqnNuqwVfNUqrjjFwpWX" name="270K Plus" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cTPqnNuqwVfNUqrjjFwpWX.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="870" height="1047" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a><p>Get Intel's latest and greatest processor, the 270K Plus, at an all-time low price. The 8p/16e core processor has plenty of oomph to plow through any workflow and games well, too.<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.amazon.com/Intel%C2%AE-CoreTM-Processor-270K-P-cores/dp/B0GMLJCBBM" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="74eef726-f472-4ac6-9dd9-b09aaf9735a8" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="Get Intel's latest and greatest processor, the 270K Plus, at an all-time low price. The 8p/16e core processor has plenty of oomph to plow through any workflow and games well, too." data-dimension48="Get Intel's latest and greatest processor, the 270K Plus, at an all-time low price. The 8p/16e core processor has plenty of oomph to plow through any workflow and games well, too." data-dimension25="$264.99">View Deal</a></p></div><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="38a6589f-661a-4fd3-a8fe-0a1f944b0897" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="This chip is among the fastest gaming CPUs on the market and drops into modern AM5 motherboards, featuring 96MB of L3 cache with AMD's explosive 3D V-Cache, eight cores, and 16 threads. It also features a maximum boost clock of 5.0 GHz." data-dimension48="This chip is among the fastest gaming CPUs on the market and drops into modern AM5 motherboards, featuring 96MB of L3 cache with AMD's explosive 3D V-Cache, eight cores, and 16 threads. It also features a maximum boost clock of 5.0 GHz." data-dimension25="$348" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BTZB7F88" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1152px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="2nKXRKFKLDmzEp7Kgd9p7N" name="1696697779.jpg" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2nKXRKFKLDmzEp7Kgd9p7N.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1152" height="648" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a><p>This chip is among the fastest gaming CPUs on the market and drops into modern AM5 motherboards, featuring 96MB of L3 cache with AMD's explosive 3D V-Cache, eight cores, and 16 threads. It also features a maximum boost clock of 5.0 GHz. <a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BTZB7F88" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="38a6589f-661a-4fd3-a8fe-0a1f944b0897" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="This chip is among the fastest gaming CPUs on the market and drops into modern AM5 motherboards, featuring 96MB of L3 cache with AMD's explosive 3D V-Cache, eight cores, and 16 threads. It also features a maximum boost clock of 5.0 GHz." data-dimension48="This chip is among the fastest gaming CPUs on the market and drops into modern AM5 motherboards, featuring 96MB of L3 cache with AMD's explosive 3D V-Cache, eight cores, and 16 threads. It also features a maximum boost clock of 5.0 GHz." data-dimension25="$348">View Deal</a></p></div><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="792a7bb5-f517-49ba-b12d-387cd5f94057" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="The Intel Core i9-14900K is a fully overclocked 24-core processor comes with eight performance and 16 efficiency cores, and is still one of the best Intel options if you're looking for a new gaming CPU. Use code FTTF84 at checkout." data-dimension48="The Intel Core i9-14900K is a fully overclocked 24-core processor comes with eight performance and 16 efficiency cores, and is still one of the best Intel options if you're looking for a new gaming CPU. Use code FTTF84 at checkout." data-dimension25="$389.99" href="https://www.amazon.com/i9-14900K-Desktop-Processor-Integrated-Graphics/dp/B0CGJDKLB8" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1280px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:120.78%;"><img id="XgkmCsVYS3HW3hcAQzhBEi" name="1752130963.jpg" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XgkmCsVYS3HW3hcAQzhBEi.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1280" height="1546" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a><p>The Intel Core i9-14900K is a fully overclocked 24-core processor comes with eight performance and 16 efficiency cores, and is still one of the best Intel options if you're looking for a new gaming CPU. <br><br>Use code <strong>FTTF84 </strong>at checkout. <a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.amazon.com/i9-14900K-Desktop-Processor-Integrated-Graphics/dp/B0CGJDKLB8" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="792a7bb5-f517-49ba-b12d-387cd5f94057" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="The Intel Core i9-14900K is a fully overclocked 24-core processor comes with eight performance and 16 efficiency cores, and is still one of the best Intel options if you're looking for a new gaming CPU. Use code FTTF84 at checkout." data-dimension48="The Intel Core i9-14900K is a fully overclocked 24-core processor comes with eight performance and 16 efficiency cores, and is still one of the best Intel options if you're looking for a new gaming CPU. Use code FTTF84 at checkout." data-dimension25="$389.99">View Deal</a></p></div><p><em>Here are our standout CPU deals from the Prime Day event, which is currently taking place. See our best overall picks below.</em></p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-best-cpu-for-gaming-in-2026-at-a-glance-more-info-below"><span>Best CPU for Gaming in 2026 at a glance (more info below):</span></h3><div ><table><thead><tr><th class="firstcol " ><p>CPU</p></th><th  ><p><strong>Best CPU for Gaming</strong></p></th><th  ><p><strong>Alternate</strong></p></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><strong>Overall Best CPU for Gaming: $300 to $400</strong></p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0DKFMSMYK"><strong>Ryzen 7 9800X3D (Buy)</strong></a> <a href="#section-best-cpu-for-gaming-2025-300-to-400">[More]</a></p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-9700X-16-Thread-Unlocked-Processor/dp/B0D6NMDNNX">Ryzen 7 9700X (Buy)</a> | <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Intel%C2%AE-CoreTM-Processor-270K-P-cores/dp/B0GMLJCBBM/">Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus (Buy)</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><strong>Mid-Range Best CPU for Gaming: $200 to $300</strong></p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Intel%C2%AE-CoreTM-Processor-250K-P-cores/dp/B0GMKXVVJQ/"><strong>Core Ultra 5 250K Plus (Buy)</strong>  </a><a href="#section-mid-range-best-cpu-for-gaming-200-to-300">[More]</a></p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-7600X3D-Raphael-4-1GHz-Processor/dp/B0F9XH8DBP">Ryzen 5 7600X3D (Buy)</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><strong>Highest Performance Best CPU for Gaming: $400+</strong></p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0GTRTJSNZ"><strong>AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D2 (Buy)</strong></a> <a href="#section-highest-performance-best-cpu-for-gaming-400">[More]</a></p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.bestbuy.com/site/intel-core-i9-14900k-14th-gen-24-core-32-thread-4-4ghz-6-0ghz-turbo-socket-lga-1700-unlocked-desktop-processor-multi/6560418.p">Core i9-14900K (Buy)</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><strong>Budget Best CPU for Gaming: $100 to $150</strong></p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-7600X-12-Thread-Unlocked-Processor/dp/B0BBJDS62N/"><strong>Ryzen 5 7600X (Buy)</strong></a><strong> </strong> <a href="#section-best-budget-cpu-pick-100-to-150">[More]</a></p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-5600-12-Thread-Unlocked-Processor/dp/B09VCHR1VH">AMD Ryzen 5 5600 (Buy)</a></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><strong>Entry-Level Best CPU for Gaming: (iGPU)</strong></p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-8500G-12-Thread-Processor/dp/B0CQ4JV8D5/ref=asc_df_B0CQ4JV8D5"><strong>Ryzen 5 8600G (Buy) </strong></a><a href="#section-entry-level-best-cpu-for-gaming-for-gaming-on-integrated-gpus">[More]</a></p></td><td  ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/amd-ryzen-5-5600g-ryzen-5-5000-g-series/p/N82E16819113683">AMD Ryzen 5 5600G (Buy)</a></p></td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>The list below is for the best CPUs for gaming, while the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cheap-cpus,5668.html">best budget CPUs</a> can help you find a cheap chip. Processors benefit from the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/best-picks/best-thermal-paste">best thermal paste</a>, so check out our guide if you're shopping for a new processor. But if you're after the best CPU for gaming, you're in the right place.</p><h2 id="best-cpu-for-gaming-benchmarks">Best CPU for Gaming Benchmarks</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jBp8pv3MTsgV9U2yXWjp9f.png" alt="CPU Benchmark Rankings" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/inLKtbMy7MiHA6ZRPj8nAf.png" alt="CPU Benchmark Rankings" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DDw3RLrourqMvUZa2Ugp9f.png" alt="CPU Benchmark Rankings" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SmDdzbKGWsiS2fFtifxNCf.png" alt="CPU Benchmark Rankings" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ck86DgAJZmSd2VC8TuvXJJ.png" alt="Best CPUs for Gaming" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/buLzVUJhvMUqjHoPkDFWCJ.png" alt="Best CPUs for Gaming" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VuBvEjzMNKLtxMNcgFhiKD.png" alt="Best CPU for Gaming" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Ji7YTauVU7NRDubw38HbPD.png" alt="Best CPU for Gaming" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HzakxstHL5pFCDqjVnTs4W.png" alt="CPU benchmark hierarchy" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NmQ9vd4L2xwGmbWp55UYiH.png" alt="CPU Benchmarks" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/K9qmnd9wJvvBVi53KQLLdH.png" alt="CPU Benchmarks" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/X7m4xTnr8p4E2qf8xx5Y3V.png" alt="CPU Hierarchy" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bMp3CkuZdToqCCuZEuaGSV.png" alt="CPU Hierarchy" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tsqVwJetsB7L9BazpFkheZ.png" alt="CPU Benchmarks" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dXQmGZbdFLC5izEoqZVB8Z.png" alt="CPU Benchmarks" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>We rank all the Intel and AMD processors based on our in-depth <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">CPU benchmarks</a> hierarchy. You can see some of those numbers in the charts above, including <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/how-to/how-to-overclock-a-cpu">CPU overclock</a> performance results (marked as PBO for AMD processors). We're currently retesting all of these processors with the Nvidia RTX 5090, but only the first four slides have that testing. The remainder are historical testing results with the RTX 4090, which we'll remove once we have fully retested all of the gaming CPUs with the RTX 5090 for our benchmarks. This group of results comprises only the chips that have passed through our newest test suite. Additionally, the tables in our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">CPU benchmark</a> hierarchy include rankings based on past CPU benchmarks and breakdowns of single- and multi-threaded performance in productivity applications across a broad spate of processors. Finally, be aware that the pricing in the charts above can fluctuate.</p><h2 id="quick-shopping-tips">Quick Shopping Tips</h2><p>When choosing the best CPU for gaming in 2026, consider the following:</p><ul><li><strong>You can't lose with AMD or Intel:</strong> As noted in our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/features/amd-vs-intel-cpus">AMD vs. Intel feature</a>, AMD tends to make the best all-around CPU for gaming for mainstream PCs lately, but both offer compelling performance options at any given price point.</li><li><strong>Eight cores is sufficient for gaming: </strong>If you’re looking at a pricey flagship, you’re likely wasting some money if gaming is your primary focus. You can game on as little as a quad-core CPU, but performance scaling really falls off past eight cores.</li><li><strong>Budget platform costs: </strong>You never want to pair a strong CPU with a weak GPU, RAM, and storage. Right now, it’s especially important to consider platform costs, however. DDR5 prices are peaking, and you’ll need to factor in the cost of DDR5 and a new motherboard if you’re coming from an older socket like AM4.</li><li><strong>Overclocking isn’t for everyone, </strong>but if you follow our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/how-to/how-to-overclock-a-cpu">How to Overclock a CPU</a> guide, you can scrape out extra performance gains.</li></ul><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-best-cpu-for-gaming-2026-300-to-400"><span>Best CPU for Gaming 2026 - $300 to $400</span></h3><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1280px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:42.81%;"><img id="Zq5UZ53REGfouVuBNjeLqW" name="best-ryzen-7-9800x3d.jpg" alt="AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Zq5UZ53REGfouVuBNjeLqW.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="1280" height="548" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Zq5UZ53REGfouVuBNjeLqW.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: AMD)</span></figcaption></figure><div class="buying-guide-block"><h3 id="1-amd-ryzen-7-9800x3d"><span class="title__text"><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-ryzen-7-9800x3d-review-devastating-gaming-performance">1. AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D</a></span><span class="chunk rating"><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star half"></span></span></h3><div class="_hawk subtitle"><p>Overall Best CPU for Gaming</p></div><p class="specs__container"><strong>Architecture: </strong>Zen 4 | <strong>Socket: </strong>AM5 | <strong>Cores/Threads: </strong>8/16 | <strong>Base Frequency: </strong>4.7GHz | <strong>Top Boost Frequency: </strong>5.2GHz | <strong>TDP: </strong>120W</p><div class="hawk-wrapper"></div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">The fastest gaming CPU money can buy</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Productivity performance</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Power consumption and efficiency</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Reasonable cooling requirements</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Fully overclockable</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">Similarly-priced chips are faster in productivity work</div></div><p>The Ryzen 7 9800X3D technically isn’t the fastest gaming chip on the market any more. That title goes to the new Ryzen 7 9850X3D, though the victory is marginal. As you can read in our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-ryzen-7-9850x3d-review">Ryzen 7 9850X3D review</a>, AMD’s latest X3D offering pushes ahead by 3.3% on average. Despite a minor uplift, we’re still recommending the Ryzen 7 9800X3D. With prices as they currently are, the Ryzen 7 9850X3D is only 3.3% faster despite costing around 6% more than the Ryzen 7 9800X3D. </p><p>This chip really has no peer in the market outside of the Ryzen 7 9850X3D — the Ryzen 7 9800X3D delivers outstanding gaming performance, beating Intel's fastest gaming chip, the $469 Core i9-14900K, by 30% in our test suite. The 9800X3D is also almost unbelievably 35% faster than the current-gen Intel flagship, the <a href="https://www.newegg.com/intel-core-ultra-9-285k-arrow-lake-lga-1851-processor/p/N82E16819118505">$560</a> <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-ultra-9-285k-cpu-review" target="_blank">Core Ultra 9 285K</a>. The stock Ryzen 7 9800X3D's 1% low frame rates (a good smoothness indicator) also deliver an exceptionally smooth gaming experience, benefiting gamers even in GPU-limited scenarios.</p><p>The Ryzen 7 9800X3D has eight cores and 16 threads that operate at a 4.7 GHz base and 5.2 GHz boost clock rate. The chip employs AMD's 3D V-Cache tech with a new spin, which places a 3D-stacked SRAM chiplet underneath the die to deliver an incredible 96MB of L3 cache to great effect. AMD moved the L3 cache chiplet from the top to the bottom of the compute die this generation. That gives the integrated heat spreader (IHS) direct access to the compute die, allowing for more thermal headroom, and in turn, higher clock speeds. The end result is a comparatively low-power chip that delivers incredible gaming performance and comparable productivity performance to other eight-core models on the market.</p><p>3D V-Cache previously came with trade-offs in the productivity department, but that’s not the case with the Ryzen 7 9800X3D. Still, 3D V-Cache doesn’t provide a performance benefit in every game, and the performance benefit is less pronounced as your display resolution climbs. </p><p>The Ryzen 7 9800X3D has much lower power consumption than the Intel competition, making it a far cooler processor that won't require as expensive accommodations, like a beefy cooler, motherboard, and power supply. It also takes particularly well to undervolting, which is easy to accomplish with AMD’s Curve Optimizer. That means the 9800X3D delivers top-notch gaming performance and a cooler, quieter, and less expensive system than you'll get with an Ultra 9 or Core i9.</p><p><strong>Read: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-ryzen-7-9800x3d-review-devastating-gaming-performance"><strong>AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D Review</strong></a></p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1280px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:42.81%;"><img id="J8JCUviRRuFAnJTXmKboC8" name="AMD Ryzen 7 9700X best cpu hero.jpg" alt="AMD Ryzen 7 9700X" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/J8JCUviRRuFAnJTXmKboC8.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="1280" height="548" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/J8JCUviRRuFAnJTXmKboC8.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: AMD)</span></figcaption></figure><div class="buying-guide-block"><h3 id="amd-ryzen-7-9700x"><span class="title__text">AMD Ryzen 7 9700X</span><span class="chunk rating"><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star half"></span></span></h3><div class="_hawk subtitle"><p>Overall Best CPU for Gaming — First Alternate Pick</p></div><p class="specs__container"><strong>Architecture: </strong>Zen 5 | <strong>Socket: </strong>AM5 | <strong>Cores/Threads: </strong>8 / 16 | <strong>Base Frequency: </strong>3.8 GHz | <strong>Top Boost Frequency: </strong>5.5 GHz | <strong>TDP: </strong>65W</p><div class="hawk-wrapper"></div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Solid gaming performance for the price points</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Decent pricing</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Low power consumption, excellent efficiency</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Easy to cool</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Class-leading single-threaded performance</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Native AVX-512 support</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">No bundled cooler</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">Trails competitors in heavily-threaded productivity work</div></div><p>The <a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0D6NMDNNX">$305</a> <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-ryzen-5-9600x-cpu-review">Ryzen 7 9700X</a> had a rough initial product launch, but AMD's targeted firmware and operating system improvements have changed the picture tremendously, allowing the chip to place much higher on our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">CPU benchmark</a> hierarchy (head there for the most up-to-date gaming benchmarks). Combined with lower-than-launch pricing, the Ryzen 7 9700X is a strong contender, tying Intel's Core i9-14900K in gaming and beating the Core i7-14700K. That's not to mention that it beats Intel's entire lineup of Arrow Lake processors as well. Now, all of those processors offer faster performance in heavily-threaded productivity applications than the 9700X, but when it comes to a pure gaming experience, the 9700X either ties or beats all current Intel competitors. </p><p>The Ryzen 7 9700X has eight Zen 5 cores with 16 threads that operate at a 3.8 GHz base and 5.5 GHz boost clock. The chip has a 65W TDP, though AMD retroactively added a 105W TDP option you can select in the BIOS that helps boost performance in productivity applications. It's covered by the warranty, as well. With either setting, the 9700X has comparatively tame power consumption, so it is an easy chip to cool. You'll have to buy your own cooler for the processor, though.  </p><p>The Ryzen 7 9700X drops into socket AM5 motherboards, and B-series motherboards make the most sense for this class of chip. B850 and B840 motherboards get AMD's latest chipset with features like mandatory PCIe 5.0 support on the top M.2 slot and better availability for features like Wi-Fi 7. However, the Ryzen 7 9700X will still work with the older B650 chipset if you can find a board on sale. </p><p><strong>Read: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-ryzen-5-9600x-cpu-review"><strong>Ryzen 5 9700X Review</strong></a></p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Intel%C2%AE-CoreTM-Processor-270K-P-cores/dp/B0GMLJCBBM/"><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1193px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:42.83%;"><img id="YQaAkdfMaEdfmBkp6LRCZj" name="270k plus best cpus" alt="Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus box." src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YQaAkdfMaEdfmBkp6LRCZj.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="1193" height="511" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YQaAkdfMaEdfmBkp6LRCZj.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Intel)</span></figcaption></figure></a><div class="buying-guide-block"><h3 id="intel-core-ultra-7-270k-plus"><span class="title__text"><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-ultra-7-270k-plus-review">Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus</a></span><span class="chunk rating"><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star half"></span></span></h3><div class="_hawk subtitle"><p>Overall Best CPU for Gaming — Second Alternate Pick</p></div><p class="specs__container"><strong>Architecture: </strong>Arrow Lake Refresh | <strong>Socket: </strong>LGA 1851 | <strong>Cores/Threads: </strong>24 (8P+16E) / 24 | <strong>Base Frequency: </strong>3.7 GHz | <strong>Top Boost Frequency: </strong>5.5 GHz | <strong>Processor Base Power: </strong>125W</p><div class="hawk-wrapper"></div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Chart-topping application performance</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Significant price cut</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">iBOT shows a lot of promise in games and applications</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Large improvements over the 265K</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">Big increase in power demands</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">LGA 1851 is on its way out the door</div></div><p>The <a href="https://www.newegg.com/intel-core-ultra-7-270k-plus-core-ultra-7-series-2-arrow-lake-refresh-lga-1851-desktop-cpu-processor/p/N82E16819118628?srsltid=AfmBOop2k_wLJRqKty9TRK58M2nebb3JDQKrTt0Ka4l0PPD0HEIj3arb">$350</a> Core Ultra 7 270K Plus performs like a flagship CPU, but it costs about half as much. In games, it narrowly outclasses the Core i7-14700K and offers a 2.4% boost over the competing Ryzen 7 9700X. AMD’s last-gen Ryzen 7 7800X3D still offers around a 10% boost over the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus, but it’s also around $50 to $80 more expensive depending on sales. </p><p>It’s a solid gaming CPU, and certainly a better recommendation than the Core i7-14700K given prices right now. Compared to the Ryzen 7 9700X, things are tighter. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus gains an edge with productivity performance. Short of the 9950X, it’s at the top of our multithreaded performance rankings, more than doubling the performance of the Ryzen 7 9700X. </p><p>On the gaming front, it supports Intel’s new Binary Optimization Tool, which offers an average of an 8% improvement in gaming performance based on our testing. It’s only available in a limited number of games at the moment, but Intel says it plans to support the feature with updates in the future. </p><p>For specs, the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is close to the 285K. It comes with 24 cores and threads, split across eight Lion Cove P-cores and 16 Darkmont E-cores. The P-cores boost up to 5.4 GHz and the E-cores can climb to 4.7 GHz. Across the CPU, you get a total of 76 MB of combined L2 and L3 cache. It comes with a 125W TDP and 250W MTP. Critically, the Core Ultra 270K Plus also comes with a 900 MHz boost in die-to-die frequency and 400 MHz boost in fabric frequency compared to stock Arrow Lake chips. </p><p>The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus slots into existing 800-series motherboards with the LGA 1851 socket. This is an unlocked chip, so if you want to get the full benefits of overclocking, you’ll need a Z890 board. However, it’ll still work with H- and B-series motherboards, just without CPU overclocking support. </p><p><strong>Read: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-ultra-7-270k-plus-review"><strong>Core Ultra 7 270K Plus Review</strong></a></p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-mid-range-best-cpu-for-gaming-200-to-300"><span>Mid-Range Best CPU for Gaming - $200 to $300</span></h3><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Intel%C2%AE-CoreTM-Processor-250K-P-cores/dp/B0GMKXVVJQ/"><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1311px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:42.79%;"><img id="AM2JJmBMKE4shaqw3zdEXa" name="250k plus best cpus" alt="Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus box." src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/AM2JJmBMKE4shaqw3zdEXa.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="1311" height="561" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/AM2JJmBMKE4shaqw3zdEXa.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Intel)</span></figcaption></figure></a><div class="buying-guide-block"><h3 id="2-intel-core-ultra-5-250k-plus"><span class="title__text"><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-ultra-5-250k-plus-review">2. Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus</a></span><span class="chunk rating"><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span></span></h3><div class="_hawk subtitle"><p>Mid-Range Best CPU for Gaming</p></div><p class="specs__container"><strong>Architecture: </strong>Arrow Lake Refresh | <strong>Socket: </strong>LGA 1851 | <strong>Cores/Threads: </strong>18 (6P + 12E) / 18 | <strong>Base Frequency: </strong>4.2 GHz | <strong>Top Boost Frequency: </strong>5.3 GHz | <strong>Processor Base Power: </strong>125W</p><div class="hawk-wrapper"></div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Inexpensive at only $200</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Often competes with chips that are twice as expensive in heavily-threaded workloads</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Reasonably efficient</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Matches the Ryzen 5 9600X in gaming</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Easy to cool</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">LGA 1851 is a dead-end platform</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">Some applications still struggle with Arrow Lake more broadly</div></div><p>Intel has returned to gaming prominence with its Arrow Lake Refresh CPUs, and nowhere is that clearer than with the <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Intel%C2%AE-CoreTM-Processor-250K-P-cores/dp/B0GMKXVVJQ">$220 Core Ultra 5 250K Plus</a>. It’s priced like a budget CPU at $220, but it can perform as well (and sometimes even better) than chips that cost twice as much. It doesn’t dominate the gaming charts in the same way as AMD’s X3D offerings, but at this price, it doesn’t need to. It offers marginally better performance than AMD’s competing six-core Ryzen 5 9600X in games while running the tables with application performance.</p><p>On average, the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is 1% faster than the Ryzen 5 9600X at 1080p, and 9% faster than the 245K. It’s functionally identical, but Intel’s new iBOT feature allows the chip to hold some solid leads in certain titles. For instance, it’s 10% ahead of the 9600X in <em>Cyberpunk 2077. </em>Even in a non-iBOT title like <em>Doom: The Dark Ages, </em>the 250K Plus leads by 12%. There are still some games that struggle with the unique Arrow Lake architecture like <em>F1 2024, </em>but the losses are less pronounced with the souped-up Arrow Lake Refresh chips compared to the stock offerings. </p><p>The application performance is what really stands out with the 250K Plus, however. With 18 cores, it outpaces the Core i7-13700K, nearly matches the Core i7-14700K, and more than doubles the performance of the Ryzen 5 9600X in multithreaded applications. In single-threaded applications, it beats the Ryzen 5 9600X by 6%. </p><p>Although you get 18 cores, they’re split between six Lion Cove performance cores and 12 Darkmont efficient cores. The P-cores climb up to 5.3 GHz, while the E-cores top out at 4.6 GHz. The CPU comes with a combined 60 MB of L2 and L3 cache, along with a TDP of 125W and a MTP of 159W. Like all Arrow Lake chips, it doesn’t support Hyper-Threading, so you get 18 total threads. </p><p>The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus slots into existing motherboards with the LGA 1851 socket. It’s unlocked for overclocking, so a Z-series motherboard is an ideal pairing. However, Intel increased the die-to-die frequency and the fabric frequency out of the box, and you’ll see those improvements in action on B- and H-series motherboards, as well. It’s locked to DDR5 memory, unlike Raptor Lake and Alder Lake platforms, and it officially supports speeds up to 7200MT/s. </p><p><strong>Read: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-ultra-5-250k-plus-review"><strong>Core Ultra 5 250K Plus Review</strong></a></p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0F9XH8DBP"><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1553px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:42.82%;"><img id="uLZK8FNKmHSPC4nVGE9CGi" name="7600x3d-best-cpu" alt="Ryzen 5 7600X3D box." src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uLZK8FNKmHSPC4nVGE9CGi.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="1553" height="665" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uLZK8FNKmHSPC4nVGE9CGi.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: AMD/Getty)</span></figcaption></figure></a><div class="buying-guide-block"><h3 id="amd-ryzen-5-7600x3d"><span class="title__text"><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-ryzen-5-7600x3d-review">AMD Ryzen 5 7600X3D</a></span><span class="chunk rating"><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span></span></h3><div class="_hawk subtitle"><p>Mid-Range Best CPU for Gaming - Alternate Pick</p></div><p class="specs__container"><strong>Architecture: </strong>Zen 4 X3D | <strong>Socket: </strong>AM5 | <strong>Cores/Threads: </strong>6 / 12 | <strong>Base Frequency: </strong>4.1 GHz | <strong>Top Boost Frequency: </strong>4.7 GHz | <strong>TDP: </strong>65W</p><div class="hawk-wrapper"></div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Only slightly slower than Ryzen 7 7800X3D in games</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Often demands less than 70W when gaming</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Inexpensive, and finally available online</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Easy to cool</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">No bundled cooler</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">Core Ultra 5 250K Plus offers twice the multithreaded performance at around the same price</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">Locked multiplier</div></div><p>The <a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-7600X3D-Raphael-4-1GHz-Processor/dp/B0F9XH8DBP/">$230 Ryzen 5 7600X3D</a> is currently the best value gaming CPU you can get right now, though it trades performance in other areas to reach that status. It's just 4.5% slower than the Ryzen 7 7800X3D based on our testing, giving you most of the performance of AMD's coveted 3D V-Cache in games without the extra cost. </p><p>In games, it outclasses more expensive CPUs with ease, including the Ryzen 7 9700X, and averaged just 65W of power draw during our gaming tests. Outside of games, however, the Ryzen 5 7600 X3D struggles. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is more than twice as fast in multithreaded performance, and in single-threaded performance, even the base Ryzen 5 7600X is around 13% faster. </p><p>The lagging productivity performance makes sense. The Ryzen 5 7600X3D is a six-core / 12-thread chip, so it has limited multithreaded potential, and it only clocks up to 4.7 GHz. The limited specs give AMD room to cram 102 MB of combined L2/L3 cache on the die, however, which comes with a sizeable boost in gaming performance. Compared to the base Ryzen 5 7600X, the X3D version is 22% faster despite coming in at lower peak clocks and power draw. </p><p>You can slot the Ryzen 5 7600X3D into socket AM5, which is available on 600- and 800-series motherboards, though the latter may require a BIOS update. Memory and CPU overclocking is available on both B- and X-series chipsets; however, the Ryzen 5 7600X3D has a locked multiplier, so the only overclocking you can access is through AMD's Precision Boost Overdrive, or PBO. </p><p><strong>Read: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-ryzen-5-7600x3d-review"><strong>Ryzen 5 7600X3D review</strong></a></p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-highest-performance-best-cpu-for-gaming-400"><span>Highest Performance Best CPU for Gaming - $400+</span></h3><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1269px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:42.87%;"><img id="UVpfPS52uTibnDKdpYnNgK" name="3rafedfg" alt="9950X3D2 Box." src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UVpfPS52uTibnDKdpYnNgK.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="1269" height="544" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UVpfPS52uTibnDKdpYnNgK.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: AMD / Getty)</span></figcaption></figure><div class="buying-guide-block"><h3 id="3-amd-ryzen-9-9950x3d2"><span class="title__text"><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-ryzen-9-9950x3d2-review">3. AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D2</a></span><span class="chunk rating"><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star half"></span></span></h3><div class="_hawk subtitle"><p>Highest Performance Best CPU for Gaming</p></div><p class="specs__container"><strong>Architecture: </strong>Zen 5 | <strong>Socket: </strong>AM5 | <strong>Cores/Threads: </strong>16/32 | <strong>Base Frequency: </strong>4.3 GHz | <strong>Top Boost Frequency: </strong>5.6 GHz | <strong>TDP: </strong>200W</p><div class="hawk-wrapper"></div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Matches the Ryzen 7 9800X3D in games</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Around 4% faster in multithreaded performance compared to 9950X3D</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Double-digit improvements in some specialized workloads</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Unlocked multiplier for overclocking</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">Very expensive</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">Slight regressions in single-threaded workloads</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">Higher power consumption</div></div><p>How do you improve upon a CPU that already claims a dominating position in gaming <em>and </em>productivity workloads? You add more cache, of course. The Ryzen 9 9950X3D2 is powerful, expensive, and hungry for wattage, but it’s the best of the best if you want top-shelf gaming and application performance. It throws value out the window, and it’s only marginally better than the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-ryzen-9-9950x3d-review">Ryzen 9 9950X3D</a>, but it is still better. </p><p>Based on our testing, it’s about 3.9% ahead of the Ryzen 9 9950X3D in multithreaded applications, and in lockstep in gaming at 1080p. Compared to Intel’s Core Ultra 7 270K Plus, the Ryzen 9 9950X3D2 is 9% ahead in multithreaded performance and 23% ahead in average gaming performance. The Ryzen 7 9800X3D delivers a better value on the gaming front, and the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is a monster productivity chip at a third of the price of the 9950X3D2. But the magic trick of this chip is that it can do both without breaking a sweat. </p><p>Under the hood, the Ryzen 9 9950X3D2 is similar to the Ryzen 9 9950X3D. It’s a 16-core / 32-thread chip packing AMD’s Zen 5 architecture, and it tops out with a 5.6 GHz boost clock; just 100MHz behind the 9950X3D. As the name suggests, this processor is unique because it uses AMD’s 3D V-Cache on both CCDs. Both eight-core CCDs have 32 MB of onboard cache, plus an additional 64 MB chunk placed under the cores, giving you a total of 192 MB of L3 cache. </p><p>The extra cache slightly accelerates multithreaded performance overall, though only by around 4%. There are specific workloads where the advantage is more present, with some data science workloads showing performance gains in the realm of 26% over the Ryzen 9 9950X3D. Those specific workstation-class workloads are where the Ryzen 9 9950X3D2 earns its stripes. </p><p>Otherwise, it’s the chip to buy because you simply want the best, no matter what the cost or how marginal the improvements are. It slots into existing AM5 motherboards, and it’s best suited for newer 800-series chipsets. AMD officially supports memory speeds up to DDR5-5600, though we find that DDR5-6000 is the sweet spot for Zen 5 CPUs.</p><p>Prices have dropped since release, though the 9950X3D2 is still expensive. It launched at $1,000, but you can find the <a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-RyzenTM-9-9950X3D2-Dual/dp/B0GTRTJSNZ/">chip for around $900 now</a>. </p><p><strong>Read: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-ryzen-9-9950x3d2-review"><strong>AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D2 Review</strong></a></p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1280px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:42.81%;"><img id="7wCcomZPsgJRP4PjNnvwXW" name="Intel Core i9-14900K Best CPUs hero.jpg" alt="Intel - Core i9-14900K" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7wCcomZPsgJRP4PjNnvwXW.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="1280" height="548" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7wCcomZPsgJRP4PjNnvwXW.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Intel)</span></figcaption></figure><div class="buying-guide-block"><h3 id="intel-core-i9-14900k"><span class="title__text">Intel Core i9-14900K</span><span class="chunk rating"><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span></span></h3><div class="_hawk subtitle"><p>Highest Performance Best CPU for Gaming - Alternate Pick</p></div><p class="specs__container"><strong>Architecture: </strong>Raptor Lake Refresh | <strong>Socket: </strong>LGA 1700 | <strong>Cores/Threads: </strong>16 (8P+16E) / 32 | <strong>Base Frequency: </strong>3.2 | <strong>Top Boost Frequency: </strong>6.0 | <strong>Processor Base Power: </strong>125W</p><div class="hawk-wrapper"></div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Solid gaming performance</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Competitive pricing</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Incredible overclocking headroom</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">DDR5 and PCIe 5.0</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Single- and Multi-threaded performance</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">No bundled cooler</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">Needs a powerful cooler for the best performance</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">Power consumption</div></div><p>The prior-gen <a href="https://www.amazon.com/i9-14900K-Desktop-Processor-Integrated-Graphics/dp/B0CGJDKLB8?th=1">$469</a> <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-core-i9-14900k-cpu-review">Core i9-14900K</a> is now selling for all-time low pricing, primarily because the newer <a href="https://www.newegg.com/intel-core-ultra-9-285k-arrow-lake-lga-1851-processor/p/N82E16819118505">$560</a> <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-ultra-9-285k-cpu-review">Core Ultra 9 285K</a> has arrived to take its place. However, the Core Ultra 9 285K is actually slower than the 14900K in gaming, so it isn't a suitable replacement.  The new Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is marginally slower based on our testing, as well. Even in the face of Intel’s 200S Boost update, which was meant improve gaming performance, the competitive landscape remains unchanged. In our testing, the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/we-tested-intels-unreleased-200s-boost-feature-7-percent-higher-gaming-performance-thanks-to-memory-overclocking-now-covered-by-the-warranty">Core Ultra 9 285K gained an average of 7%</a> from the update, which means it’s still slower than the Core i9-14900K. </p><p>You should be aware that the much more economically-priced 14700K (listed above) is only 2% slower than the 14900K in gaming but costs over $100 less. The Ryzen 7 9700X, also listed above, is also less expensive and effectively ties the 14900K in gaming.</p><p>However, there are Intel fans willing to pay extra for the absolute most gaming performance they can get from an Intel platform. Also, the 14900K does offer more multi-threaded horsepower than the 14700K and 9700X, which could be useful if you game, stream, and record simultaneously or do other heavy multi-tasking while gaming. Just make sure that your use case justifies the extra cost. </p><p>The 14900K sports leading-edge connectivity, supporting DDR4-3200 or up to DDR5-5600 memory, along with 16 lanes of PCIe 5.0 and an additional four lanes of PCIe 4.0 from the chip for M.2 SSDs.</p><p>The chip comes with eight P-cores that support Hyper-Threading and 16 single-threaded E-cores for a total of 32 threads. The P-cores have a 3.2 GHz base, and peak frequencies reach an amazing 6.0 GHz with Turbo Boost Max 3.0 (this feature is only active on P-cores). Meanwhile, the E-cores have a 2.4 GHz base and stretch up to 4.4 GHz via the standard Turbo Boost 2.0 algorithms. The chip also has 36MB of L3 cache and 32MB of L2.<br><br>This 14900K has a 125W PBP (base) and 253W MTP (peak) power rating, but we recorded considerably lower power consumption than its prior-gen counterpart. You'll need to buy a capable cooler for the chip, and you'll also need either a 700-series or 600-series motherboard. Like other Raptor Lake Refresh chips, you can find DDR4 and DDR5 motherboards, though you’ll need to go with a DDR5 board for the highest performance. </p><p>The lower price of DDR4 might entice some gamers, but you'll lose anywhere from 5-8% of gaming performance with higher-end Intel chips. You can step up to the much more expensive DDR5 if you need access to more memory throughput and, thus, every bit of performance possible. </p><p>Beyond specs, the Core i9-14900K was at the center of a years-long controversy concerning instability. An error in the microcode (CPU firmware) meant the Core i9-14900K would degrade faster than expected, starting with instability in games. Intel has <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/raptor-lake-instability-saga-continues-as-intel-releases-0x12f-update-to-fix-vmin-instability">rectified the issue with microcode 0x12F</a>, so make sure you update your BIOS immediately if you pick up Intel’s last-gen flagship</p><p><strong>Read: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-core-i9-14900k-cpu-review"><strong>Intel Core i9-14900K Review</strong></a></p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-best-budget-cpu-pick-100-to-150"><span>Best Budget CPU Pick - $100 to $150</span></h3><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1280px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:42.81%;"><img id="EHtpZ9Kmqhyw6UCYdD6FzF" name="ryzen 5 7600x best cpu hero" alt="Ryzen 5 7600X" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EHtpZ9Kmqhyw6UCYdD6FzF.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="1280" height="548" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EHtpZ9Kmqhyw6UCYdD6FzF.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><div class="buying-guide-block"><h3 id="4-amd-ryzen-5-7600x"><span class="title__text"><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-9-7950x-ryzen-5-7600x-cpu-review">4. AMD Ryzen 5 7600X</a></span><span class="chunk rating"><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span></span></h3><div class="_hawk subtitle"><p>Best Budget CPU for Gaming</p></div><p class="specs__container"><strong>Architecture: </strong>Zen 4 | <strong>Socket: </strong>AM5 | <strong>Cores/Threads: </strong>6/12 | <strong>Base Frequency: </strong>4.7GHz | <strong>Top Boost Frequency: </strong>5.3GHz | <strong>TDP: </strong>105W</p><div class="hawk-wrapper"></div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">PCIe 5.0 </div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Great pricing</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Solid gaming performance compared to Zen 5</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">DDR5 only</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">High power consumption for six-core part</div></div><p>The <a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-7600X-12-Thread-Unlocked-Processor/dp/B0BBJDS62N/">$164</a> Ryzen 5 7600X is an attractive budget CPU at its new price, forced down by Intel's new Arrow Lake Refresh chips. It’s marginally slower than the Ryzen 5 9600X, but also marginally cheaper – the Ryzen 5 7600X offers about 90% of the performance of the Ryzen 5 9600X for 94% of the price. It’s a slightly worse value, but it’s still a good option to keep in mind, especially if you find it on sale. The Ryzen 5 7600, sans X, is available at around the same price. We’ve yet to see it drop below the Ryzen 5 7600X, however. </p><p>With the 7600X, you get six cores and 12 threads based on the Zen 4 architecture, clocked at 4.7GHz with boost speeds up to 5.3GHz. Unlike the Ryzen 5 9600X, the Zen 4-based version comes with a TDP of 105W. Cooling it shouldn’t be an issue, and you’re free to run in AMD’s 65W Eco mode through the Ryzen Master software. </p><p>The Ryzen 5 7600X slots into AM5 motherboards, including 600- and 800-series chipsets, and it supports PCIe 5.0. DDR5 is required, which is a tough pill to swallow at this bang-for-your-buck price point, but it’s hard to avoid soaring RAM prices. </p><p><strong>Read: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-9-7950x-ryzen-5-7600x-cpu-review"><strong>Ryzen 5 7600X review</strong></a></p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1280px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="" name="AMD Ryzen 5 5600X best page.jpg" alt="AMD Ryzen 5 5600" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Ez2oCy4jPEQTUQn5mx3D2i.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="1280" height="720" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Ez2oCy4jPEQTUQn5mx3D2i.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: AMD)</span></figcaption></figure><div class="buying-guide-block"><h3 id="amd-ryzen-5-5600"><span class="title__text">AMD Ryzen 5 5600</span><span class="chunk rating"><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star half"></span></span></h3><div class="_hawk subtitle"><p>Budget Best CPU for Gaming - Alternative</p></div><p class="specs__container"><strong>Architecture: </strong>Zen 3 | <strong>Socket: </strong>AM4 | <strong>Cores/Threads: </strong>6 / 12 | <strong>Base Frequency: </strong>3.7GHz | <strong>Top Boost Frequency: </strong>4.6GHz | <strong>TDP: </strong>65W</p><div class="hawk-wrapper"></div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Competent gaming and application performance</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Solid upgrade path for Ryzen 1000 owners</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Bundled CPU Cooler</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Overclockable</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Broad support with 300-series motherboards</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">Value prop is poor vs Intel chips</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">No integrated GPU</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">5500 only supports PCIe 3.0</div></div><p>The <a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-5600-12-Thread-Unlocked-Processor/dp/B09VCHR1VH">$135</a> <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-5-5600-and-ryzen-5-5500-review">AMD Ryzen 5 5600</a> delivers a solid blend of performance in both gaming and productivity applications, bringing a new level of value to the Zen 3 lineup. If you're fine sticking with a previous-gen AM4 motherboard, the Ryzen 5 5600 makes a great base for a budget build. The primary trade-off for the AM4 platform is that you're limited to DDR4, and you don't have access to PCIe 5.0. You also have a limited runway for upgrades, as the fastest gaming CPUs on AM4 – the Ryzen 7 5700X3D and Ryzen 7 5800X3D – have reached end of life. </p><p>The Ryzen 5 5600 also makes an absolutely unbeatable budget chip if you're updating a first-gen Ryzen system. The 5600 unseats the Ryzen 5 5600<strong>X</strong>, a long-time favorite. The 5600X is only a mostly imperceptible ~1% faster in gaming and multi-threaded PC work than the non-X model, but provides a 4% advantage in single-threaded work.<br><br>Our testing shows that the Ryzen 5 5600 generally matches the gaming performance of its more expensive sibling, the ~$230 Ryzen 7 5800X. That makes the 5600 an incredibly well-rounded chip that can handle gaming well, from competitive-class performance with high refresh rate monitors to multi-tasking gaming workloads like streaming, while also serving up more than enough performance for day-to-day productivity apps. As with all AMD CPUs for gaming, you can fully <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/how-to/how-to-overclock-a-cpu">overclock the chip</a>.<br><br>The Ryzen 5 5600 has a 3.7 GHz base and 4.6 GHz boost clock. The chip also has a 65W TDP rating, so it runs cool and quiet. Existing AMD owners with a 500-series motherboard will be happy, as the 5600X drops right into existing 500-, 400-, and 300-series motherboards. If you need a new motherboard to support the chip, AMD's AM4 motherboards are plentiful and relatively affordable, with the B-series lineup offering the best overall value for this class of chip.</p><p>Prices for the Ryzen 5 5600 have drifted upward as stock depletes, but that’s offset by platform costs. In addition to low prices on AM4 motherboards, the Ryzen 5 5600 is limited to DDR4. High DDR5 prices are a significant roadblock to opting for a newer chip, as prices continue to surge. So it’s hard to recommend a newer budget CPU, even if it’ll net you higher performance. In the event you already have a kit of DDR5, the <a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-7600-12-Thread-Unlocked-Processor/dp/B0BMQJWBDM/">$189</a> <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-ryzen-5-7600-cpu-review">Ryzen 5 7600</a> is a compelling option, and it includes AMD’s Wraith Stealth cooler. </p><p><strong>Read: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-5-5600-and-ryzen-5-5500-review"><strong>AMD Ryzen 5 5600 Review</strong></a></p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-entry-level-best-cpu-for-gaming-for-gaming-on-integrated-gpus"><span>Entry-Level Best CPU for Gaming - For gaming on integrated GPUs</span></h3><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1280px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:42.81%;"><img id="rfDfkRsvD4ZavZsGBimQ79" name="ryzen-5-8600g best cpu hero.jpg" alt="AMD Ryzen 5 8600G" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rfDfkRsvD4ZavZsGBimQ79.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="1280" height="548" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rfDfkRsvD4ZavZsGBimQ79.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: AMD)</span></figcaption></figure><div class="buying-guide-block"><h3 id="5-amd-ryzen-5-8600g"><span class="title__text">5. AMD Ryzen 5 8600G</span></h3><div class="_hawk subtitle"><p>Entry-Level Best CPU for Gaming</p></div><p class="specs__container"><strong>Architecture: </strong>Zen 4 | <strong>Socket: </strong>AM5 | <strong>Cores/Threads: </strong>6 / 12 | <strong>Base Frequency: </strong>4.3GHz | <strong>Top Boost Frequency: </strong>5.0GHz | <strong>TDP: </strong>65W</p><div class="hawk-wrapper"></div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">+Passable 1080p in some titles, solid 720p gaming</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">+Hyper-RX support</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">+Bundled coolers</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">+Power efficiency</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">Higher DDR5 pricing, no 8GB options</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">-AM5 motherboards remain pricey</div></div><p>The <a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0CQ4JBKW3">$268</a> Ryzen 7 8700G, AMD's flagship desktop APU, delivers the fastest socketed performance on the market from integrated graphics, bringing passable 1080p gaming to the desktop PC without a discrete graphics card, but its high price point relegates it to a niche audience.</p><p>In contrast, the <a href="https://www.newegg.com/amd-ryzen-5-8600g-ryzen-5-8000-g-series-phoenix-zen-4-socket-am5/p/N82E16819113814" target="_blank">$191</a> <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-ryzen-7-8700g-cpu-review">Ryzen 5 8600G</a> delivers 90% of the 8700G's performance but for ~$80 less, making it a solid alternative for gaming systems that don't use a discrete GPU. </p><p>Naturally, you'll have to accept lower fidelity settings and be realistic about which titles can play at 1080p resolution. Still, AMD's Hyper-RX suite of features, which includes in-driver Radeon Super Resolution upscaling tech, frame generation with AMD Fluid Motion Frames (AFMF), Anti-Lag+, and Radeon Boost, helps boost performance at a slight cost to image quality. This new feature set, a first for AMD's iGPUs, is a boon for budget gamers.</p><p>The Ryzen 5 8600G has six Zen 4 CPU cores and the RDNA 3 GPU engine with eight CUs. The Ryzen 5 8600G drops into the AM5 platform, with value-focused B650 and A620 motherboards being the obvious best combination. These systems offer a new level of connectivity for AMD's APU processors, which were previously on the aging AM4 platform but require DDR5 memory. That adds some cost, so do a value analysis before selecting this processor. If you're looking for the lowest entry price possible with an APU, the Ryzen 5 5600G listed below slots in as the value alternative.</p><p>The Ryzen 7 8600G only supports 16 usable lanes of PCIe 4.0 connectivity, while other processors on the AM5 platform support PCIe 5.0. However, we don't feel this will impact this class of system. </p><p><strong>More: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-ryzen-7-8700g-cpu-review"><strong>AMD Ryzen 7 8700G and Ryzen 5 8600G Review</strong></a></p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1280px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:42.81%;"><img id="QLawvfwQQauGKaSYXFLLh" name="AMD Ryzen 5 5600.jpg" alt="AMD Ryzen 5 5600G" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QLawvfwQQauGKaSYXFLLh.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="1280" height="548" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QLawvfwQQauGKaSYXFLLh.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: AMD)</span></figcaption></figure><div class="buying-guide-block"><h3 id="amd-ryzen-5-5600g"><span class="title__text">AMD Ryzen 5 5600G</span><span class="chunk rating"><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span></span></h3><div class="_hawk subtitle"><p>Entry-Level Best CPU for Gaming — Alternative</p></div><p class="specs__container"><strong>Architecture: </strong>Zen 3 | <strong>Socket: </strong>AM4 | <strong>Cores/Threads: </strong>6/12 | <strong>Base Frequency: </strong>3.9GHz | <strong>Top Boost Frequency: </strong>4.4GHz | <strong>TDP: </strong>65W</p><div class="hawk-wrapper"></div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Stellar price-to-performance ratio</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Faster Zen 3 CPU cores</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Passable 1080p, solid 720p</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Excellent power consumption and efficiency</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Great overclocking headroom</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Bundled cooler</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Compatible with some AM4 motherboards</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">PCIe 3.0 connectivity</div></div><p>The Ryzen 5 5600G steps into the arena as the value champ for APUs, which are chips with strong enough integrated graphics that they don't require a discrete GPU for light gaming—just be sure you're willing to accept lowered quality settings.<br><br>The Ryzen 5 5600G gives you 96% of the gaming performance on integrated graphics than its more expensive sibling, the<a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-5700G-16-Thread-Processor/dp/B091J3NYVF/ref=sr_1_3?crid=IT9Z2VNNXO3N&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.ijK8fV05pyP6t-oXrGHfS-6-lziUUdSyP3tzp6QeU9XQBVMTMZcGRlFPnHwWpNHx3eEuHau6V5pwNEXdd7qo4w.vp5tyIN1MWJ4xqECeoDvCQQTeV9jXxwEvNx4UjLKcFo&dib_tag=se&keywords=5600gt&qid=1732240010&sprefix=5600gt%2Caps%2C282&sr=8-3"> Ryzen 7 5700G</a>, but for 25% less cash. Our testing shows that its level of performance makes it the best value APU on the market. As long as you're willing to sacrifice fidelity and resolution and keep your expectations in check, the Ryzen 5 5600G's Vega graphics have surprisingly good performance in gaming.</p><p>The 5600G's Vega graphics served up comparatively great 1280x720 gaming across numerous titles in our tests, but options become more restricted at 1080p. Of course, you can get away with 1080p gaming, but you'll need to severely limit the fidelity settings with most titles.<br><br>With eight cores and 16 threads that operate at a 3.9 GHz base and boost up to 4.4 GHz, the Ryzen 5 5600G also offers solid performance for its price point in standard desktop PC applications. The chip also comes with a bundled Wraith Stealth cooler, sweetening the value prop, and drops into existing 500-series and some 400-series motherboards, though support on the latter will vary by vendor.</p><p>The Ryzen 5 5600G is nearly five years old, and as a result, it’s hard to find it in stock at a reasonable price. AMD updated this model with the Ryzen 5 5600GT in early 2024, which features identical silicon and a slight boost to clock speed, and you’ll generally find it for less at around <a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-5600GT-12-Thread-Processor/dp/B0CQ4DTJYX/">$150</a>. <br><br>If your budget is tight and you're looking to build a system for modest gaming, you should check out our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cheap-cpus,5668.html">Best Cheap CPU</a> feature. Some of those chips can deliver passable gaming performance without a graphics card, and their prices start at just $55 (£40). </p><p><strong>Read: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-5-5600g-review"><strong>AMD Ryzen 5 5600G Review</strong></a></p><ul><li><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html"><strong>CPU Benchmark</strong></a><strong> Hierarchy</strong></li><li><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/features/amd-vs-intel-cpus"><strong>AMD vs Intel</strong></a></li><li><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cheap-cpus,5668.html"><strong>Best Cheap CPUs</strong></a></li><li><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-performance-cpus,5683.html"><strong>Best CPUs for Workstations</strong></a></li></ul>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Intel Core Ultra 7 255H lands 32% faster than the 155H in PassMark's single-core benchmark ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-ultra-7-255h-lands-32-percent-faster-than-the-155h-in-passmarks-single-core-benchmark</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Arrow Lake on mobile delivers impressive results versus Meteor Lake, thanks to the newer cores and an updated process node. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">jyUT2dKN2Y5Wg5YgyyqbCF</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PKLpo7ve6TAwsg7cqQYoTV-1280-80.png" type="image/png" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Sun, 02 Feb 2025 13:30:00 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 09:52:33 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[CPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ editors@tomshardware.com (Hassam Nasir) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Hassam Nasir ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SxxNFHt95eGK37mKPhJpdZ.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Hassam is a lifelong PC gamer and tech enthusiast with over five years of experience in PC hardware journalism. His passion began in childhood when he rescued a discarded Pentium 4 processor, straightening its pins with a kitchen knife to revive a Dell Dimension 2400 at the age of seven. Since then, he has followed the advancements in technology, witnessing the evolution of hardware from the era of AMD&#039;s Opteron architecture to Intel&#039;s Smithfield (Pentium D), and the rise of Voodoo GPUs alongside Nvidia&#039;s FX GPUs taking the market by storm to the latest innovations today. As a seasoned writer, Hassam loves to get into the nitty-gritty details of hardware, providing insights on everything from CPUs, Motherboards and RAM to GPUs. When he’s not writing, you’ll find him building custom water-cooled PCs for himself and his friends, attending drag racing events, or collecting niche fragrances.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/png" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PKLpo7ve6TAwsg7cqQYoTV-1280-80.png">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Intel]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Intel Arrow Lake]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Intel Arrow Lake]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Intel Arrow Lake]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PKLpo7ve6TAwsg7cqQYoTV-1280-80.png" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Intel's Arrow Lake-based Core Ultra 7 255H appears to have been tested in <a href="https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/6471vs5677/Intel-Ultra-7-255H-vs-Intel-Ultra-7-155H" target="_blank">PassMark</a>, where it outperformed its Meteor Lake equivalent by 32% in single-threaded tests (via <a href="https://x.com/x86deadandback/status/1885730383280435572" target="_blank">x86deadandback </a>at X). Across a wide variety of metrics, the 255H is roughly 15% faster in CPU Mark, which is PassMark's proprietary metric for gauging a CPU's performance. </p><p>Intel revealed its <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-launches-arrow-lake-mobile-family-with-core-ultra-200hx-and-200h-processors" target="_blank">Arrow Lake-H family </a>of processors at CES, shortly followed by a user review at <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intels-core-ultra-9-285h-outperforms-the-ryzen-ai-9-365-in-user-review-alchemist-offers-a-nice-bump-in-synthetics-but-gaming-performance-remains-similar-to-meteor-lake" target="_blank">Bilibili</a>, which left much to be desired from these CPUs. Dubbed Core Ultra 200H, these processors employ Intel's Arrow Lake architecture featuring Lion Cove P-cores and Skymont E-cores. What separates them from desktop chips, apart from the power envelope, is that these CPUs feature an LPE (Low Power Efficient) core cluster on the SoC Tile, a feature reused from Meteor Lake. </p><p>Unlike Lunar Lake which uses Battlemage (Xe2) graphics, Arrow Lake-H is armed with up to eight Xe-LPG+ (Alchemist+) cores with support for XMX. As the SoC Tile remains unchanged, Arrow Lake-H's NPU is capable of dishing out just 13 TOPS of INT8 performance, versus 45 TOPS on Lunar Lake. What is similar to Lunar Lake is the process node: TSMC's N3B, a step-up from Intel 4 used with Meteor Lake. </p><p>The Core Ultra 7 255H in question packs 16 cores, divided into six P-cores, eight E-cores, and two LPE-cores with 16 threads in total, as Arrow Lake lacks hyperthreading support. The Core Ultra 7 155H on the contrary is equipped with a similar layout but 22 threads. In PassMark's single-core benchmark, the 255H blazes past its predecessor, scoring 4,631 points compared to the 155H's 3,500 points for a 32% lead. This is a direct result of the updated Lion Cove P-cores and N3B process, allowing a 300 MHz bump in boost clocks. When aggregated, the CPU Mark rating puts Arrow Lake ahead by around 15%. </p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:678px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:92.92%;"><img id="iyPJonGrBWhcx9Kjqws2gM" name="Core Ultra 7 255H vs 155H PassMark" alt="Core Ultra 7 255H vs 155H PassMark" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/iyPJonGrBWhcx9Kjqws2gM.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="678" height="630" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: <a href="https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/6471vs5677/Intel-Ultra-7-255H-vs-Intel-Ultra-7-155H" target="_blank">PassMark</a>)</span></figcaption></figure><p>Relatively speaking, efficiency remains the Achilles' heel of these chips, as the 16-core Core Ultra 9 285H <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intels-core-ultra-9-285h-outperforms-the-ryzen-ai-9-365-in-user-review-alchemist-offers-a-nice-bump-in-synthetics-but-gaming-performance-remains-similar-to-meteor-lake" target="_blank">failed to beat </a>the 10-core Ryzen AI 9 365 when limited to 50W of power. While Arrow Lake-H offers an updated Compute Tile and a slightly modified Graphics Tile, the SoC, and IOE Tiles are largely carried over from Meteor Lake. </p><p>It all comes down to how these laptops are priced since Strix Point devices still have an entry price of around $1,000. On that note, it is important to mention that the 15W variant of these Intel chips, Core Ultra 200U, is <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intels-core-200-family-poised-to-mix-arrow-lunar-meteor-alder-and-raptor-lake-parts-arrow-lake-u-cpus-rumored-to-offer-meteor-lake-refresh-ported-to-intel-3" target="_blank">reported </a>to be based on Meteor Lake with Redwood Cove+ P-cores and Crestmont+ E-cores fabbed on Intel 3, a node once <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/intel-3-3nm-class-process-technology-is-in-high-volume-production-intel" target="_blank">reserved </a>for Intel's server counterparts. This will allow Intel to extract higher margins with possibly lower prices for us, though we haven't exactly found affordable Arrow Lake laptops to be abundant, at least not yet. </p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Acer’s new Predator Helios gaming laptops up the ante on performance and RGB – RTX 50 series and Intel Core 200HX CPUs meet a disco’s worth of glowing RGB ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/acers-new-predator-helios-gaming-laptops-up-the-ante-on-performance-and-rgb-rtx-50-series-and-intel-core-200hx-cpus-meet-a-discos-worth-of-glowing-rgb</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Acer’s new Predator Helios laptop series includes 16-, 18-inch models with Nvidia 50 series graphics, Core Ultra 9 275HX processors, RGB light bars up front, light stripes on the deck and rear, and swappable mechanical key switches. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">4YybwjcWSEqYMRxiArthYT</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Va7SVcA9HKdE2fLYibSooA-1280-80.png" type="image/png" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Tue, 07 Jan 2025 04:00:43 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 08:41:40 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[Laptops]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Matt Safford ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uW75KiUF9FVG2vFdwJzeZh.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Matt began piling up computer experience as a child with his Mattel Aquarius. He built his first PC in the late 1990s and ventured into mild PC modding in the early 2000s. He’s spent 15 years covering emerging technology for Smithsonian, Popular Science, and Consumer Reports, while testing components and PCs for Computer Shopper, PCMag and Digital Trends. When not writing about tech, he’s often walking—through the streets of New York, over the sheep-dotted hills of Scotland, or just at his treadmill desk at home in front of the 50-inch HDR TV that serves as his PC monitor.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/png" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Va7SVcA9HKdE2fLYibSooA-1280-80.png">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Acer]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Acer Predator Helios Laptops]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Acer Predator Helios Laptops]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Acer Predator Helios Laptops]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Va7SVcA9HKdE2fLYibSooA-1280-80.png" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>On the desktop component side of things, we’ve seen a decided downturn in RGB this past year. But Acer clearly didn’t get the memo, because its latest Predator Helios 16 AI and 18 AI laptops sport an RGB light bar, a per-key RGB keyboard with (some) swappable switches, and diagonal RGB stripes that run across the right side of the keyboard deck and on the rear exhaust and cooling area. At least the lights on the deck are pretty subdued so as not to be distracting while you game.<br><br></p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:4000px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.30%;"><img id="3ZRpZVya6QwNTQTBiUxwfV" name="20250105_172126.jpg" alt="Acer Predator Helios laptop" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3ZRpZVya6QwNTQTBiUxwfV.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="4000" height="2252" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>If you’re after a gaming laptop with high-end performance and lots of lights, there may be a Predator Helios in your future. And if RGB isn’t your thing but you still want something slim and powerful, the  Acer Predator Helios Neo 16S AI might be more appealing, though its 1.1-inch-thick frame tops out at an RTX 5070 Ti.</p><h2 id="acer-predator-helios-16-ai-18-ai">Acer Predator Helios 16 AI, 18 AI</h2><p>Both of these new models offer Core Ultra 9 275HX processors and up to an RTX 5090 for graphics, and what Acer calls MagKey 4.0, which lets you swap out mechanical switches. The catch is that those swappable mechanical switches are only on the arrow and WASD keys, rather than the whole keyboard.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:4000px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.30%;"><img id="qnEKKn97EiggeJ5qC4Do2k" name="20250105_172136.jpg" alt="Acer Predator Helios swappable switches" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qnEKKn97EiggeJ5qC4Do2k.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="4000" height="2252" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>As someone who types and games, I’d really like to see mechanical switches across the entire keyboard, like Alienware and MSI offer with some of their high-end gaming laptops.<br><br>The Helios AI laptops feature G-Sync and Advanced Optimus and a MUX switch, so they should at least offer decent battery life when not gaming.<br><br>The larger Helios 18 AI offers a 4K Mini LED dual-mode display option with 1000 nits of brightness and 120 Hz refresh, which you can switch to FHD at 240 Hz for esports titles. The 16-inch model splits the resolution difference, offering up 2560x1600 resolution, but opts for OLED. The larger model offers up to 192GB of RAM and 6TB of PCIe 5.0 storage, while the 16-inch model tops out at 64GB and 4TB of PCIe 5.0.<br><br>Really though, the stand-out feature of these laptops is their chassis. Aside from ports and cooling vents across three sides, you get an RGB light bar in the front, and diagonal RGB light stripes running across part of the keyboard deck and the rear top of the laptop, as well as the Predator logo on the lid. Combined with the per-key RGB on the keyboard, this might be the most RGB-adorned laptop line we’ve ever seen. And that’s honestly saying something given the many gaming laptops we’ve gone hands-on with in recent years. To be fair to Acer, if you’re into the whole RGB thing, it arguably looks pretty good. I’m curious to see some of the effects possible using the company’s PredatorSense software. I don’t think I’d want to leave the laptop in rainbow mode, but with single-color cyan or purple, the laptop might be pretty striking in low light.<br><br>Acer says the Predator Helios 18 AI will be available in North America in May, starting at $2,999 ($4,449 in Canada), and the Helios 16 AI will follow in June starting at $2,299 (U.S.) and $3,199 (CA).</p><h2 id="acer-predator-helios-neo-16s-ai">Acer Predator Helios Neo 16S AI</h2><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:2000px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:62.50%;"><img id="uzecrVjk9ndjfPqdayoe3C" name="image2.png" alt="Acer Predator Helios Laptops" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uzecrVjk9ndjfPqdayoe3C.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="2000" height="1250" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uzecrVjk9ndjfPqdayoe3C.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Acer)</span></figcaption></figure><p>Taking a step back from ample RGB and top-end components is the Predator Helios 16S AI. The S in the name seems to imply “slim,” as the laptop is a svelte (for a gaming rig) 1.1 inches thick. As is often the case, a smaller chassis limits components and performance. So the 16S AI tops out with an RTX 5070 Ti GPU, but still makes room for up to a Core Ultra 9 275HX CPU. RAM goes up to 32GB and 2TB of PCIe 4.0 storage will be offered. As with its non-S sibling, you get a 2560 x1600 OLED screen, with refresh rates pegged at either 165 or 240 Hz.<br><br>You do still get RGB on the keyboard and the lid, but otherwise, this is a decidedly more understated design, with clean lines and a stealthy black aesthetic. Acer says the Helios Neo 16S AI will arrive in April in the US and Canada, starting at $1,699 / $2,299.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ RTX 5080 16GB spotted in early pre-built listing from iBuyPower — Sports the upcoming 65W Intel Core Ultra 9 285 and an unreleased B860 motherboard  ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/rtx-5080-16gb-spotted-in-early-pre-built-listing-from-ibuypower-sports-the-upcoming-65w-intel-core-ultra-9-285-and-an-unreleased-b860-motherboard</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ A new listing featuring an upcoming pre-built PC from iBuyPower popped up, powered by Nvidia's RTX 5080 16GB GPU. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">oYbfiWoedZbKtfd4d5ccCd</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/w6FRbFbXK5secSEmPyZksP-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Tue, 31 Dec 2024 13:20:59 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 10:08:37 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[GPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ editors@tomshardware.com (Hassam Nasir) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Hassam Nasir ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SxxNFHt95eGK37mKPhJpdZ.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Hassam is a lifelong PC gamer and tech enthusiast with over five years of experience in PC hardware journalism. His passion began in childhood when he rescued a discarded Pentium 4 processor, straightening its pins with a kitchen knife to revive a Dell Dimension 2400 at the age of seven. Since then, he has followed the advancements in technology, witnessing the evolution of hardware from the era of AMD&#039;s Opteron architecture to Intel&#039;s Smithfield (Pentium D), and the rise of Voodoo GPUs alongside Nvidia&#039;s FX GPUs taking the market by storm to the latest innovations today. As a seasoned writer, Hassam loves to get into the nitty-gritty details of hardware, providing insights on everything from CPUs, Motherboards and RAM to GPUs. When he’s not writing, you’ll find him building custom water-cooled PCs for himself and his friends, attending drag racing events, or collecting niche fragrances.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/w6FRbFbXK5secSEmPyZksP-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[iBuyPower]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[iBuyPower]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[iBuyPower]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[iBuyPower]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/w6FRbFbXK5secSEmPyZksP-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Less than a week remains until <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-teases-rtx-50-blackwell-gaming-gpus-for-launch-next-month-the-witcher-ivs-first-cinematic-trailer-likely-leveraged-the-upcoming-rtx-5090" target="_blank">Nvidia's keynote </a>at CES where it is expected to reveal the Blackwell series for desktop PCs. Following <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-rtx-5090-and-rtx-5080-gaming-pcs-listed-prematurely-for-usd7-539-and-usd4-399-at-a-retailer-blackwell-meets-arrow-lake-to-power-upcoming-predator-orion-7000-pcs-from-acer" target="_blank">preliminary listings </a>from Acer featuring upcoming RTX 50 GPUs, iBuyPower too has joined in the action with Nvidia's RTX 5080 at the heart of its forthcoming pre-built, spotted by <a href="https://x.com/momomo_us/status/1873973141036584962" target="_blank">momomo_us </a>at X. While we managed to grab a few screenshots before the listings were taken down, information regarding pricing and performance remains scarce. </p><p>Nvidia has decided to revive <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/video-games/pc-gaming/nvidia-revives-lan-party-after-13-years-to-celebrate-rtx-50-series-gpu-launch-geforce-lan-50-is-a-50-hour-lan-party-across-four-different-cities" target="_blank">GeForce LAN </a>after 13 years in the form of a 50-hour marathon preceding the long-awaited RTX 50 unveiling. To build hype for Blackwell, Nvidia kicked off a "GeForce Hype Meter" social media campaign leading up to the highly-anticipated reveal. Leaked data from Zotac suggests the initial lineup could comprise the RTX 5090, RTX 5080, and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidias-rtx-5070-ti-and-rtx-5070-allegedly-sport-16gb-and-12gb-of-gddr7-memory-respectively-up-to-8960-cuda-cores-256-bit-memory-bus-and-300w-tdp" target="_blank">RTX 5070 series</a>. </p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qCWcVcZMpC69io9GhUisvG.jpg" alt="rtx-5080-system-1" /><figcaption><small role="credit">iBuyPower</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WzNWdmTfcFSrXxhXmLyxH8.jpg" alt="iBuyPower spec" /><figcaption><small role="credit">iBuyPower</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>Going over the spec sheet, iBuyPower claims its upcoming gaming PC, codenamed "y40bi9n5801", is powered by Nvidia's soon-to-launch RTX 5080 Super, only to correct itself in the description above (highlighted in blue). From what we know thus far, Nvidia has no plans for an RTX 5080 Super at this stage. It is possible the person who put up this listing probably replaced an existing RTX 4080 Super entry with the RTX 5080 but overlooked omitting the "Super" suffix.</p><p>Likewise, other specifications mention the upcoming Core Ultra 9 285 non-K CPU from Intel, pre-orders of which are <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-opens-pre-orders-for-arrow-lake-non-k-65w-cpus-in-china-shipping-is-expected-to-commence-on-january-13-as-intel-eyes-a-ces-unveil-next-month" target="_blank">live in China</a>, and an un-named budget B860 motherboard with Wi-Fi support. The pre-built offers 2TB of NVMe storage and 32GB of rather slow DDR5-5200 memory. To top it off, iBuyPower is using its own AW4 240mm ARGB Liquid Cooler but we doubt you'll need that much cooling for a 65W chip. </p><p>If you're wondering, yes, iBuyPower also included a few benchmarks but they're extremely inaccurate, to say the least. It's very unlikely the RTX 5080 can push only 50 FPS in <em>Baldur's Gate 3 </em>at 1080p, dropping to 20 FPS when switching over to 1440p, for example.</p><p>Going off leaks, the RTX 5080 is expected to adopt the GB203-300-A1 die outfitted with 84 SMs (10,752 CUDA cores), 16GB of <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-rtx-5080-allegedly-adopts-faster-30-gbps-gddr7-modules-delivering-960-gb-s-of-bandwidth-the-remaining-blackwell-lineup-is-expected-to-stick-with-slower-28-gbps-memory" target="_blank">30 Gbps </a>GDDR7 memory, a 256-bit bus alongside a 400W TDP. While the chip is undoubtedly powerful, it pales in contrast to the RTX 5090 offering more than twice the core count and double the VRAM capacity. We can expect more details from Nvidia in just a couple of days. </p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Entire Intel Core 200 laptop lineup leaks out — Intel prepping to launch 22 new mobile CPUs next month at CES 2025 ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/entire-intel-core-200-laptop-lineup-leaks-out-intel-prepping-to-launch-22-new-mobile-cpus-next-month-at-ces-2025</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Intel's entire Core Ultra/non-Ultra 200 portfolio has been detailed, spread across three different architectures. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">c9rNs4MdRFfSMQS9NfDxEE</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/u5GQBZsggFApBsorZCfYcQ-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Sun, 15 Dec 2024 13:50:00 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 08:55:59 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[CPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ editors@tomshardware.com (Hassam Nasir) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Hassam Nasir ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SxxNFHt95eGK37mKPhJpdZ.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Hassam is a lifelong PC gamer and tech enthusiast with over five years of experience in PC hardware journalism. His passion began in childhood when he rescued a discarded Pentium 4 processor, straightening its pins with a kitchen knife to revive a Dell Dimension 2400 at the age of seven. Since then, he has followed the advancements in technology, witnessing the evolution of hardware from the era of AMD&#039;s Opteron architecture to Intel&#039;s Smithfield (Pentium D), and the rise of Voodoo GPUs alongside Nvidia&#039;s FX GPUs taking the market by storm to the latest innovations today. As a seasoned writer, Hassam loves to get into the nitty-gritty details of hardware, providing insights on everything from CPUs, Motherboards and RAM to GPUs. When he’s not writing, you’ll find him building custom water-cooled PCs for himself and his friends, attending drag racing events, or collecting niche fragrances.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/u5GQBZsggFApBsorZCfYcQ-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Intel]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Intel 14th Gen mobile CPU]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Intel 14th Gen mobile CPU]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Intel 14th Gen mobile CPU]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/u5GQBZsggFApBsorZCfYcQ-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>The beans have been spilled regarding Intel's Core 200 family of CPUs as data aggregator <a href="https://x.com/momomo_us" target="_blank">momomo_us </a>has detailed the entire family across a series of tweets at X. The data misses out on key specifications such as core counts, but most of that information has been covered in the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-ultra-200hx-cpu-specifications-purportedly-leaked-arrow-lake-hx-scales-up-to-24-cores-and-55-ghz-boost-clock" target="_blank">past</a>. On that note, the leak includes retail ordering codes suggesting that these CPUs are already in the hands of OEMs as they ready their upcoming laptops. </p><p>To recap, Intel's Core 200 CPUs are divided into Ultra and non-Ultra SKUs. The <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-200-non-ultra-cpus-may-be-rebranded-raptor-lake-alder-lake-chips-core-5-210h-spotted-with-slower-performance-than-the-core-i5-12450h" target="_blank">Core 200 non-Ultra family</a> will arrive as Raptor Lake refresh on budget laptops, akin to current-gen Core 100 offerings. Similarly, Core 200 Ultra CPUs get the latest Arrow Lake architecture - divided across the H and HX suffixes. Word of caution; the Core Ultra 200U processors are actually rumored to be a refresh of <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intels-core-200-family-poised-to-mix-arrow-lunar-meteor-alder-and-raptor-lake-parts-arrow-lake-u-cpus-rumored-to-offer-meteor-lake-refresh-ported-to-intel-3" target="_blank">Meteor Lake</a> rather than Arrow Lake, ported to Intel 3. It gets even more confusing as leaks allege the Core 200H family might incorporate <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intels-arrow-lake-h-could-feature-three-types-of-cpu-cores-according-to-linux-patch-hybrid-designs-could-get-more-complex" target="_blank">LPE cores</a>; absent from desktop Arrow Lake-S and flagship-grade mobile Arrow Lake-HX CPUs. </p><p>On the graphical side of things, Core Ultra 200 H/HX CPUs will employ the new Xe-LPG+ (Alchemist+) architecture with XMX cores, however, the Core Ultra 200U series is expected to stick with Xe-LPG as it is based on Meteor Lake - so you won't be able to use Intel's latest <a href="re.com/pc-components/gpus/intel-xess-2-dll-files-leaked-days-before-launch-frame-generation-and-low-latency-libraries-surface-at-nexus-mods" target="_blank">XeSS Frame Generation</a> technology with these processors.</p><p>With those nuances aside, today's leak completes the puzzle of Intel's Core 200 lineup as we gaze upon the list of 22 upcoming mobile processors from Intel. We've decided to include the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-ultra-200hx-cpu-specifications-purportedly-leaked-arrow-lake-hx-scales-up-to-24-cores-and-55-ghz-boost-clock" target="_blank">already-leaked HX series</a> to give you a clearer <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-ultra-200hx-cpu-specifications-purportedly-leaked-arrow-lake-hx-scales-up-to-24-cores-and-55-ghz-boost-clock" target="_blank">picture</a>. </p><div ><table><thead><tr><th class="firstcol " >Core 200U/H (Raptor Lake)</th><th  >Core Ultra 200H (Arrow Lake)</th><th  >Core Ultra 200U (Meteor Lake Refresh)</th><th  >Core Ultra 200HX (Arrow Lake)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " >Core 9 270H</td><td  >Core Ultra 9 285H</td><td  >Core Ultra 7 265U</td><td  >Core Ultra 9 285HX</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Core 7 250H</td><td  >Core Ultra 7 265H</td><td  >Core Ultra 7 255U</td><td  >Core Ultra 9 275HX</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Core 7 240H</td><td  >Core Ultra 7 255H</td><td  >Core Ultra 5 235U</td><td  >Core Ultra 7 265HX</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Core 5 220H</td><td  >Core Ultra 5 235H</td><td  >Core Ultra 5 225U</td><td  >Core Ultra 7 255HX</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Core 5 210H</td><td  >Core Ultra 5 225H</td><td  ></td><td  >Core Ultra 5 245HX</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Core 7 250U</td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  >Core Ultra 5 235HX</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Core 5 220U</td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ></td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>Given the large variations between each suffix - going beyond simple core count and clock speed differences - users must exercise great caution when choosing a laptop next year. And it's not just Intel, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-is-purportedly-preparing-ryzen-200-hawk-point-refresh-apus-ryzen-7-255-260-set-to-replace-the-ryzen-7-8745h-8845h-series" target="_blank">AMD </a>is also adjusting its existing offerings by re-releasing them under the new "Ryzen AI 300" branding.</p><p>Nonetheless, we expect all these processors to be announced at CES next month alongside budget 65W and 35W Arrow Lake processors. AMD will also roll out the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-ryzen-z2-lineup-leaked-z2-extreme-rumored-to-have-12-rdna-3-5-cus-z2-and-z2g-using-older-architectures-also-in-the-works" target="_blank">Ryzen Z2 series</a>, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-to-release-the-krackan-at-ces-cpu-rivals-intel-lunar-lake-in-new-benchmarks-ryzen-ai-7-350-takes-on-the-core-ultra-7-258v" target="_blank">Krackan Point</a>, and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-strix-halo-rdna-3-5-igpu-rumored-to-launch-under-the-radeon-8000s-branding-up-to-40-cus-and-support-for-lpddr5x-8000-memory" target="_blank">Strix Halo</a>, side by side with its next-gen RDNA 4 <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/amd-rdna-4-coming-in-early-2025-set-to-deliver-ray-tracing-improvements-ai-capabilities" target="_blank">Radeon RX 8000 GPUs</a>. <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-arrow-lake-h-and-amd-krackan-point-laptops-emerge-at-retailers-preliminary-listings-indicate-that-manufacturers-are-gearing-up-for-launch-next-month" target="_blank">Laptops </a>equipped with these processors should see availability in the following weeks.  </p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Intel Core 7 240H shows similar performance to Core i7-13620H on Geekbench — Core 7 240H could be a rewarmed Core i7-13620H ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-7-240h-shows-similar-performance-to-core-i7-13620h-on-geekbench-core-7-240h-could-be-a-rewarmed-core-i7-13620h</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ The leaked Core 7 240H could potentially be a repackaged Core i7-13620H ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">NNn7AWQserSyoW47FzrRqh</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/u5GQBZsggFApBsorZCfYcQ-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Sat, 30 Nov 2024 16:49:51 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 10:07:01 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[CPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ editors@tomshardware.com (Kunal Khullar) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Kunal Khullar ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NDK3ae3zDxAx2BJnMXxBJV.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Kunal Khullar is a contributor at Tom’s Hardware with extensive writing experience in computing. With a deep-seated passion for technology, Kunal has dedicated years to mastering the intricacies of computer hardware components and staying at the forefront of the latest software developments. His journey in the tech world began with hands-on experience in assembling and troubleshooting PCs and laptops as a kid in the 90s, a skill he has meticulously honed over the years. He has worked for various publications covering a range of topics including smartphones, laptops, audio devices, and PC hardware. Currently, he is engrossed with everything happening in the world of computing with a growing obsession for unique PC cases and RGB cooling fans. Through his articles Kunal strives to demystify complex concepts for a broad audience. Kunal is also a casual gamer as he loves to squad up with his friends in &lt;em&gt;Apex Legends&lt;/em&gt;, and claims to have a fairly good taste in music especially when it comes to heavy metal.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/u5GQBZsggFApBsorZCfYcQ-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Intel]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Intel 14th Gen mobile CPU]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Intel 14th Gen mobile CPU]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Intel 14th Gen mobile CPU]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/u5GQBZsggFApBsorZCfYcQ-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>An upcoming Intel laptop processor has surfaced on Geekbench, revealing intriguing details about its performance and specifications. The Core 7 240H will potentially be part of Intel’s rumored Core 200H lineup, boasting ten cores (6-Performance + 4-Efficient cores) and 16 threads. Notably, the <a href="https://browser.geekbench.com/search?k=v6_cpu&q=Acer+Nitro+ANV15-52">Geekbench </a>listing (via ﻿<a href="https://x.com/BenchLeaks/status/1861683053711552922">Benchleaks</a>) suggests the codename as ‘Raptor Lake,’ which could also mean that it will be more or less a Raptor Lake refresh.</p><p>The Geekbench listing was part of an Acer Nitro ANV15-52 gaming laptop with a discrete RTX 4050 laptop GPU. The Core 7 240H operates with a base frequency of 2.5 GHz, up to 5 GHz boost clock, and 24MB of L3 cache. The Core 7 240H configuration suggests continuing Intel’s hybrid core architecture, which debuted with the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-alder-lake-specifications-price-benchmarks-release-date">Alder Lake</a> series.</p><p>The approach combines high-performance and energy-efficient cores for optimal multitasking and power efficiency. This chip includes DDR5 memory support and advanced connectivity options that meet modern laptop requirements.</p><div ><table><thead><tr><th class="firstcol " >Processor</th><th  >Geekbench 6 single-core</th><th  >Geekbench 6 multi-core</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " >Intel Core 7 240H</td><td  >2,689</td><td  >13,330</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Intel Core i7-13620H</td><td  >2,571</td><td  >13,373</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>In terms of performance, the Core 7 240H was benchmarked more than once, achieving a maximum score of 2,689 points in single-core and 13,330 points in multi-core benchmarks on Geekbench 6. These scores are quite competitive, considering their segment.</p><p>For comparison, the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/ultrabooks-ultraportables/acer-nitro-v-15-review">Acer Nitro V 15</a> with an Intel Core i7-13620H delivered 2,571 points in single-core and 13,373 points in multi-core benchmarks on Geekbench 6 in our testing. Notably, the Core i7-13620H offers a similar 10-core architecture as the Core 7 240H, with slightly different boost and base clock speeds.</p><p>Coming to the iGPU of the leaked Core 7 240H is based on Intel's Xe architecture, equipped with 64 Compute Units, equivalent to 8 Xe Cores, and operates at a maximum clock speed of 1.5GHz. The OpenCL benchmark delivered scores of 13,362 and 13,478 across two tests, demonstrating decent performance for integrated graphics.</p><p>Of course, it will not be able to compete with GPUs like the Nvidia RTX 4050 mobile, which has an average score of over 80,000 points. This gap highlights the iGPU’s focus on efficiency and general-purpose tasks rather than high-end gaming, for which dedicated GPUs are more suited.</p><p>While Intel has not officially announced the Core 7 240H, these leaks provide a glimpse into what consumers can expect from the company's upcoming mobile CPU lineup. The official Core 200H announcement is rumored to be scheduled for next year, probably around CES.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Tencent reveals Lunar Lake-powered 11-inch handheld packing Intel Core Ultra 7 258V, 2.5K 120Hz display, 32GB RAM, and 1TB of storage ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/video-games/handheld-gaming/tencent-reveals-lunar-lake-powered-11-inch-handheld-packing-intel-core-ultra-7-258v-2-5k-120hz-display-32gb-ram-and-1tb-of-storage</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Tencent has a prototype ready for an 11-inch handheld powered by Intel's Lunar Lake based Core Ultra 7 258V. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">oRxC2Usb5Tp6xLKbvPDnYN</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/M2bJKg7PeZjLMNytzPinCb-1280-80.png" type="image/png" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Tue, 26 Nov 2024 14:40:00 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 10:08:27 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[Handheld Gaming]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[Video Games]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[Console Gaming]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ editors@tomshardware.com (Hassam Nasir) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Hassam Nasir ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SxxNFHt95eGK37mKPhJpdZ.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Hassam is a lifelong PC gamer and tech enthusiast with over five years of experience in PC hardware journalism. His passion began in childhood when he rescued a discarded Pentium 4 processor, straightening its pins with a kitchen knife to revive a Dell Dimension 2400 at the age of seven. Since then, he has followed the advancements in technology, witnessing the evolution of hardware from the era of AMD&#039;s Opteron architecture to Intel&#039;s Smithfield (Pentium D), and the rise of Voodoo GPUs alongside Nvidia&#039;s FX GPUs taking the market by storm to the latest innovations today. As a seasoned writer, Hassam loves to get into the nitty-gritty details of hardware, providing insights on everything from CPUs, Motherboards and RAM to GPUs. When he’s not writing, you’ll find him building custom water-cooled PCs for himself and his friends, attending drag racing events, or collecting niche fragrances.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/png" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/M2bJKg7PeZjLMNytzPinCb-1280-80.png">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Tencent via Videocardz]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[3D One HERO]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[3D One HERO]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[3D One HERO]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/M2bJKg7PeZjLMNytzPinCb-1280-80.png" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>If you weren't delighted with the miniature screen size of existing devices, Tencent has something new for handheld enthusiasts. <a href="https://videocardz.com/newz/tencent-3d-one-gaming-prototype-features-massive-11-inch-screen-and-intel-core-ultra-7-258v-lunar-lake-processor" target="_blank">Videocardz </a>reports that Tencent has announced a new handheld—which is less of a handheld and more of a portable console—the Sunday Dragon 3D One. An Intel Lunar Lake CPU powers this whopping handheld, alongside a massive 11-inch display for a more immersive viewing experience—provided you can hold the thing in your hands. </p><p>The 3D One features the Core Ultra 7 258V - packing four P-Cores (Lion Cove), four E-Cores (Skymont), and the Arc 140V iGPU (Integrated GPU) with eight Xe2 cores. Our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/intel-takes-down-amd-in-our-integrated-graphics-battle-royale" target="_blank">extensive testing</a> shows that Intel's latest Lunar Lake processors have caught up to AMD's Strix Point (Ryzen AI 300 APUs) in gaming. In terms of memory, we see 32GB of LPDDR5X-8533 RAM - sufficient for modern tasks but is not upgradeable since it comes soldered on the CPU die. The specifications mention a "high-speed" 1TB SSD that should be upgradeable - if you want higher speeds or capacities. </p><p>Interestingly, the 3D One might be the first Lunar Lake handheld available - if it manages to hit shelves this year since <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/video-games/handheld-gaming/msis-claw-8-ai-is-first-lunar-lake-handheld-gaming-console-comes-in-fallout-themed-version" target="_blank">MSI's Claw 8 AI+</a> is slated for an early 2025 launch. But don't get your hopes up, as Videocardz reports that the 3D One is merely a prototype - at least for now. Boasting a massive 11-inch 2560x1440 display with a 120Hz refresh rate - the 3D One could function as a makeshift laptop given its large size. On the flip side, GPD is readying its <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/video-games/handheld-gaming/gpd-announces-official-pricing-for-its-pocket-4-mini-laptops-the-usd1-466-unit-packs-12-core-ryzen-ai-hx-370-64gb-of-ram-2tb-ssd-and-144hz-2-5k-display" target="_blank">Pocket 4 mini-laptops</a> but even they cap out at 8.8 inches for the display. Tencent's latest handheld incorporates real-time eye-tracking technology for a glasses-free 3D (autostereoscopic) experience. As per reports, Tencent has optimized a handful of games including <em>Path of Exile, Blade & Soul, </em>and <em>Arena Breakout: Infinite </em>for this technology. </p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aM6UjDtNUkYBP8aJrzgy4V.png" alt="3D One without controllers" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tencent via Videocardz</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZR9ia4wJUXyH4Xx2B4Kd2S.png" alt="3D One in gaming" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tencent via Videocardz</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fymEihctQd2YRDfEf2TiNP.png" alt="3D One Back Design" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tencent via Videocardz</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>The pre-installed controllers employ Hall Effect joysticks, linear triggers, and two customizable buttons at the back. Even so, the controllers are detachable so if you want to swap them out for third-party ones; you can - just make sure they're compatible with the 3D One given its unconventional size. Likewise, there is support for 100W fast-charging though the battery capacity is not mentioned. </p><p>Admittedly, the 3D One follows a very eccentric design philosophy. You'd expect handhelds to be ergonomic and actually function like handhelds; something you can hold in your hands for long gaming sessions. Nonetheless, small screen sizes are sometimes unappealing and just not large enough to capture the depth and beauty of a game. The 3D One is still in the development phase - a prototype - and may be limited in supply, geographically, and due to its potential niche appeal.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Intel Core i9-13900K drops to all-time-low under $400 in Black Friday deal ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-i9-13900k-drops-to-all-time-low-under-usd400-in-black-friday-deal</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Intel’s Core i9-13900K desktop processor has hit its lowest price ever on Amazon for Black Friday. It is now just $399. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">AsjZCfGaGGX58xEnnbjocB</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KkPAgVeQMGp7zfBLev8Vgb-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Sat, 23 Nov 2024 15:37:08 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 08:45:25 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[CPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Mark Tyson ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/56vqMYLDaKRHPhHZgbADFR.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Mark&#039;s enthusiasm for computers dampened at an early age by the rubber-keyed Sinclair Spectrum 48K and feelings of Commodore 64 envy. However, in the mid-80s, hope in a digital future was rekindled by the purchase of an Atari 520 STe. Since that time Mark has used a multitude of computers for fun and professional endeavors. He often owned both Macs and PCs but went cold on the former after OS9 was killed off, and warmed to the latter with the introduction of Windows XP.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
Early work years were spent in artwork and reprographics but in the late noughties, Mark started to blog about computers, Taiwanese food culture, and guitar design. This activity led to a full-time position writing about breaking PC tech news for HEXUS, for the best part of a decade. When HEXUS was abruptly closed, Mark helped with the foundation of Club386, before finding a new home at Tom&#039;s Hardware.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
When not wearing through the keycap legends on his PC keyboards, Mark can be found wandering the computer malls of Taiwan&#039;s neon-lit conurbations and enjoying local and international cuisine.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KkPAgVeQMGp7zfBLev8Vgb-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Intel]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Intel Core i9-13900K drops under $400 to all-time-low]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Intel Core i9-13900K drops under $400 to all-time-low]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Intel Core i9-13900K drops under $400 to all-time-low]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KkPAgVeQMGp7zfBLev8Vgb-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Intel’s Core i9-13900K desktop processor has hit its <a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BCF54SR1">lowest price on Amazon</a> for Black Friday. This processor launched as the Raptor Lake desktop flagship CPU in October 2022 and remains a potent force two years later. The big difference is that at $399.61, it is now half the money people would have had to splash out to grab one when it first hit retail, according to three camels.</p><p>So, what do you get with the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-core-i9-13900k-i5-13600k-cpu-review">Core i9-13900K</a>? This CPU comes packing eight Raptor Cove cores doing duty as the performance cores (P-cores) plus 16 Gracemont efficiency cores (E-cores). Users thus benefit from 24 cores and 32 threads of processing power. P-core base/boost frequencies ranged from 3.0 to 5.8 GHz. Intel also fitted 68MB of total cache, and the CPU ran at 125W Base Turbo Power and up to 253W using Thermal Velocity Boost and Turbo Boost 3.0 tech.</p><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="a8b4ba50-c2f7-48ee-ae46-ac06e7dee1ce" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="Intel Core i9-13900K: now $399 at Amazon" data-dimension48="Intel Core i9-13900K: now $399 at Amazon" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BCF54SR1" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1024px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:83.98%;"><img id="unFjfjJQn3YPbU6PGduAnH" name="i9-13900K-box" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/unFjfjJQn3YPbU6PGduAnH.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1024" height="860" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a><p><strong>Intel Core i9-13900K: </strong><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BCF54SR1" data-dimension112="a8b4ba50-c2f7-48ee-ae46-ac06e7dee1ce" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="Intel Core i9-13900K: now $399 at Amazon" data-dimension48="Intel Core i9-13900K: now $399 at Amazon" data-dimension25=""><strong>now $399 at Amazon</strong></a> (was $629.99)<br>Intel launched this processor in late 2022 as the flagship of the 13th Generation Raptor Lake series of desktop processors. It is a multiplier-unlocked chip that uses the LGA 1700 socket and delivers 24 cores and 32 threads of processing power, running at up to 5.8 GHz.<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BCF54SR1" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="a8b4ba50-c2f7-48ee-ae46-ac06e7dee1ce" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="Intel Core i9-13900K: now $399 at Amazon" data-dimension48="Intel Core i9-13900K: now $399 at Amazon" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></p></div><p>The Core i9-13900K was crowned the fastest gaming chip in 2022. However, any recommendation had specific warnings about high power consumption and cooling requirements. We would later learn that Intel’s powerful Raptor Lake chips (and 14<sup>th</sup> Gen refresh parts) used microcodes that elevated CPU voltage levels beyond safe limits. However, starting in September this year, Intel identified, outlined, and issued mitigations for the root cause of Raptor Lake / Refresh issues and failures dubbed <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-finds-root-cause-of-cpu-crashing-and-instability-errors-prepares-new-and-final-microcode-update">Vmin Shift Instability</a>.</p><p>An attractive quality of a CPU like the Core i9-13900K in 2024 is that it can be partnered with a wide range of existing socket <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/best-picks/best-motherboards" target="_blank">LGA 1700 motherboards</a>. You can also build a platform that uses either DDR4 or DDR5 RAM, which could save money for DIY desktop upgraders. It might be most attractive to those currently using an Alder Lake CPU or a lower-tier processor from the Raptor Lake (Refresh) family used as a stopgap.</p><p>However, this lowest-ever-priced Core i9-13900K might also appeal to those considering a new build. There are plenty of great <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/live/best-black-friday-ssd-deals-2024">Black Friday bargains for SSDs,</a> <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/live/best-black-friday-monitor-deals-2024">Monitors, </a>and more around now to assemble completely new PC systems capable of high-end gaming fun and accelerated content creation tasks.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Intel Core Ultra 5 225H delivers 14% better single core and 16% improved iGPU performance than Meteor Lake per early benchmarks — the CPU still falls short of its Lunar Lake counterparts ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-ultra-5-225h-delivers-14-percent-better-single-core-and-16-percent-improved-igpu-performance-than-meteor-lake-per-early-benchmarks-the-cpu-still-falls-short-of-its-lunar-lake-counterparts</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Leaked Geekbench test results show that Intel's upcoming Core Ultra 5 225H will be a decent uplift from its Meteor Lake predecessor but might not be able to catch up to Lunar Lake. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">bbvxzYD2J35XeP42zJedS9</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wcD8PV8SHjFzMZ59eCxr9m-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Tue, 12 Nov 2024 14:58:23 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 08:54:28 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[CPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ editors@tomshardware.com (Hassam Nasir) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Hassam Nasir ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SxxNFHt95eGK37mKPhJpdZ.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Hassam is a lifelong PC gamer and tech enthusiast with over five years of experience in PC hardware journalism. His passion began in childhood when he rescued a discarded Pentium 4 processor, straightening its pins with a kitchen knife to revive a Dell Dimension 2400 at the age of seven. Since then, he has followed the advancements in technology, witnessing the evolution of hardware from the era of AMD&#039;s Opteron architecture to Intel&#039;s Smithfield (Pentium D), and the rise of Voodoo GPUs alongside Nvidia&#039;s FX GPUs taking the market by storm to the latest innovations today. As a seasoned writer, Hassam loves to get into the nitty-gritty details of hardware, providing insights on everything from CPUs, Motherboards and RAM to GPUs. When he’s not writing, you’ll find him building custom water-cooled PCs for himself and his friends, attending drag racing events, or collecting niche fragrances.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wcD8PV8SHjFzMZ59eCxr9m-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Intel]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Intel Arc GPU Meteor Lake images and slides]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Intel Arc GPU Meteor Lake images and slides]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Intel Arc GPU Meteor Lake images and slides]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wcD8PV8SHjFzMZ59eCxr9m-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Intel's upcoming Core Ultra 5 225H from the Arrow Lake-H mobile family has been tested at Geekbench (via <a href="https://x.com/BenchLeaks/status/1856234025309909354" target="_blank">Benchleaks</a>), delivering moderate uplifts compared to its predecessor in the <a href="https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/8792755" target="_blank">CPU </a>and <a href="https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/compute/3114457" target="_blank">iGPU </a>(OpenCL) departments. However, even this sizeable uplift is still insufficient to leapfrog Lunar Lake, which sits comfortably at the top of the table at much lower power limits.</p><p>The Core Ultra 5 225H is the successor to the Core Ultra 5 125H. It features 14 cores (four P + eight E + two LPE) and 14 threads alongside 18MB of L3 cache. The test bench is an upcoming notebook from Samsung—codenamed "NP965XHD"—offering 16GB of unspecified memory. Based on this test, the Core Ultra 5 225H clocked at a maximum of 4.9 GHz—roughly 9% faster than the Core Ultra 5 125H.</p><p>Starting with the CPU scores, the Core Ultra 5 225H amassed 2,547 points and 12,448 points in the single-core and multi-core tests, respectively. This lands it 14% faster in single-core performance than the 125H, though multi-core remains a disappointment at just 8% faster; that may be attributed to the lack of hyperthreading. Lunar Lake still takes the lead in single-core while consuming less power. The gap was more prominent with the previously leaked <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-ultra-9-285h-45w-mobile-cpu-falls-short-of-its-lunar-lake-brethren-in-leaked-geekbench-6-single-core-benchmark">Core Ultra 9 285H</a>, so these results probably do not indicate the final silicon.</p><div ><table><thead><tr><th class="firstcol " >Processor</th><th  >Single Core</th><th  >Multi Core</th><th  >OpenCL</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " >Core Ultra 5 225H</td><td  ><a href="https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/8792755">2547</a></td><td  ><a href="https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/8792755">12448</a></td><td  ><a href="https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/compute/3114457">33508</a></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Core Ultra 5 125H</td><td  ><a href="https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/8784393">2233</a></td><td  ><a href="https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/8784393">11530</a></td><td  ><a href="https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/compute/3115134">28862</a></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Core Ultra 5 228V</td><td  ><a href="https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/8786783">2587</a></td><td  ><a href="https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/8786783">10260</a></td><td  ><a href="https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/compute/3107001">25557</a></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360</td><td  ><a href="https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/8777437">2698</a></td><td  ><a href="https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/8777437">11537</a></td><td  ><a href="https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/compute/3107480">30049</a></td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>Arrow Lake ships with Intel's upgraded Xe-LPG+ architecture with the Core Ultra 5 225H sporting the Arc 130T iGPU with 7 Xe cores (112 Xe Vector Engines) clocked at 2.2 GHz. Oddly enough, 7 Xe-LPG+ cores outperform 7 Xe2 cores (Core Ultra 5 228V), at least in OpenCL, a synthetic test.</p><p>To explain this, Lunar Lake operates at a lower TDP (17W - 37W) than Arrow Lake-H (expected to be 28W - 115W). Secondly, Lunar Lake offers faster gaming performance in practice than what theoretical benchmarks suggest, owing to architectural refinements and better drivers. Nonetheless, Core Ultra 5 225H's iGPU scores 16% better than its Meteor Lake equivalent. Real-world performance, however, will primarily be subject to driver support and game optimizations.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yaSfdFdQNDiXjQh3xYYXfR.png" alt="Core Ultra 5 225H test bench" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Geekbench</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NEsA8AnPytxT5EM4daKKiU.png" alt="Core Ultra 5 225H single core / multi core score" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Geekbench</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hX5vnwq6t32GHJHxm9sTaX.png" alt="Core Ultra 5 225H OpenCL score" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Geekbench</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>Intel will release the Core Ultra 200H/U/HX/non-K CPUs at CES 2025. Rumors allege that Battlemage will arrive ahead of RDNA 4 and Blackwell as early as <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/intel-arc-xe2-battlemage-gpus-rumored-to-arrive-next-month-ahead-of-amd-rdna-4-and-nvidia-blackwell">next month</a>. </p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Intel Core Ultra 9 285H 45W mobile CPU falls short of its Lunar Lake brethren in leaked Geekbench 6 single-core benchmark ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-ultra-9-285h-45w-mobile-cpu-falls-short-of-its-lunar-lake-brethren-in-leaked-geekbench-6-single-core-benchmark</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ A leaked benchmark featuring Intel's upcoming Core Ultra 9 285H from the Arrow Lake-H family falls short of expectations. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">7C8uqvCQ8JkrHkDSggcNob</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3mHVeCdY3d5P5ceJDq92LU-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Tue, 05 Nov 2024 13:11:00 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 08:42:53 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[CPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ editors@tomshardware.com (Hassam Nasir) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Hassam Nasir ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SxxNFHt95eGK37mKPhJpdZ.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Hassam is a lifelong PC gamer and tech enthusiast with over five years of experience in PC hardware journalism. His passion began in childhood when he rescued a discarded Pentium 4 processor, straightening its pins with a kitchen knife to revive a Dell Dimension 2400 at the age of seven. Since then, he has followed the advancements in technology, witnessing the evolution of hardware from the era of AMD&#039;s Opteron architecture to Intel&#039;s Smithfield (Pentium D), and the rise of Voodoo GPUs alongside Nvidia&#039;s FX GPUs taking the market by storm to the latest innovations today. As a seasoned writer, Hassam loves to get into the nitty-gritty details of hardware, providing insights on everything from CPUs, Motherboards and RAM to GPUs. When he’s not writing, you’ll find him building custom water-cooled PCs for himself and his friends, attending drag racing events, or collecting niche fragrances.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3mHVeCdY3d5P5ceJDq92LU-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Intel]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Arrow Lake]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Arrow Lake]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Arrow Lake]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3mHVeCdY3d5P5ceJDq92LU-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>A <a href="https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/8660787">new benchmark</a> has surfaced on Geekbench showcasing Intel's upcoming mobile Core Ultra 9 285H in action. Initial scores put it a smidgeon behind Lunar Lake in terms of single-core performance. Against Meteor Lake, the CPU manages to pull ahead by 19% at roughly the same power envelope,  giving us cause for some optimism. </p><p>Intel's new Core naming schematic has some weird nuances. To keep things short, any CPU without the "Ultra" moniker is equipped with Raptor Lake / Alder Lake silicon. Hence, the Core Ultra 9 285H is part of the Arrow Lake-H family and should feature a TDP of 45W. </p><p>Spotted in the upcoming Dell Pro Max 16 (MC16250) laptop, the Core Ultra 9 285H offers 16 cores (six P + eight E + two LPE) and 16 threads. The laptop hosts 64GB of DDR5-6400 memory - one of the highest speeds we've seen for SODIMMs, assuming the laptop doesn't use LPDDR5 memory. The CPU achieved a maximum clock speed of 5.4 GHz, just 100 MHz shy of the desktop Core Ultra 7 265K. </p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:701px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:130.39%;"><img id="VbQeuWLU3ycEzDjxXcVwGN" name="Core Ultra 9 285H specs" alt="Core Ultra 9 285H specs" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VbQeuWLU3ycEzDjxXcVwGN.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="701" height="914" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: <a href="https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/8660787">Geekbench</a>)</span></figcaption></figure><p>The Core Ultra 9 285H managed to score 2,665 and 15,330 points in the single-core and multi-core categories, respectively. Don't get us wrong - the performance is acceptable at roughly 19% faster than the <a href="https://browser.geekbench.com/processors/intel-core-ultra-9-185h">Core Ultra 9 185H</a> from the last generation but fails to match Lunar Lake's <a href="https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/8457518">Core Ultra 9 288V</a> (30W). The worst part is that the Core Ultra 9 288V scores higher at just 5.1 GHz, meanwhile, the 285H pushes upwards of 5.4 GHz so something is clearly wrong with this benchmark.</p><p>Since we are unaware of the operating environment and temperature, it is not possible to draw any judgments yet. Case in point - the leaked 65W <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/core-ultra-9-285-65w-cpu-beats-core-i9-14900k-in-early-geekbench-benchmark-arrow-lake-chip-shows-15-percent-better-multithreaded-performance-than-predecessor-despite-lacking-hyper-threading">Core Ultra 9 285 non-K</a> scored 3,247 points (single core) landing it 21% faster than the 285H.  Hence, this is likely an engineering sample or a result of poor testing conditions.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:701px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:42.08%;"><img id="yMSur4rmgDtJqXQia5TUDa" name="Core Ultra 9 285H Score" alt="Core Ultra 9 285H Score" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yMSur4rmgDtJqXQia5TUDa.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="701" height="295" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: <a href="https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/8660787">Geekbench</a>)</span></figcaption></figure><p>Nonetheless, we expect this CPU to come paired with an RTX 40, maybe even an RTX 50 laptop GPU in gaming notebooks next year. Despite the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-ultra-9-285k-cpu-review">initial disappointment</a><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-ultra-9-285k-cpu-review"></a>, Arrow Lake scales pretty well at lower power limits so there is a lot of room for improvement. Intel is rumored to announce its Core Ultra 200H/HX/S non-K CPUs at CES 2025, or in just two months.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Diabatix and Asus hit new overclocking records with LN2-optimized heatsink – Intel Core Ultra 9 285K hits 7.448 GHz ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/overclocking/diabatix-and-asus-hit-new-overclocking-records-with-ln2-optimized-heatsink-intel-core-ultra-9-285k-hits-7-448-ghz</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Diabatix creates an LN2-optimized heatsink enabling Asus ROG to set new overclocking records on Intel Core Ultra 9 285K. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">yktYz62TP967GzxgE29SnG</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wraWoWGMG7KWSr8L5bTDiQ-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Thu, 31 Oct 2024 19:21:24 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 12:55:38 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[Overclocking]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Christopher Harper ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qS2hbWnXwNUSmgyAHBQqKB.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Christopher Harper has been a successful freelance tech writer specializing in PC hardware and gaming since 2015, and ghostwrote&amp;nbsp;for various B2B clients in High School before that. Outside of work, Christopher is best known to friends and rivals as an active competitive player in various eSports (particularly fighting games and arena shooters) and a purveyor of music ranging from Jimi Hendrix to Killer Mike to the&amp;nbsp;Sonic Adventure 2&amp;nbsp;soundtrack.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wraWoWGMG7KWSr8L5bTDiQ-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Diabatix]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                        <media:description><![CDATA[Diabatix&#039;s LN2-optimized CPU cooler.]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Diabatix&#039;s LN2-optimized CPU cooler.]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Diabatix&#039;s LN2-optimized CPU cooler.]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wraWoWGMG7KWSr8L5bTDiQ-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Asus&apos;s Maximus Z890 Apex motherboard recently helpedto break overclocking records with Intel&apos;s latest high-end desktop CPU, the Core Ultra 9 285K, pushing it all the way to 7.448 GHz while achieving a 12066 MT/s RAM overclock by using a unique liquid nitrogen (LN2) cooling setup, featuring an <a href="https://www.diabatix.com/blog/asus-rog-sets-new-overclocking-records-with-maximus-z890-apex-and-diabatixs-advanced-thermal-solutions?utm_medium=email&_hsmi=97849591&utm_content=97849591" target="_blank">cooler designed by Diabatix and manufactured by 3D Systems</a>. The unique shape of the cooler is due to its intended use for liquid nitrogen overclocking, made to offset the natural Leidenfrost effect which can occur with LN2, forming undesired vapor layers.</p><div class="youtube-video" data-nosnippet ><div class="video-aspect-box"><iframe data-lazy-priority="high" data-lazy-src="https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/kxC0-isRErk" allowfullscreen></iframe></div></div><p>This LN2 cooler, initially revealed in July, was partially designed by Diabatix&apos; custom generative AI model and tested with 14th Gen Intel chips prior to being adopted for this Arrow Lake S overclocking run. It&apos;s noted as being capable of achieving a thermal resistance of 0.011K/W. LN2 cooling is a notoriously fickle and fragile process, which often means that it&apos;s difficult to sustain these workloads for truly practical lengths of time— but optimized solutions like this can allow the system to run more stably, for longer periods, and thus be pushed to yet farther heights.</p><p>In <a href="https://press.asus.com/news/press-releases/rog-maximus-z890-apex-record-overclocking/" target="_blank">Asus&apos; detailing of the overclocking process and results</a> with the whole range of Intel Arrow Lake CPUs, it&apos;s noted that its overclockers managed to achieve "5 world records, 19 global first-place records and 31 first-place records" with the help of this cooling setup. The peaks are achieved with Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, of course, with the prior-mentioned 7488.7 MHz overclock being done by Elmor and the paired 12066 MT/s RAM overclock being achieved by BenchMarc. The Core Ultra 7 265K and Core Ultra 5 245K are also pushed impressively far beyond their base levels of performance, but of course the high-end numbers are the most impressive when using such specialized LN2 cooling.</p><p>Besides the specialized cooling and CPU in use, the motherboard used to achieve all of this was the Asus ROG Maximus Z890 Apex. While average consumers certainly won&apos;t have access to all this specialized overclocking equipment, these records do reflect positively on that particular motherboard, though like <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/asus-rog-maximus-z790-dark-hero" target="_blank">its predecessor</a>, expect to pay a significant price premium for both the board and the rest of the components you&apos;ll need to make the most of it.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ AMD crowns the Ryzen 7 9800X3D a ‘gaming legend’ in a surprise announcement — chipmaker claims $479 Zen 5 3D V-Cache chip is up to an average 20% faster than Intel Core Ultra 9 flagship ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-crowns-the-ryzen-7-9800x3d-a-gaming-legend-in-a-surprise-announcement-chipmaker-claims-usd479-zen-5-3d-v-cache-chip-is-up-to-an-average-20-percent-faster-than-intel-core-ultra-9-flagship</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ AMD has announced its highly anticipated Ryzen 7 9800X3D processor. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">3YiGTPAqbUpghNPuG8tnNY</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/V7MeqhTAPczyjxeMTKKoz6-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Thu, 31 Oct 2024 14:36:16 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 08:41:04 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[CPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Mark Tyson ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/56vqMYLDaKRHPhHZgbADFR.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Mark&#039;s enthusiasm for computers dampened at an early age by the rubber-keyed Sinclair Spectrum 48K and feelings of Commodore 64 envy. However, in the mid-80s, hope in a digital future was rekindled by the purchase of an Atari 520 STe. Since that time Mark has used a multitude of computers for fun and professional endeavors. He often owned both Macs and PCs but went cold on the former after OS9 was killed off, and warmed to the latter with the introduction of Windows XP.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
Early work years were spent in artwork and reprographics but in the late noughties, Mark started to blog about computers, Taiwanese food culture, and guitar design. This activity led to a full-time position writing about breaking PC tech news for HEXUS, for the best part of a decade. When HEXUS was abruptly closed, Mark helped with the foundation of Club386, before finding a new home at Tom&#039;s Hardware.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;br&gt;
When not wearing through the keycap legends on his PC keyboards, Mark can be found wandering the computer malls of Taiwan&#039;s neon-lit conurbations and enjoying local and international cuisine.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/V7MeqhTAPczyjxeMTKKoz6-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[AMD]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Ryzen 7 9800X3D announcement]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Ryzen 7 9800X3D announcement]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Ryzen 7 9800X3D announcement]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/V7MeqhTAPczyjxeMTKKoz6-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>AMD has announced its highly anticipated Ryzen 7 9800X3D processor, which will vie for a spot on the list of <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">best CPUs</a>. As it makes this processor official, the AMD PR machine has gone into overdrive, claiming the new AM5 chip is already a “gaming legend,” which will deliver enhanced gaming performance and more. Two of AMD's key claims are that the new <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-announces-zen-5-ryzen-9000-processors-launches-in-july-four-new-ryzen-9-7-and-5-processors-with-a-16-ipc-improvement">Zen 5</a> processor with <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-shares-new-second-gen-3d-v-cache-chiplet-details-up-to-25-tbs">3D V-Cache</a> beats its predecessor and its newest Intel rival by 8% and 20%, respectively, in tests of 40 popular PC game titles.</p><p>The new Ryzen 7 9800X3D takes off where the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-7-7800x3d-cpu-review">Ryzen 7 7800X3D</a> left off. It delivers AMD’s Zen 5 cores, plus lavish amounts of cache relocated beneath the processor – this is 2nd Gen AMD 3D V-Cache technology. The new Ryzen 7 9800X3D also offers a 500 MHz improved base frequency and embraces overclocking – but we’ll have to test to see if this is worthwhile. The relocated cache topology means that the Zen 5 cores can be kept cooler, too.</p><p>The specifications of the new Ryzen 7 9800X3D include eight of those Zen 5 cores for 16 threads of processing. It offers a base frequency of 4.7 GHz, with a boost of up to 5.2 GHz before any OC shenanigans. Last but not least, this 120W part packs 104MB of cache (64MB is dedicated 3D V-Cache).</p><div class="see-more see-more--clipped"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet hawk-ignore" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Excited to announce the next chapter in gaming greatness! The world’s best gaming processor, the @AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D is here to power our community to new heights. Let’s level up together! 🚀🎮 pic.twitter.com/2ykzt6UeFc<a href="https://twitter.com/cantworkitout/status/1851970613604126789">October 31, 2024</a></p></blockquote><div class="see-more__filter"></div></div><p>The AMD news blast makes key performance claims, including that the Ryzen 7 9800X3D provides “up to an average 8% gaming performance improvement compared to our last-gen generation and up to an average 20% faster than the competition.” With this power in their AM5 machines, gamers and enthusiasts can push performance to new limits, it says.</p><p>AMD also provides some specific gaming performance pointers, but please remember that first-party benchmarks should not be taken as gospel. In a selection of 40 popular titles, AMD found the shiny new 9800X3D to perform up to 8% faster than the 7800X3D, on average. Slides showed games performing between 1% and 26% faster than the chip’s predecessor. Games like <em>Hogwarts Legacy</em>, <em>Far Cry 6</em>, and <em>Ashes of the Singularity</em> were boosted by over 20% on the new chip.</p><p>Its newest Team Blue rival, the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-ultra-9-285k-cpu-review">Intel Core Ultra 9 285K</a>, was also graced with a direct comparison. According to AMD’s in-house testing, the 9800X3D was 20% faster than the Intel chip in 40 games. Special mention went to <em>Far Cry 6</em> and <em>Cyberpunk 2077</em>, where AMD claimed a stunning 40% advantage over Intel’s latest and greatest consumer desktop chip.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tcr69zs6bkTNXuCyVp6P27.jpg" alt="Ryzen 7 9800X3D announcement" /><figcaption><small role="credit">AMD</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/M6Gh2N9C7Gg3vuqcu5oX27.jpg" alt="Ryzen 7 9800X3D announcement" /><figcaption><small role="credit">AMD</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XUV7DbZ9z8HP6Hn4TYJa27.jpg" alt="Ryzen 7 9800X3D announcement" /><figcaption><small role="credit">AMD</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KFFPKrPpk6hrZD6YQTwG27.jpg" alt="Ryzen 7 9800X3D announcement" /><figcaption><small role="credit">AMD</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>AMD has partnered with developers for upcoming titles. It claims games like <em>Call of Duty</em>, <em>Frostpunk</em>, and <em>Warhammer</em> series are helping to push boundaries with chips like the Ryzen 7 9800X3D.</p><p>Earlier today, we wrote about an internet tipster claiming the new AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D would launch at <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amds-gaming-optimized-ryzen-7-9800x3d-rumored-to-cost-usd479-usd30-price-bump-over-prior-gen-ryzen-7-7800x3d" target="_blank">$30 over</a> its predecessor parts. That has turned out to be accurate, with AMD confirming this processor will launch at an MSRP of $479.99. Retail availability is scheduled for November 7.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Intel Core Ultra 9 285K cooling testing: How much does it take to keep Arrow Lake cool in MSI's MPG Gungnir 300R Airflow PC Case?  ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cooling/intel-core-ultra-9-285k-cooling-testing-how-much-does-it-take-to-keep-arrow-lake-cool-in-msis-mpg-gungnir-300r-airflow-pc-case</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ We tested Intel’s Core Ultra 9 285K in MSI’s MPG Gungnir 300R Computer Case to determine what coolers are best paired with Intel’s new Ultra 9 CPU. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">KoTB4jMNaPs9RAwyVfrK6</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eFqQtHHLVbiUFssbQiA66i-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Wed, 30 Oct 2024 16:33:37 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 09:53:13 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[Cooling]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Albert Thomas ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HZFCUXYqjPLXde2hcteqXG.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Albert Thomas has been tinkering with PCs for a long time, starting with his first custom-built 486 rig which he blew up by connecting the motherboard power cables incorrectly. Albert is an active Redditor who moderates various tech subreddits and has written about PC Tech for AdoredTV and other, now defunct, publications. When he&#039;s not tinkering with computers or reviewing coolers, Albert can be found sipping on a cold Frazil and will tell you how it&#039;s the best Slushee in America.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eFqQtHHLVbiUFssbQiA66i-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Tom&#039;s Hardware]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Intel Core Ultra 9 285K cooling testing]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Intel Core Ultra 9 285K cooling testing]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Intel Core Ultra 9 285K cooling testing]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eFqQtHHLVbiUFssbQiA66i-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Our most recent test bench for cooling utilized Intel’s i7-14700K and it (along with its i9 sibling) was one of the most difficult-to-cool CPUs in recent history. As a result, I recommended <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/liquid-cooling/msi-coreliquid-i240-and-i360-review"><u>liquid coolers</u></a> paired with <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/thermalright-lga1700-bcf-contact-frame"><u>CPU contact frames</u></a> to prevent potential CPU bending for those looking to sustain the best possible thermal and CPU performance.</p><p>With their dramatically different architecture, Intel’s Arrow Lake (Core Ultra 200) CPUs present different challenges for cooling. In addition to using more advanced manufacturing and packaging processes, the CPU’s hotspot has shifted north compared to the previous-generation Raptor Lake CPUs, which may impact the performance of some coolers.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:3363px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.26%;"><img id="LCoxZmgP26gW5BeDt6moLW" name="20241010_151012" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K cooling testing" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LCoxZmgP26gW5BeDt6moLW.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="3363" height="1892" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>In this article we’ll investigate just what you need to cool Intel’s Core Ultra 9 285K. But before we get into the cooler testing results, we’re going to take a quick look at <a href="https://www.msi.com/PC-Case/MPG-GUNGNIR-300R-AIRFLOW"><u>MSI’s Gungnir 300R</u></a> case, which we used for this testing. MSI also sent along the motherboard and power supply we used, while Intel provided the Core Ultra 9 285K CPU.</p><h2 id="msi-mpg-gungnir-300r-airflow-computer-case-specifications">MSI MPG Gungnir 300R Airflow Computer Case specifications</h2><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:3366px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.24%;"><img id="qEWQoqzWzfqJviKxAQEBPi" name="20241015_134926" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K cooling testing" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qEWQoqzWzfqJviKxAQEBPi.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="3366" height="1893" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><div ><table><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Case</strong></td><td  >MSI MPG Gungnir 300R Airflow</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>MSRP</strong></td><td  >$169.99 USD</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Type</strong></td><td  >Mid-Tower</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Motherboard Support</strong></td><td  >E-ATX(up to 280 x 305 mm) ATX / M-ATX / ITX</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>IO Panel</strong></td><td  >2 x USB 3.2 Gen 1 Type-A (5Gbps)  1 x USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 Type C (20Gbps)  1 x Audio-out /Mic-in  1 x LED Switch Button</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Net Weight</strong></td><td  >10.9 kg / 24.03 lbs</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Pre-installed fans</strong></td><td  >Front: 3 x 120 mm  Rear: 1 x 120 mm</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Radiator Support</strong></td><td  >Front: 120 / 140 / 240 / 280 / 360 mm  Top: 120 / 140 / 240 / 280 / 360 mm  Rear: 120 / 140 mm</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Dimensions (D * W * H)</strong></td><td  >474 x 231 x 490 mm / 18.7 x 9.1 x 19.3 inches</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Drive Support</strong></td><td  >6 x 2.5” 2 x 2.5” / 3.5”</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Power Supply Size</strong></td><td  >ATX</td></tr></tbody></table></div><h2 id="features-of-msi-mpg-gungnir-300r-computer-case">Features of MSI MPG Gungnir 300R Computer Case</h2><p><strong>*️⃣ Side view and customization options, hinged door</strong></p><p>Looking from the side, the inner design of the Gungnir 300R is fairly standard for an airflow-focused case. At the top, you have support for extra fans or up to a 360mm radiator. The bottom houses a chamber hiding the PSU and drive cage, and serves to support a pre-installed LED GPU support bar.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:4000px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="BhnsEgtVVr4znKK3Mvpmni" name="20241015_135157" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K cooling testing" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BhnsEgtVVr4znKK3Mvpmni.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="4000" height="2250" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>There are only two parts that aren’t quite traditional here: To the side of the motherboard, you can install up to two additional fans. The other, more interesting feature is the side cover.</p><p><strong>*️⃣ Efficient design</strong></p><p>While fishbowl-style computer cases are visually appealing to many builders, I generally prefer more traditional setups because side intake isn’t usually as efficient or effective as traditional direct airflow from front-intake fans in cases like MSI’s MPG Gungnir 300R Airflow. </p><p><strong>*️⃣ LED GPU Support Bar</strong></p><p>Preinstalled to the bottom cage is an GPU support bar with ARGB lighting illuminating the MSI Dragon logo.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:3500px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.26%;"><img id="7KhDDjyYujqjch72eQE8Ri" name="20241028_115854" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K cooling testing" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7KhDDjyYujqjch72eQE8Ri.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="3500" height="1969" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p><strong>*️⃣ Build Quality and Price</strong></p><p>The build quality of MSI’s MPG Gungnir 300R is sturdy, with no apparent weaknesses. However, it is a bit lacking in space behind the motherboard – so you’ll have to take some care with cable management. Its price is moderate at $169.99 – you can certainly find cases that are more and less expensive. </p><p><strong>*️⃣ Rear side view, storage support, and cable management features</strong></p><p>The backside of the case has velcro straps in the center and along the rear for cable management. Storage enthusiasts will be pleased to see four 2.5-inch drives supported on the back and an additional two drives of either 2.5- or 3.5-inch size at the bottom drive bay – enough for a “small” file server!</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:3861px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="wqmcLG6YUrGhmLuGAabrti" name="20241015_135338" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K cooling testing" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wqmcLG6YUrGhmLuGAabrti.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="3861" height="2172" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p><strong>*️⃣ Four pre-installed 120mm ARGB fans</strong>  </p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:3769px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="mMFYA3k8UmJRBeRkXzEpgi" name="20241015_135051" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K cooling testing" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mMFYA3k8UmJRBeRkXzEpgi.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="3769" height="2120" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>The fans included with a case have a huge impact on noise levels and thermal performance. MSI includes three 120mm intake fans and one 120mm exhaust fan in the  Gungnir 300R, all of which are PWM-controlled. For this cooling setup, I’ve set these fans to run at 35 dBA. </p><p><strong>*️⃣ IO Panel</strong></p><p>The IO panel is located at the top of the case and features a button to quickly change LED lighting settings on the fly, which is connected to a hardware ARGB hub. There’s also one USB-C and two USB-A ports here, along with separate mic and headphone jacks.<br>  </p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:3148px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.26%;"><img id="mMmxDfLVBwo9LPPvqg43Wi" name="20241015_135029" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K cooling testing" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mMmxDfLVBwo9LPPvqg43Wi.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="3148" height="1771" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p><strong>*️⃣ Dust filters</strong></p><p>The top, side, and bottom of the case are protected with easily removable dust filters. The front is filtered with mesh, but does not feature an easily removable filter.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZsaNmdHHHK2y4mD7mwCR8i.jpg" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K cooling testing" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xhHuGAmnWvaLEEMP84oURi.jpg" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K cooling testing" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p><strong>*️⃣ Radiator and Fan Support</strong></p><p>Radiators up to 360mm can be mounted at the top or front of the case. Two fans can be installed on the side of the unit, three on the top, and one on the rear exhaust.</p><h2 id="other-components">Other components</h2><p><strong>*️⃣ MSI Ventus 3X OC RTX 4070Ti Super GPU</strong></p><p>MSI provided the Ventus 3X OC RTX 4070 Ti GPU for use with CPU + GPU cooler testing. During stress testing, this GPU will consume <em>up to</em> ~290W of power, but typically consumes much less in gaming. </p><p>What I like about this GPU is that it features the same bulky heatsink and fans featured on MSI’s more power-hungry RTX 4090 Ventus. This might be a bit of overkill for a card that consumes less than 300W, but it allows for cool and quiet operation in any workload you’re likely to encounter.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:2930px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="dXfVATL9UvSjYLWtavVh3W" name="20241017_202816" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K cooling testing" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dXfVATL9UvSjYLWtavVh3W.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="2930" height="1648" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p><strong>*️⃣ MSI Z890 Carbon Wifi Motherboard</strong></p><p>MSI also sent along its newly released Z890 Carbon Wifi motherboard for testing. One of the things that I especially liked about this board is that the CPU power connection has been moved from its traditional spot in the top left corner to a spot above the RAM slots. This makes installing the CPU power cables a much simpler task. </p><p>Many motherboard makers skimp on built-in SSD heatsinks, cooling only one side – this can cause throttling in some scenarios – but not MSI. In addition to supporting five NVMe SSDs, the SSD heatsinks that come with the Z890 Carbon Wifi motherboard are double-sided and so should effectively cool SSDs in common scenarios.</p><p>The motherboard also has two PCIe 5 x16 slots and one PCI-e 4 x16 expansion slot for use with GPUs and other devices.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:3645px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.27%;"><img id="r4w58uDHgx7SHDBnMyjtMW" name="20241017_202954" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K cooling testing" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/r4w58uDHgx7SHDBnMyjtMW.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="3645" height="2051" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p><strong>*️⃣ MSI MAG AI1250GL PCI-E 5 PSU</strong></p><p>To power our cooling setup, MSI provided a MAG AI1250GL PCI-5-supporting PSU. The PSU also ran cool and quiet in all scenarios I tested it under, but the components I’ve used won’t push the PSU to its limits – your experience might be different with more power-hungry parts.<br>  </p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:3382px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.24%;"><img id="svZT2mFj8jPcVpayprk28i" name="20241015_142830" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K cooling testing" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/svZT2mFj8jPcVpayprk28i.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="3382" height="1902" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>Finally, Intel provided both a Core Ultra 7 265K and Core Ultra 9 285K CPU for use in our cooling testing. Today we’re covering the cooling needs for the higher-end Core Ultra 9 285K, and as you’ll see in the benchmarks below it’s much easier to tame than previous-generation Intel i9 CPUs – roughly comparable to Intel’s i7-13700K in cooling difficulty.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:3363px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.26%;"><img id="LCoxZmgP26gW5BeDt6moLW" name="20241010_151012" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K cooling testing" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LCoxZmgP26gW5BeDt6moLW.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="3363" height="1892" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><h2 id="testing-configuration-intel-lga1851-platform">Testing configuration – Intel LGA1851 platform</h2><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:4000px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="eFqQtHHLVbiUFssbQiA66i" name="20241028_121025" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K cooling testing" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eFqQtHHLVbiUFssbQiA66i.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="4000" height="2250" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><div ><table><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>CPU</strong></td><td  >Intel “Arrow Lake” Core Ultra 9 285K (8P+16E)</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Motherboard</strong></td><td  >MSI Z890 Carbon Wifi</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>RAM</strong></td><td  ><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/ram/kingston-fury-beast-ddr5-6000-c40-2x32gb-review"><u>Kingston Fury Beast DDR5-6000 (16gb x 2)</u></a></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Case</strong></td><td  >MSI MPG Gungnir 300R Airflow</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Storage</strong></td><td  ><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-optane-ssd-dc-p5800x-review"><u>Intel Optane DC P5800X 400GB</u><br></a><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/teamgroup-cardea-z540-ssd-review"><u>TeamGroup Z540 2TB</u></a></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>NVMe Heatsink</strong></td><td  ><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/heatsinks/teamgroup-t-force-dark-airflow-i-ssd-cooler-review/"><u>TeamGroup Dark Airflow I SSD Cooler</u></a></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>GPU</strong></td><td  >MSI Ventus 3X OC RTX 4070Ti Super</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>PSU</strong></td><td  >MSI MAG AI1250GL</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>I do a few things to ensure my results are useful to system builders and upgraders. To begin, I strictly regulate the ambient temperature to 23C during testing. I do not accept results at 22 or 24C as valid, even though, in theory, there shouldn’t be much of a difference. </p><p>I also do my best to emulate typical user conditions, with thermal typical thermal loads, tested in a real case – not on an open bench, which can decrease the difficulty of cooling.</p><h2 id="observations-when-testing-intel-s-arrow-lake-ultra-9-285k-cpu">Observations when testing Intel’s Arrow Lake Ultra 9 285K CPU</h2><p><strong>Gaming Power Consumption</strong></p><p>While the Ultra 9 285K can be difficult to cool when all cores are fully loaded, in more common scenarios like gaming it is much more energy efficient than its predecessors - and as such, is easier to cool. A great example of this is <em>Far Cry V</em>, where the peak power consumption of the Ultra 7/9 CPUs is roughly 60% that of Intel’s 13th Gen i7 and i9 CPUs.  </p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:4649px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.79%;"><img id="ynsZpiKSBMYQCSK96WDLWh" name="Far Cry V" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K cooling testing" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ynsZpiKSBMYQCSK96WDLWh.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="4649" height="2640" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><h2 id="offset-mounting-can-improve-thermal-performance">Offset mounting can improve thermal performance</h2><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:2982px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.24%;"><img id="Xpm4EGJzApDKWzkUUdZfUi" name="20241027_115714" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K cooling testing" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Xpm4EGJzApDKWzkUUdZfUi.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="2982" height="1677" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>Arrow Lake’s hotspot has shifted north compared to the previous-generation Raptor Lake CPUs, which may impact the performance of some coolers. <a href="https://www.msi.com/Promotion/coreliquid-lga-1851-offset-kit-enhancer"><u>MSI is offering a mounting offset kit at no charge</u></a> for users of their AIOs, which the company claims can improve performance by up to 3 degrees Celsius with their CoreLiquid I360 AIO. I tested it with the smaller 240mm AIO, and found an improvement of up to 5 degrees C!</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:4637px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.91%;"><img id="PR3otynRmCjZH26e7QbPXh" name="Offsets" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K cooling testing" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PR3otynRmCjZH26e7QbPXh.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="4637" height="2639" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><h2 id="cpu-thermal-results-without-power-limits">CPU Thermal results without power limits</h2><p>Without power limits enforced on Intel’s Core Ultra 9 285K, the CPU will hit its peak temperature (TJ Max) and thermally throttle with even the strongest of air coolers and many liquid coolers on the market. The overall cooling difficulty is similar to Intel’s i7-13700K, and so only <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/best-picks/best-aio-coolers"><u>the best liquid coolers</u></a> will be able to pass this test.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:4637px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.91%;"><img id="cehcicrt5Bf2bcCc9Nktah" name="avg max temp" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K cooling testing" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cehcicrt5Bf2bcCc9Nktah.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="4637" height="2639" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>The above metrics are the <em>average</em> temperature of the CPU, with red bars indicating coolers where the peak temperature of the CPU reached the maximum temperature (TJ Max) of 105C. It’s worth noting, however, that even the coolers that pass this test reach peak temperatures of 104C – only a single degree from the throttling point.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:4637px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.91%;"><img id="PvtrSxiUfi7ki8DZVhtbYh" name="Peak Temp" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K cooling testing" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PvtrSxiUfi7ki8DZVhtbYh.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="4637" height="2639" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>Where the CPU reaches the peak temperature and throttles, we’ll also look at the CPU package power to determine the effectiveness of a cooler.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:4637px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.93%;"><img id="FgzjXuyGjBUoRyVoA7zKYh" name="Avg watts" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K cooling testing" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FgzjXuyGjBUoRyVoA7zKYh.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="4637" height="2640" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>And of course, we’ll also look at noise levels.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:4648px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:57.27%;"><img id="AmtcG7LQwKzSBrvjhEFZah" name="noise levels" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K cooling testing" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/AmtcG7LQwKzSBrvjhEFZah.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="4648" height="2662" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>Observant readers will notice that the chart starts at 35 dBA. This is in part because 35 dBA is the lowest level my noise meter can accurately measure. But also, noise level measurements are logarithmic. A person with typical hearing will perceive a doubling of noise for every 10 dBA increase, but the impact can vary from person to person.</p><p><strong>Loud fans are pointless</strong></p><p>I will be much more critical of coolers that run needlessly loud if I test them with Arrow Lake, because it doesn’t make a lick of difference. To demonstrate this point, I’ve compared coolers running a 135W load on the CPU and a full load on the GPU. I chose this power limit based on the <em>peak </em>power consumption I observed in <em>Shadow of the Tomb Raider</em>. It should be noted, however, that the average power consumption is lower. In most games, the Core Ultra 9 285K will average ~80W of power consumption in my testing.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LXRVHK8zqUuyD6MLWkTHfh.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K cooling testing" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CETyUrdWmBVWoHe5KCopbh.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K cooling testing" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>If you look at both of the charts above, you’ll see that the cooling performance gained by letting the fans run loudly is minimal – we’re talking only 1-2C of difference. So unless you’re trying to earn top scores in HWBot overclocking competitions, there’s really no point in letting fans run loudly. </p><p><strong>How much does performance improve with better cooling?</strong></p><p>It is technically true that you’ll need one of the strongest AIOs on the market to keep Intel’s Core Ultra 9 285K to prevent thermal throttling in the most stressful situations. But at the same time, you aren’t going to gain much performance this way, unless you’re overclocking the CPU.</p><p>To demonstrate this, I tested one of the strongest AIOs on the market and one of the weakest air coolers on the market while running Cinebench R23. During this test, all power limits were removed. What I found is that in short-term workloads, there’s literally no loss in benchmark performance with a basic air cooler. However, this changes if the workload is extended to a duration of ten or twenty minutes – showing a performance loss of 5% versus a high-end liquid cooler.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:4649px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.79%;"><img id="N3w7uZdrmd5hcBzFZdTsJh" name="Cooler Scaling" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K cooling testing" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/N3w7uZdrmd5hcBzFZdTsJh.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="4649" height="2640" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><h2 id="conclusion">Conclusion  </h2><p>Intel’s Core Ultra 9 285K is much easier to cool than prior-generation Core i9 CPUs, similar in overall cooling difficulty to Intel’s past i7-13700K. If you want the absolute best performance, you’ll need one of the strongest AIOs on the market. However, our testing shows that lower-end coolers only result in minor performance losses that most users won’t notice.  </p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Intel Core Ultra 7 265K cooling testing: How much does it take to keep Arrow Lake cool in MSI's MPG Velox 100R PC Case? ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cooling/intel-core-ultra-7-265k-cooling-testing-how-much-does-it-take-to-keep-arrow-lake-cool-in-msis-mpg-velox-100r-pc-case</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ We tested Intel’s Core Ultra 265K in MSI’s MPG Velox 100R Computer Case to determine what cooler is best paired with Intel’s latest Ultra 7 CPU. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">mZY87NuGrEcUFh9VdKokL4</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3pYQeTeDBTWRcRckhArYhG-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Thu, 24 Oct 2024 15:30:57 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 10:05:59 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[Cooling]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Albert Thomas ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HZFCUXYqjPLXde2hcteqXG.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Albert Thomas has been tinkering with PCs for a long time, starting with his first custom-built 486 rig which he blew up by connecting the motherboard power cables incorrectly. Albert is an active Redditor who moderates various tech subreddits and has written about PC Tech for AdoredTV and other, now defunct, publications. When he&#039;s not tinkering with computers or reviewing coolers, Albert can be found sipping on a cold Frazil and will tell you how it&#039;s the best Slushee in America.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3pYQeTeDBTWRcRckhArYhG-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Tom&#039;s Hardware]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Intel Core Ultra 7 265K cooling testing]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Intel Core Ultra 7 265K cooling testing]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Intel Core Ultra 7 265K cooling testing]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3pYQeTeDBTWRcRckhArYhG-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Our most recent test bench for cooling utilized Intel’s i7-14700K, and it (along with its i9 sibling) was one of the most difficult-to-cool CPUs in recent history. As a result, I recommended <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/liquid-cooling/msi-coreliquid-i240-and-i360-review"><u>liquid coolers</u></a> paired with <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/thermalright-lga1700-bcf-contact-frame"><u>CPU contact frames</u></a> to prevent potential CPU bending for those looking to sustain the best possible thermal and CPU performance.</p><p>With their dramatically different architecture, Intel’s Arrow Lake (Core Ultra 200) CPUs present different challenges for cooling. In addition to using more advanced manufacturing and packaging processes, the CPU’s hotspot has shifted north compared to the previous-generation Raptor Lake CPUs, which may impact the performance of some coolers. <a href="https://www.msi.com/Promotion/coreliquid-lga-1851-offset-kit-enhancer"><u>MSI is offering a mounting offset kit at no charge</u></a> for users of their AIOs, which the company claims can improve performance by up to 3 degrees Celsius.</p><p>Before we get into the cooler testing results, we’re going to take a quick look at MSI’s Velox 100R case, which we used for this testing. MSI also sent along the motherboard and power supply we used, while Intel provided the Core Ultra 7 265K CPU.</p><h2 id="msi-velox-100r-computer-case-specifications">MSI Velox 100R Computer Case specifications</h2><div ><table><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Case</strong></td><td  >MSI Velox 100R</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>MSRP</strong></td><td  >$139.99 USD</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Type</strong></td><td  >Mid-Tower</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Motherboard Support</strong></td><td  >ATX/ Micro-ATX/ Mini-ITX</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>IO Panel</strong></td><td  >2 x USB 3.2 Gen 1 Type-A (5Gbps) 1 x USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 Type C (20Gbps) 1 x Audio-out 1 x Mic-in 1 x LED Switch Button</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Net Weight</strong></td><td  >8.64 kg / 19.05 lbs</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Pre-installed fans</strong></td><td  >Front: 3 x 120 mm Rear: 1 x 120 mm</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Radiator Support</strong></td><td  >Front: 120 / 140 / 240 / 280 / 360 mm Top: 120 / 140 / 240 / 280 / 360 mm Rear: 120 mm Side: 120 / 240 mm</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Dimensions (D * W * H)</strong></td><td  >474 x 231 x 490 mm / 18.7 x 9.1 x 19.3 inches</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Drive Support</strong></td><td  >2x 2.5” and 2x 3.5”drives</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Power Supply Size</strong></td><td  >ATX</td></tr></tbody></table></div><h2 id="features-of-msi-velox-100r-computer-case">Features of MSI Velox 100R Computer Case</h2><p><strong>*️⃣ Side view and customization options, hinged door</strong></p><p>Looking from the side, the inner design is simple but effective. At the top, you have support for extra fans or up to a 360mm radiator. The bottom houses a chamber hiding the PSU and drive cage.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:4000px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="dkBmASkqjALGhPUUDLNETR" name="20241017_132254.jpg" alt="Intel Core Ultra 7 265K cooling testing" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dkBmASkqjALGhPUUDLNETR.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="4000" height="2250" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dkBmASkqjALGhPUUDLNETR.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>There are only two parts that aren’t quite traditional here: To the side of the motherboard you can install up to two additional fans. The other, more interesting feature is the side cover – the door is hinged and opens using a convenient handle. The picture below shows the cover in the closed position.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:3452px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.26%;"><img id="45u8BGFa4wwGnRzxhFteVH" name="20241016_193313-full.jpg" alt="Intel Core Ultra 7 265K cooling testing" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/45u8BGFa4wwGnRzxhFteVH.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="3452" height="1942" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/45u8BGFa4wwGnRzxhFteVH.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>When you open the door, you’ll see there are four circles on the side. The top two circles are protective padding to prevent damage to the door. The middle two circles are magnetic, sealing the door to the case when it’s closed.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:3795px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.26%;"><img id="Pa7rEhetLb2ttvoCkgfDtK" name="20241016_193525.jpg" alt="Intel Core Ultra 7 265K cooling testing" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Pa7rEhetLb2ttvoCkgfDtK.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="3795" height="2135" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Pa7rEhetLb2ttvoCkgfDtK.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p><strong>*️⃣ Efficient design</strong></p><p>While fishbowl-style computer cases may have an aesthetic appeal, I tend to prefer more traditional setups because side intake isn’t usually as efficient or effective as traditional direct airflow from front-intake fans in cases like MSI’s Velox 100R.</p><p><strong>*️⃣ Subtle LED lighting strip</strong></p><p>On the side of the bottom cage, there is a slim lighting strip that stretches from one end of the case to the other, adding a subtle flair to the case’s aesthetic.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:2369px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.23%;"><img id="sXxFVKDZ2dFYwsLZxHNW3G" name="20241016_193313.jpg" alt="Intel Core Ultra 7 265K cooling testing" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sXxFVKDZ2dFYwsLZxHNW3G.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="2369" height="1332" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sXxFVKDZ2dFYwsLZxHNW3G.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>*️⃣ <strong>Build Quality and Price</strong></p><p>The build quality of MSI’s Velox 100R is sturdy, with no apparent weaknesses. However, it is a bit lacking in space behind the motherboard – so you’ll have to take some care with cable management. Its price is moderate at $139.99 – you can certainly find cases that are more and less expensive.</p><p><strong>*️⃣ Rear side view, storage support, and cable management features</strong></p><p>The backside of the unit is this case’s primary downside. There’s not a lot of room to work with. For cable management, MSI includes three Velcro straps as shown in the image below. Two 2.5-inch drives and two 3.5-inch drives are supported, for a total of 4 drives. The 2.5-inch drives can be installed behind the motherboard, and the 3.5-inch drives can be installed to the drive cage at the bottom of the unit. I’ve highlighted these areas in the photo below.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:3975px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="5riuuRtWSdCC3zeVhcKo7M" name="20241016_010459.jpg" alt="Intel Core Ultra 7 265K cooling testing" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5riuuRtWSdCC3zeVhcKo7M.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="3975" height="2236" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5riuuRtWSdCC3zeVhcKo7M.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p><strong>*️⃣ Four pre-installed 120mm ARGB fans</strong></p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:4000px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="VySJ6aaUa5Fxj9X3YHJkkM" name="20241017_221658.jpg" alt="Intel Core Ultra 7 265K cooling testing" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VySJ6aaUa5Fxj9X3YHJkkM.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="4000" height="2250" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VySJ6aaUa5Fxj9X3YHJkkM.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>The fans included with a case have a huge impact on noise levels and thermal performance. MSI includes three 120mm intake fans and one 120mm exhaust fan in the Velox 100R, all of which are PWM-controlled. For this cooling setup, I’ve set these fans to run at 35dBA.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:3062px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.24%;"><img id="ER5rTNthZqAKBjBMY3PDLG" name="20241017_222451.jpg" alt="Intel Core Ultra 7 265K cooling testing" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ER5rTNthZqAKBjBMY3PDLG.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="3062" height="1722" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ER5rTNthZqAKBjBMY3PDLG.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p><strong>*️⃣ IO Panel</strong></p><p>The IO panel is located at the top of the case and features a button to quickly change LED lighting settings on the fly which is connected to a hardware ARGB hub. THere’s also one USB-C and two USB-A ports here, along with separate mic and headphone jacks, an HDD activity indicator, plus power and reset buttons.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:2953px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="qGuEZjWsB7GYfgeJi9b7PJ" name="20241017_221534.jpg" alt="Intel Core Ultra 7 265K cooling testing" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qGuEZjWsB7GYfgeJi9b7PJ.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="2953" height="1661" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qGuEZjWsB7GYfgeJi9b7PJ.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p><strong>*️⃣ Dust filters</strong></p><p>The top, side, and bottom of the case are protected with easily removable dust filters. The front is filtered with mesh, but does not feature an easily removable filter.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:3289px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="NpVGWNuTv2w885AapLkwMK" name="20241016_010317.jpg" alt="Intel Core Ultra 7 265K cooling testing" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NpVGWNuTv2w885AapLkwMK.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="3289" height="1850" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NpVGWNuTv2w885AapLkwMK.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p><strong>*️⃣ Radiator and Fan Support</strong></p><p>Radiators up to 360mm can be mounted at the top or front of the case. Two fans can be installed on the side of the unit, three on the top, and one on the rear exhaust.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:4000px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="uNDzJM7fs5iRBQYhMnpArP" name="20241017_221907.jpg" alt="Intel Core Ultra 7 265K cooling testing" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uNDzJM7fs5iRBQYhMnpArP.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="4000" height="2250" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uNDzJM7fs5iRBQYhMnpArP.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><h2 id="other-components-2">Other components</h2><p>*️⃣ <strong>MSI Ventus 3X OC RTX 4070Ti Super GPU</strong></p><p>MSI provided the Ventus 3X OC RTX 4070 Ti GPU for use with CPU + GPU cooler testing. During stress testing, this GPU will consume up to ~290W of power, but typically consumes much less in gaming.</p><p>What I like about this GPU is that it features the same bulky heatsink and fans featured on MSI’s more power-hungry RTX 4090 Ventus. This might be a bit overkill for a card that consumes less than 300W, but it allows for cool and quiet operation in any workload you might encounter. I can recommend MSI’s Ventus lineup of GPUs for gamers looking for strong performance paired with whisper-quiet noise levels.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:2930px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="miFXo2v6CbMVjiGMCgbxwH" name="20241017_202816.jpg" alt="Intel Core Ultra 7 265K cooling testing" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/miFXo2v6CbMVjiGMCgbxwH.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="2930" height="1648" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/miFXo2v6CbMVjiGMCgbxwH.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p><strong>*️⃣ MSI Z890 Carbon Wifi Motherboard</strong></p><p>MSI also sent along its newly released Z890 Carbon Wifi motherboard for testing. One of the things that I especially liked about this board is that the CPU power connection has been moved from its traditional spot in the top left corner to a spot above the RAM slots. This makes installing the CPU power cables a much simpler task.</p><p>Many motherboard makers skimp on their built-in SSD heatsinks, cooling only one side – this can cause throttling in some scenarios – but not MSI. In addition to supporting five NVMe SSDs, the SSD heatsinks that come with the Z890 Carbon Wifi motherboard are double-sided and so should effectively cool SSDs in common scenarios.</p><p>The motherboard also has two PCIe 5 x16 slots and one PCI-e 4 x16 expansion slot for use with GPUs and other devices.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:3645px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.27%;"><img id="D82iibBsDLFUiHDYKy44cQ" name="20241017_202954.jpg" alt="Intel Core Ultra 7 265K cooling testing" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/D82iibBsDLFUiHDYKy44cQ.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="3645" height="2051" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/D82iibBsDLFUiHDYKy44cQ.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p><strong>*️⃣ MSI MEG AI1300P PCI-E 5 PSU</strong></p><p>To power our cooling setup, MSI provided a MEG AI1300P PCI-5-supporting PSU. What I like about this power supply is that it features the ability to report detailed statistics such as system power consumption, PSU temperatures, and more if connected to a motherboard via USB. The PSU also ran cool and quiet in all scenarios I tested it under, but the components I’ve used won’t push the PSU to its limits – your experience might be different with more power-hungry components.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:3350px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.24%;"><img id="VDsee5Fo39Nsmj6rYTbzMN" name="20241017_202843.jpg" alt="Intel Core Ultra 7 265K cooling testing" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VDsee5Fo39Nsmj6rYTbzMN.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="3350" height="1884" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VDsee5Fo39Nsmj6rYTbzMN.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>Finally, Intel provided both a Core Ultra 7 265K and Core Ultra 9 285K CPU for use in our cooling testing. Today we’re covering the cooling needs for the more common Core Ultra 7 265K, and as you’ll see in the benchmarks below it’s much easier to tame than previous-generation INtel CPUs. However, the same can’t be said for Intel’s more power-hungry Core Ultra 9 285K, but that’s an article for another day.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:2635px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.24%;"><img id="snyPW38YMfSbKcdEAtgvqJ" name="20241010_151012.jpg" alt="Intel Core Ultra 7 265K cooling testing" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/snyPW38YMfSbKcdEAtgvqJ.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="2635" height="1482" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/snyPW38YMfSbKcdEAtgvqJ.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p><strong>To be clear</strong>: The advice given in this article is only applicable to Intel’s Core Ultra 7 265K and Core Ultra 5 245K CPUs. We’ll soon have another feature covering the cooling needs of Intel’s Core Ultra 9 285K, with a different set of guidelines and recommendations.</p><h2 id="testing-configuration-x2013-intel-lga1851-platform">Testing configuration – Intel LGA1851 platform</h2><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:4000px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="dkBmASkqjALGhPUUDLNETR" name="20241017_132254.jpg" alt="Intel Core Ultra 7 265K cooling testing" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dkBmASkqjALGhPUUDLNETR.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="4000" height="2250" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dkBmASkqjALGhPUUDLNETR.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><div ><table><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>CPU</strong></td><td  >Intel “Arrow Lake” Core Ultra 7 265K (8P+12E)</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Motherboard</strong></td><td  >MSI Z890 Carbon Wifi</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>RAM</strong></td><td  >Kingston Fury Beast DDR5-6000 (16gb x 2)</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Case</strong></td><td  >MSI Velox 100R White</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Storage</strong></td><td  >Intel Optane DC P5800X 400GBTeamGroup Z540 2TB</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>NVMe Heatsink</strong></td><td  >TeamGroup Dark Airflow I SSD Cooler</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>GPU</strong></td><td  >MSI Ventus 3X OC RTX 4070Ti Super</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>PSU</strong></td><td  >MSI AI1300P</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>I do a few things to ensure my results are useful to actual users. To begin, I strictly regulate the ambient temperature to 23C during testing. I do not accept results at 22 or 24C as valid, even though, in theory, there shouldn’t be much of a difference.</p><p>I also do my best to emulate the conditions a user would encounter using the cooler, with thermal loads similar to those a person would experience in real life, and tested in a real case – not on an open bench, which can decrease the difficulty of cooling.</p><p>As Intel’s Core Ultra 7 265K is easy to cool, we’ll be focusing our reviews on low and mid-range air coolers, with a special emphasis on quiet noise-normalized performance.</p><h2 id="cpu-thermal-results-with-and-without-power-limits">CPU Thermal results with and without power limits</h2><p>Without power limits enforced on Intel’s i7-14700K, the CPU will hit its peak temperature (TJ Max) and thermally throttle with even the strongest of air coolers and even most liquid coolers on the market. But Intel’s Core Ultra 7 265K is a different beast that can be easily cooled by simple air coolers. When I removed the power limitations from the CPU and ran Cinebench R23’s multi-core benchmark, the CPU peaked at 97C – eight degrees below Core Ultra 200s maximum temperature (TJ Max) of 105C.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:4637px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.93%;"><img id="L9JdkysjT5datswsKzkX4F" name="max temp.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 7 265K cooling testing" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/L9JdkysjT5datswsKzkX4F.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="4637" height="2640" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/L9JdkysjT5datswsKzkX4F.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>In stress tests where the CPU is able to remain under TJMax, stronger cooling can reduce electrical leakage throughout the CPU – reducing its peak power consumption. As such, we’ll be looking at this metric as well for coolers tested with Intel’s Ultra 7 265K. When paired with Scythe’s Mugen 6, power consumption peaked at 247W while running Cinebench R23’s multi-core benchmark.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:4637px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.93%;"><img id="eUbAeVK4vueFjtii4thkEF" name="Max watts.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 7 265K cooling testing" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eUbAeVK4vueFjtii4thkEF.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="4637" height="2640" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eUbAeVK4vueFjtii4thkEF.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>We’ll also be recording noise levels in this stress test. To keep the CPU cool in this worst-case scenario, the fans of Scythe&apos;s Mugen 6 ran at their maximum speed, which is still a fairly low noise level of only 39.6 dBA.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:4648px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:57.27%;"><img id="SfLoafHDoAdXs47DRdAstE" name="Max noise.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 7 265K cooling testing" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SfLoafHDoAdXs47DRdAstE.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="4648" height="2662" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SfLoafHDoAdXs47DRdAstE.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>Observant readers will notice that the graph starts at 35dBA. This is in part because 35dBA is the lowest level my noise meter can accurately measure. But also, noise level measurements are logarithmic. A person with typical hearing will perceive a doubling of noise for every 10dBA increase, but the impact can vary from person to person.</p><h2 id="power-limits-are-an-option-for-easier-cooling">Power limits are an option for easier cooling</h2><p>Before we continue with our traditional cooling benchmarks, It’s worth reminding folks that you can substantially reduce the difficulty of cooling your CPU simply by imposing power limits, without major losses to theoretical performance. While it is nice to know that you can sustain the CPU’s peak performance with a mid-range cooler, 97 degrees C is very hot and might make some worry. </p><p>While Intel’s engineers tell us that 105C is a safe operating temperature, given <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-finally-announces-a-solution-for-cpu-crashing-errors-claims-elevated-voltages-are-the-root-cause-fix-coming-by-mid-august"><u>how the instability issues associated with Raptor Lake</u></a> were much more likely to occur at hotter CPU temperatures - many might not feel comfortable letting their CPU reach such a high temperature. You can avoid that dilemna simply by setting a minor power limit. <br><br>When power limits are removed entirely, Intel’s Ultra 7 265K consumes up to 240W in my tests when paired with Scythe’s Mugen 6 CPU Cooler and using MSI’s Z890 Carbon Wifi motherboard (If the CPU is running at maximum temperature, power consumption increases up to 265W). Cutting power consumption by 17% drops the CPU to 200W, keeps the CPU nice and cool, but impacts maximum performance by only 5% - a difference so small that only users running benchmarks would be likely to notice. <br><br>Reducing that power limit even further to half of the CPU’s maximum power reduces theoretical multi-core performance by only 17% – 35885 vs 29950 in Cinebench R23’s multi-core benchmark in my testing. This means that if you’re willing to accept minor performance limitations, you can get by with the most basic, entry-level air coolers.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:4649px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.79%;"><img id="2WLk64szdetwsxwjdXo4aF" name="Power Scaling.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 7 265K cooling testing" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2WLk64szdetwsxwjdXo4aF.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="4649" height="2640" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2WLk64szdetwsxwjdXo4aF.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><h2 id="noise-normalized-thermal-results-36-4-dba">Noise-normalized thermal results (36.4 dBA)</h2><p>Finding the right balance between fan noise levels and cooling performance is important. While running fans at full speed can improve cooling capacity to some extent, the benefits are limited and many users prefer a quieter system. For this system’s noise-normalized tests, we’ve set the noise of the fans to the lowest point our noise meter can accurately measure – a whisper-quiet 36.4 dBA. <br><br>We have two tests when noise is normalized to 36.4 dBA. In the first of these; we’ll test the CPU alone, with the GPU at idle. With previous-generation products like the Intel Core i7-14700K, we reported the results from this test by measuring the CPU’s average package power, because the CPU would reach its peak temperature and throttle as a result. </p><p>However, due to a combination of having a higher peak temperature of 105C (vs 100C for Raptor Lake) and being easier to cool, even Scythe’s Mugen 6 is able to keep the CPU under its peak temperature. As such, we’re reporting the CPU’s temperature instead.<br><br>When paired with <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/air-cooling/scythe-mugen-6-and-mugen-6-black-edition-review"><u>Scythe’s Mugen 6</u></a>, the Core Ultra 7 265K CPU sustained an average temperature of 97C in this scenario. While it peaked at 104C, just a hair away from the CPU’s maximum temperature, the cooler was able to let the CPU operate at its maximum clock speeds throughout this test. This result is rather impressive in comparison to the intense thermal demands of the last generation Intel i7-14700K, which throttles under similar conditions even with powerful AIO liquid coolers!</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:4649px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.79%;"><img id="kRZFDajwQfMVYyxKcpYUPF" name="noise normalized cpu test.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 7 265K cooling testing" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kRZFDajwQfMVYyxKcpYUPF.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="4649" height="2640" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kRZFDajwQfMVYyxKcpYUPF.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>The second noise-normalized test is a combined CPU + GPU load, with a 120W CPU load. This power level was chosen based on the peak power consumption I observed while playing <em>Shadow of the Tomb Raider</em>. </p><p>This should be considered a “worst-case” scenario for gaming, comparable to what you’d see with an overclocked system. At stock speeds, most of the time Intel’s Ultra 7 265K will consume a significantly smaller power budget – generally less than 75W.</p><p>As we’re performing this test with overclocking in mind, ideal peak CPU temperature would be 80C or less – and Scythe’s Mugen 6 only reached 78C even with the CPU’s fans limited to a virtually silent 36.4 dBA!</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:4631px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:57.29%;"><img id="Xbju8FmkWJ4adhTrjU7GBE" name="120 + GPU noise normalized.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 7 265K cooling testing" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Xbju8FmkWJ4adhTrjU7GBE.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="4631" height="2653" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Xbju8FmkWJ4adhTrjU7GBE.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><h2 id="120w-cpu-gpu-results-default-fan-curve">120W CPU + GPU Results, default fan curve</h2><p>The last way we’ll be judging coolers with Intel’s Core Ultra 7 265K is also with a combined CPU + GPU load. But unlike the previous noise-normalized example, we’ll allow the CPU’s fans to operate tied to the default fan curve of MSI’s Z890 Carbon Wifi motherboard.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:4631px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:57.29%;"><img id="sUX5VkdaVPgPbvNEUTibuV" name="120W + GPU.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 7 265K cooling testing" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sUX5VkdaVPgPbvNEUTibuV.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="4631" height="2653" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sUX5VkdaVPgPbvNEUTibuV.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>The CPU’s peak temperature reaches a lower 75C by running at the default fan curve, which compared to our previous noise normalized test gives an additional 3C of headroom for potential overclocking. Noise increases to 38.9 dBA as a result, which is still a fairly quiet level.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:4650px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.77%;"><img id="tRokhGDpeyTjMGrHkQGbaE" name="120W Noise.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 7 265K cooling testing" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tRokhGDpeyTjMGrHkQGbaE.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="4650" height="2640" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tRokhGDpeyTjMGrHkQGbaE.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><h2 id="conclusion-2">Conclusion</h2><p>Intel’s Core Ultra 7 265K is much easier to cool than prior-generation Core i7 CPUs. It can be easily cooled with mid-range air coolers like Scythe’s Mugen 6. As such, we’ll be testing this CPU inside of MSI’s Velox 100R Computer case and paired with low-end and mid-range CPU coolers – especially those with quiet noise levels.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Intel Core Ultra 9 285K and Core 5 245K Review: Intel Throws a Lateral with Arrow Lake ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-ultra-9-285k-cpu-review</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Intel’s flagship $589 Core Ultra 9 285K headlines its new ‘Arrow Lake’ Core Ultra 200S series, leading the charge with 24 cores melded into a completely new chiplet architecture that comes with plenty of new leading-edge tech, like 3D Foveros packaging, support for new DDR5 CUDIMM memory tech, and the first dedicated AI engine fused inside a desktop PC chip. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">AWff6FGnMppP4fyXPiSJtj</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uvm2RaNa89DnWgoqobh5AB-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Thu, 24 Oct 2024 15:01:09 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 26 Mar 2026 15:34:14 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[CPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ palcorn@outlook.com (Paul Alcorn) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Paul Alcorn ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RZRmFeQfPy3etHjBQitbGW.jpeg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;As a teenager, Paul scraped up enough money to buy a 486-powered PC with a turbo button (yes, a turbo button). Back when floppies were still popular he was already chasing after the fastest spinners for his personal computer, which led him down the long and winding storage road, covering enterprise storage. His current focus is on consumer processors, though he still keeps a close eye on the latest storage news. In his spare time, you’ll find Paul hanging out with his kids or indulging his love of the Kansas City Chiefs and Royals.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uvm2RaNa89DnWgoqobh5AB-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Tom&#039;s Hardware]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Intel Core Ultra 9 285K]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Intel Core Ultra 9 285K]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Intel Core Ultra 9 285K]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uvm2RaNa89DnWgoqobh5AB-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Intel’s flagship $589 Core Ultra 9 285K headlines its new ‘Arrow Lake’ Core Ultra 200S series, leading the charge with 24 cores melded into a completely new chiplet architecture that comes with plenty of new leading-edge tech, like 3D Foveros packaging, support for new DDR5 CUDIMM memory tech, and the first dedicated AI engine fused inside a desktop PC chip. However, our tests found that Arrow Lake struggles to keep pace in gaming with Intel’s own previous-gen <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-launches-18-new-14th-gen-raptor-lake-refresh-processors-new-locked-65w-and-t-series-35w-chips-are-available-now">Raptor Lake Refresh processors</a>, never mind AMD's chart-topping <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-7-7800x3d-cpu-review">Zen 4 X3D chips</a>.<br><br>Intel says Arrow Lake provides an up to 150W reduction in system power during gaming and other improvements, like a claimed 20% gain in threaded horsepower and a 5% gain in single-thread performance over the prior-gen, which helps offset the lack of gen-on-gen gaming gains. We put those claims to the test across 14 games on the following page, not to mention a slew of productivity benchmarks.<br><br>The Intel launch comes on the heels of AMD’s tepid <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-ryzen-9-9950x-cpu-review">Zen 5 Ryzen 9000 launch</a>, which saw AMD’s newest chips providing limited generational gaming improvements, so they couldn’t quite catch up to Intel. Naturally, given the performance we’ve seen with Intel’s new chips, AMD’s Zen 5 processors, which recently had pricing adjustments and firmware/OS enhancements, look much more promising than before — at least compared to Intel’s new chips. However, AMD also has its <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-teases-ryzen-9000x3d-chip-coming-november-7-cuts-pricing-on-all-other-ryzen-9000-chips">Ryzen 9000X3D</a> processors slated for release early next month, and they will almost certainly be the new gaming performance champions.<br><br>That’s not to say that the Core Ultra 200S series doesn’t have its own charms. Intel employs a range of TSMC nodes for the different chiplets (called "tiles" in Intel parlance) in Arrow Lake. In fact, this marks Intel’s first mainstream desktop PC chip entirely fabricated using another company’s process node technology. Intel combines the more efficient process nodes with a radical new CPU core design that intersperses E-core clusters among the P-cores and discards Hyper-Threading entirely, thus claiming to deliver drastic power reductions that will result in a cooler and quieter PC.</p><div ><table><caption>Intel 'Arrow Lake' Core Ultra 200S Series — Pricing and Specifications </caption><thead><tr><th class="firstcol " ><p>CPU</p></th><th  ><p>Street (MSRP)</p></th><th  ><p>Arch</p></th><th  ><p>Cores / Threads (P+E)</p></th><th  ><p>P-Core Base / Boost Clock (GHz)</p></th><th  ><p>E-Core Base / Boost Clock (GHz)</p></th><th  ><p>Cache (L2/L3)</p></th><th  ><p>TDP / PBP or MTP</p></th><th  ><p>Memory</p></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><strong>Core Ultra 9 285K</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>$589</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>Arrow Lake</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>24 / 24 (8+16)</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>3.7 / 5.7</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>3.2 / 4.6</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>76MB (40+36)</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>125W / 250W</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>DDR5-6400</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><strong>Core Ultra 7 265K / KF</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>$394 / $379</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>Arrow Lake</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>20 / 20 (8+12</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>3.9 / 5.5</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>3.3 / 4.6</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>66MB (36+30)</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>125W / 250W</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>DDR5-6400</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><strong>Core Ultra 5 245K / KF</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>$309 / $294</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>Arrow Lake</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>14 / 14 (6+8)</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>4.2 / 5.2</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>3.6 / 4.6</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>50MB (26+24)</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>125W / 250W</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>DDR5-6400</strong></p></td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>Intel’s new family spans from the $294 14-core Core Ultra 5 245KF, which we also have in our tests today, to the flagship $589 24-core Core Ultra 9 285K. Intel has the mid-range $394 20-core Core Ultra 7 265K as well, which we’ll review in the coming days.<br><br>The new Arrow Lake chips require an 890-series motherboard, and vendors have a wide range of Z890 models available. You can also now opt for either standard DDR5 or the new CUDIMM DDR5 modules, which boost easily attainable memory overclocking speeds to DDR5-8000 and beyond. However, Intel no longer supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory like it did with the prior-gen Raptor Lake processors. </p><h2 id="intel-core-ultra-9-285k-pricing-and-specifications">Intel Core Ultra 9 285K Pricing and Specifications</h2><p>Intel's generational branding stopped at the 14th-Gen family — there will be no 15th-Gen. Instead, Intel has now switched to the same ‘Core Ultra’ branding it uses for the mobile market and uses the ‘S’ suffix to differentiate the desktop models. Intel begins the new 'Core Ultra' desktop series at ‘200S’ instead of ‘100S.’ So, no, you didn't miss a generation anywhere; Intel just can't seem to make a coherent branding decision.<br><br>The five Arrow Lake SKUs slot into the Ultra 9, 7, and 5 families, spanning chips with 24, 20, and 14 cores, matching their prior-gen counterparts. However, the Performance cores (P-cores) no longer support Hyper-Threading, so total thread counts are now lower. Intel says it has increased overall performance in multi-threaded workloads despite removing Hyper-Threading, which largely holds up in our testing.<br><br>Intel has standard overclockable K-series models and two KF-series Core 7 and 5 chips that come without the integrated graphics engine. Intel doesn’t have a KF option for the Ultra 9 285K, and it remains to be seen if one will come to the market in the future.</p><div ><table><caption>Intel Core Ultra 9 285K — Pricing and Specifications </caption><thead><tr><th class="firstcol " ><p>CPU</p></th><th  ><p>Street (MSRP)</p></th><th  ><p>Arch</p></th><th  ><p>Cores / Threads (P+E)</p></th><th  ><p>P-Core Base / Boost Clock (GHz)</p></th><th  ><p>E-Core Base / Boost Clock (GHz)</p></th><th  ><p>Cache (L2/L3)</p></th><th  ><p>TDP / PBP or MTP</p></th><th  ><p>Memory</p></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Ryzen+9+7950X3D&rh=n%3A229189">Ryzen 9 7950X3D</a></p></td><td  ><p>$599 ($699)</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 4 X3D</p></td><td  ><p>16 / 32</p></td><td  ><p>4.2 / 5.7</p></td><td  ><p>—</p></td><td  ><p>144MB (16+128)</p></td><td  ><p>120W / 162W</p></td><td  ><p>DDR5-5200</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Ryzen+9+9950X&rh=n%3A229189">Ryzen 9 9950X</a></p></td><td  ><p>$599 ($599)</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 5</p></td><td  ><p>16 / 32</p></td><td  ><p>4.3 / 5.7</p></td><td  ><p>—</p></td><td  ><p>80MB (16+64)</p></td><td  ><p>170W / 230W</p></td><td  ><p>DDR5-5600</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><strong>Core Ultra 9 285K</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>$589</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>Arrow Lake</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>24 / 24 (8+16)</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>3.7 / 5.7</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>3.2 / 4.6</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>76MB (40+36)</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>125W / 250W</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>CUDIMM DDR5-6400 / DDR5-5600</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Core+i9-14900K&rh=n%3A229189">Core i9-14900K / KF</a></p></td><td  ><p>$445 K / $442 KF</p></td><td  ><p>Raptor Lake Refresh</p></td><td  ><p>24 / 32 (8+16)</p></td><td  ><p>3.2 / 6.0</p></td><td  ><p><2.4 / 4.4</p></td><td  ><p>68MB (32+36)</p></td><td  ><p>125W / 253W</p></td><td  ><p>DDR4-3200 / DDR5-5600</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Ryzen+9+7900X3D&rh=n%3A229189">Ryzen 9 7900X3D</a></p></td><td  ><p>$579 ($599)</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 4 X3D</p></td><td  ><p>12 / 24</p></td><td  ><p>4.4 / 5.6</p></td><td  ><p>—</p></td><td  ><p>140MB (12+128)</p></td><td  ><p>120W / 162W</p></td><td  ><p>DDR5-5200</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Ryzen+7+7800X3D&rh=n%3A229189">Ryzen 7 7800X3D</a></p></td><td  ><p>$476 ($449)</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 4 X3D</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>4.2 / 5.0</p></td><td  ><p>—</p></td><td  ><p>104MB (8+96)</p></td><td  ><p>120W / 162W</p></td><td  ><p>DDR5-5200</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Ryzen+9+9900X&rh=n%3A229189">Ryzen 9 9900X</a></p></td><td  ><p>$429 ($469)</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 5</p></td><td  ><p>12 / 24</p></td><td  ><p>4.4 / 5.6</p></td><td  ><p>—</p></td><td  ><p>76MB (12+64)</p></td><td  ><p>120W / 162W</p></td><td  ><p>DDR5-5600</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><strong>Core Ultra 7 265K / KF</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>$394 / $379</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>Arrow Lake</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>20 / 20 (8+12</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>3.9 / 5.5</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>3.3 / 4.6</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>66MB (36+30)</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>125W / 250W</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>CUDIMM DDR5-6400 / DDR5-5600</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Core+i7-14700K&rh=n%3A229189">Core i7-14700K / KF</a></p></td><td  ><p>$354 K / $327 KF</p></td><td  ><p>Raptor Lake Refresh</p></td><td  ><p>20 / 28 (8+12)</p></td><td  ><p>3.4 / 5.6</p></td><td  ><p>2.5 / 4.3</p></td><td  ><p>61MB (28+33)</p></td><td  ><p>125W / 253W</p></td><td  ><p>DDR4-3200 / DDR5-5600</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Core+i5-14600K&rh=n%3A229189">Core i5-14600K / KF</a></p></td><td  ><p>$256 K / $229 KF</p></td><td  ><p>Raptor Lake Refresh</p></td><td  ><p>14 / 20 (6+8)</p></td><td  ><p>3.5 / 5.3</p></td><td  ><p>2.6 / 4.0</p></td><td  ><p>44MB (20+24)</p></td><td  ><p>125W / 181W</p></td><td  ><p>DDR4-3200 / DDR5-5600</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Ryzen+7+9700X&rh=n%3A229189">Ryzen 7 9700X</a></p></td><td  ><p>$326 ($329)</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 5</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.8 / 5.5</p></td><td  ><p>—</p></td><td  ><p>40MB (8+32)</p></td><td  ><p>65W / 88W</p></td><td  ><p>DDR5-5600</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><strong>Core Ultra 5 245K / KF</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>$309 / $294</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>Arrow Lake</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>14 / 14 (6+8)</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>4.2 / 5.2</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>3.6 / 4.6</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>50MB (26+24)</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>125W / 250W</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>CUDIMM DDR5-6400 / DDR5-5600</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Ryzen+5+9600X&rh=n%3A229189">Ryzen 5 9600X</a></p></td><td  ><p>$249 ($249)</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 5</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>3.9 / 5.4</p></td><td  ><p>—</p></td><td  ><p>38MB (6+32)</p></td><td  ><p>65W / 88W</p></td><td  ><p>DDR5-5600</p></td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>Intel’s Ultra 9 weighs in at $589, matching the launch pricing of the previous-gen equivalent, the Core i9-14900K. The $394 Ultra 7 265K debuts for $15 less than the previous-gen Core i7-14700K it replaces, while the $309 Core 5 245K is $10 less than the prior-gen Core i5-14600K.<br><br>Intel made numerous adjustments to the stack, including reductions in peak clock speeds — a somewhat expected byproduct of moving to TSMC's N3B process node. The Ultra 9 peaks at 5.7 GHz, 300 MHz less than the prior-gen 14900K's blistering 6 GHz boost, while the Ultra 7 and 5 boost clocks see 100 MHz reductions. However, Intel has adjusted P-core base clocks upward by 500 to 700 MHz. The E-cores also have boose clock improvements spanning from 200 to 600 MHz, and a 600 MHz to 1 GHz improvement in base clock speeds, all of which vary by model.<br><br>Despite Arrow Lake’s claimed lower operating power consumption, the chips still have similar maximum TDP (MTP) ratings of 250W for Ultra 9 and 7 (3W less than Raptor Lake) and 159W (22W less) for the Ultra 5 model. Intel says the lower power consumption occurs during normal workloads with an up to 40% reduction in package power consumption. Intel also increased the maximum CPU temperature (TJMax) to 105C for Arrow Lake, which is 5C higher than its traditional limit with mainstream PC processors.<br><br>The new chips come with 24 lanes of PCIe 5.0 support, with an additional 20 PCIe 4.0 lanes provided by the chipset. The Ultra 9, 7, and 5 all have the same Xe-LPG graphics engine with four Xe cores — the same GPU as the Meteor Lake chips, not the newer Battlemage Xe2 engine found in the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-launches-lunar-lake-claims-arm-beating-battery-life-worlds-fastest-mobile-cpu-cores">Lunar Lake</a> mobile chips. The Ultra 9 and 7 iGPU have a 2.0 GHz graphics boost clock, while the Ultra 5 drops to 1.9 GHz. Intel claims the iGPU offers twice the performance of the graphics on the 14th-gen processors, but we haven't yet had time to put those claims to the test. Also, integrated graphics performance on a desktop chip largely won't matter for many users, as if you actually care about GPU performance you just add a discrete graphics card.<br><br>The chips also feature the same in-built NPU engine for AI acceleration as Meteor Lake — not Lunar Lake. This engine provides up to 13 TOPS of INT8 throughput, but that doesn’t meet Microsoft’s requirement of 40+ TOPS to unlock Copilot+ features. Intel already has a larger NPU design in the market — the (up to) 48 TOPS engine found in Lunar Lake — but used the smaller engine to optimize the die area for the desktop PC market. A larger engine would chew into the space available for other additives, like cores and cache. Intel says it hasn't seen enough interest in the desktop PC market yet to sacrifice other areas of performance for the NPU. As with the iGPU, the decision makes sense: If you care about AI compute, even Nvidia's lowest tier <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4060-review-asus-dual">RTX 4060</a> offers 242 TOPS of INT8 performance.<br><br>Arrow Lake drops into the LGA 1851 socket, so the chips are incompatible with existing motherboards. Existing coolers should be compatible with the requisite mounting hardware, but the need for a kit could vary by vendor. Intel hasn't committed to using the LGA 1851 socket for future processor generations. We've seen signs of a Core Ultra 2000S Refresh generation in the works, but that isn't yet confirmed. That could mean that LGA 1851 will end up as a single-generation socket.</p><h2 id="cudimms-and-memory-support-matrix">CUDIMMs and Memory Support Matrix</h2><p>Arrow Lake supports up to 192GB of DDR5 memory, but now in two flavors with two different base speeds. The chips support DDR5-6400 with DDR5 CUDIMMs, a new type of DIMM with an integrated clock driver (ckd) that boosts easily attainable stable clock frequencies by amplifying the signal, thus stabilizing the data eye. Unlike the clock redrivers present on fully-buffered registered DIMMs, the CUDIMM redrivers are said not to impose an additional clock cycle of latency (they use a less complicated and cheaper design).<br><br>Intel also points to much higher overclocking headroom with CUDIMMs and says DDR5-8000 appears to be the sweet spot (Gear 2). CUDIMMs should enable the use of poorer-quality DRAM ICs in higher-speed kits while simplifying the pricier DIMM PCB designs often required for higher-end memory. But motherboards with CUDIMM support may cost extra, and the CUDIMMs themselves are likely to carry a price premium, so you'll need to pay close attention to the final cost before deciding whether CUDIMMs make sense.<br><br>Intel also supports standard DDR5, but at lower base speeds than it supports with CUDIMMs (the same DDR5-5600 as with its 14th Gen CPUs). Naturally, both types of memory are overclockable. The Arrow Lake DDR5 support matrix is in the table below. Arrow Lake does support ECC memory, but it won’t be supported on consumer platforms — instead, that feature is reserved for enterprise-focused W-series motherboards.</p><div ><table><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>DRAM Config</p></td><td  ><p>Official Speeds Supported</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Dual Channel, 2 board slots, 2 UDIMMs </p></td><td  ><p>DDR5-5600</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Dual Channel, 2 board slots, 2 CUDIMMs</p></td><td  ><p>DDR5-6400</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Dual Channel, 4 board slots, 2 UDIMMs</p></td><td  ><p>DDR5-5600</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Dual Channel, 4 board slots, 2 CUDIMMs</p></td><td  ><p>DDR5-5600</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Dual Channel, 4 board slots, 4 UDIMMs</p></td><td  ><p>DDR5-4800 (single rank DIMMs) DDR5-4400 (dual rank DIMMs)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Dual Channel, 4 board slots, 4 CUDIMMS</p></td><td  ><p>DDR5-4800 (single rank DIMMs) DDR5-4400 (dual rank DIMMs)</p></td></tr></tbody></table></div><h2 id="intel-arrow-lake-core-ultra-200s-architecture">Intel Arrow Lake Core Ultra 200S architecture</h2><p>Arrow Lake marks Intel's first foray into a disaggregated architecture, meaning that different compute and I/O functionalities are split out into their own dies. Intel refers to its die disaggregation technique as a ‘tiled’ architecture, but the rest of the industry refers to this as a chiplet architecture. Intel says that a ‘tiled’ processor refers to a chip using advanced packaging, which enables parallel communication between the chip units, while standard packaging employs a serial interface that isn’t as performant or energy efficient. However, other competing processors with advanced packaging are still referred to as chiplet-based, so the terms are largely interchangeable.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QYWejpymbNCLx8MnXZC7iT.jpg" alt="Intel Arrow Lake" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Intel</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CQ59QecmNfC5fcHHUyNBET.jpg" alt="Intel Arrow Lake" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Intel</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9dtgZQFekCCwDALM237aLT.jpg" alt="Intel Arrow Lake" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Intel</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HvBZkjW9qSa3WCH36L8nRT.jpg" alt="Intel Arrow Lake" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Intel</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TRn3scSaXvpGk3khQfagYT.jpg" alt="Intel Arrow Lake" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Intel</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rWNHYeizzmAtDiiDGUWXrT.jpg" alt="Intel Arrow Lake" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Intel</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>Instead of the newer Lunar Lake design, Arrow Lake uses a package design similar to its five-tile previous-gen Meteor Lake laptop processors. However, Intel integrated the newer Lion Cove P-core and Skymont E-core microarchitectures for the compute tile instead of the Redwood Cove and Crestmont cores it used in Meteor Lake.<br><br>The Arrow Lake design employs Intel chip designs etched on a compute tile (chiplet) fabbed on the TSMC N3B process node, a GPU tile with the TSMC N5P node, while the SoC and I/O tiles use TSMC’s N6 process. Intel uses Foveros 3D packaging to mount those tiles to an underlying base tile fabbed on the Intel 1227.1 process node (22nm FinFET). There are also two ‘dummy’ filler tiles that provide mechanical rigidity.</p><div ><table><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p>Arrow Lake - Manufacturer / Node</p></td><td  ><p>Meteor Lake - Manufacturer / Node</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>CPU Tile</p></td><td  ><p>TSMC / N3B (3nm)</p></td><td  ><p>Intel / 'Intel 4' </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>3D Foveros Base Die</p></td><td  ><p>Intel / 22FFL (Intel 16)</p></td><td  ><p>Intel / 22FFL (Intel 16)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>GPU Tile (tGPU)</p></td><td  ><p>TSMC / N5P (5nm)</p></td><td  ><p>TSMC / N5 (5nm)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>SoC Tile</p></td><td  ><p>TSMC / N6 (6nm)</p></td><td  ><p>TSMC / N6 (6nm)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>IOE Tile</p></td><td  ><p>TSMC / N6 (6nm)</p></td><td  ><p>TSMC / N6 (6nm)</p></td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>Intel says the chip has 17.8 billion transistors spread out over a total die area of 243mm^2. Unfortunately, given the different nodes employed and the fact that Intel included the filler tiles in the total die area, that doesn't tell us much about transistor density.<br><br>Intel’s decision to split the memory controller and PHY into their own tile (I/O tile) was to improve yields and preserve the precious 3nm transistors for compute, but this creates memory latency issues that contribute to the lower gaming performance we see on the next page. Intel does offer the option to overclock the tile-to-tile interface, but we haven't had a chance to test the impact yet. Here's the memory latency we measured with AIDA, and our cache and memory latency benchmarks using the <a href="https://github.com/ChipsandCheese" target="_blank">Memory Latency</a> tool from the Chips and Cheese team.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:455px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:74.73%;"><img id="gg9XaWufubfuyi8egmEEC3" name="MEMLAT.png" alt="ASDF" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gg9XaWufubfuyi8egmEEC3.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="455" height="340" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><div ><table><caption>AIDA L3 Cache Latency Measurements</caption><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Memory Latency - Tom's Hardware</p></td><td  ><p>DDR5-5600</p></td><td  ><p>CUDIMM DDR5-6400</p></td><td  ><p>L3 Latency</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core Ultra 9 285K</p></td><td  ><p>94.1 ns</p></td><td  ><p>91.9 ns</p></td><td  ><p>16.6 / 15.8 ns</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core i9-14900K</p></td><td  ><p>79.1 ns</p></td><td  ><p>N/A</p></td><td  ><p>21.8 ns</p></td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>As you can see in the AIDA tests, on a like-for-like basis with DDR5-5600, the remote memory controller and PHY add 15 ns of memory latency in our test. Intel says we can expect a 15 to 20 ns increase in memory latency for Arrow Lake. That's a pretty significant change, and not in a good way. It will definitely impact certain workloads, gaming in particular.<br><br>Intel redesigned its CPU core layout for Arrow Lake, with quad-core E-core clusters interspersed among the P-cores. Previously, Intel placed all the E-cores in their own dedicated block. Intel spread the cores out to reduce hotspots for this design.<br><br>Intel also connected the E-cores to the 36MB L3 cache, so they now share L3 with the P-cores for the first time. The P-cores and E-cores still have dedicated L2 caches, with 3MB for the P-cores (a .5MB increase over the prior gen) and 4MB of L2 shared among each E-core cluster. Intel says the new design yielded a 33% reduction in package size and allowed it to quickly port innovations from Lunar Lake to Arrow, thus allowing it to launch the two chips a mere month apart.<br><br>The album below contains a latency heatmap for both the new design and the previous-gen Core 9-14900K, showing that the removal of Hyper-Threading has greatly simplified the core-to-core traffic due to the reduced number of threads.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tdCZ3pKYL9owk8bG2GEtTc.png" alt="Latency" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Uy989HdJJFzmzhKrSPrAPc.png" alt="Latency" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cvVBG4Na2uuuMxnvxD6L6K.jpg" alt="Intel Arrow Lake" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Intel</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/krbgGYA9RZQAyWpDsBT9EK.jpg" alt="Intel Arrow Lake" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Intel</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wEghBJw3KtiQ2gPADyXSMK.jpg" alt="Intel Arrow Lake" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Intel</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5r8Xzdg6nddWRSML46JfUK.jpg" alt="Intel Arrow Lake" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Intel</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8LKQD5p6GuekZcKEGZEUbK.jpg" alt="Intel Arrow Lake" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Intel</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xpFAQw5xDCkPsDSr9cjbiK.jpg" alt="Intel Arrow Lake" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Intel</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gmJiD95LE3FbCnWSSiaLsK.jpg" alt="Intel Arrow Lake" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Intel</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/h2jdFGAr5E7yJM2XBAcg2L.jpg" alt="Intel Arrow Lake" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Intel</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/C3zBk7fZcaL8QyprXaT39L.jpg" alt="Intel Arrow Lake" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Intel</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/72j7Gz9iuycs5FMGpMXHFL.jpg" alt="Intel Arrow Lake" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Intel</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4xwtNEpv3qMbL4hDLht5PL.jpg" alt="Intel Arrow Lake" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Intel</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/csssixsc5E5MWSmDVUK2aL.jpg" alt="Intel Arrow Lake" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Intel</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YVbVeBgtGYdnVP9qDw7RjL.jpg" alt="Intel Arrow Lake" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Intel</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>We’ve also included the slides detailing the advances of the P-core and E-core architectures, but we’ve already covered these microarchitectures in-depth in our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-unwraps-lunar-lake-architecture-up-to-68-ipc-gain-for-e-cores-16-ipc-gain-for-p-cores">Lunar Lake deep dive</a>. Overall, Intel claims a 9% increase in IPC over Raptor Lake (lower than the 14% cited with Lunar Lake because Intel made that comparison to Meteor Lake), a 32% increase in integer IPC, and a 72% increase in floating point IPC for the E-cores.<br><br>But claims and architectural details are only the foundation. Let's see how everything looks like in actual real-world performance testing and benchmarks on the following pages.</p><h2 id="intel-core-ultra-9-285k-gaming-benchmarks-the-tldr">Intel Core Ultra 9 285K Gaming Benchmarks — The TLDR</h2><p>The particulars of our test setup are on page four. We used lifted power limits, which result in higher power consumption and heat, but you get faster performance in exchange. We revamped our Windows 11 test image to version 24H2 for this testing and updated all drivers and applications to the latest versions. We also added numerous new games to our test suite, using a mix of custom game scenes and built-in benchmarks.<br><br>Note that these game benchmarks aren't directly comparable with the results in our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">CPU benchmark</a> hierarchy (we'll update as soon as we have enough chips to swap in the new test suite). We tested with Intel's <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/application-optimizer-31-percent-higher-fps-on-i9-14900k">Application Performance Optimization (APO)</a> software active. This software will be installed by default via Windows Update, so it now represents default performance.<br><br>Here's the high-level view of gaming performance, using the geometric mean of our 14 gaming tests at 1080p. We're testing with an <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4090-review">Nvidia GeForce RTX 4090</a> to reduce GPU-imposed bottlenecks as much as possible, and differences between test subjects will shrink with lesser cards or higher resolutions and fidelity. We have the game-by-game breakdowns further below.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Fdo5prUyCsvKbjrjNpDVCo.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, GEOMEAN" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pi7qoJspny7iUxEjFncCLo.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, GEOMEAN" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/32XXh2UmoAHjuju5RAduTo.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, GEOMEAN" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>We tested the Core Ultra 9 285K and Core Ultra 5 245K with a standard DDR5-7200 kit and a CUDIMM DDR5-8200 kit (marked as CU-8200 in the charts). Intel has made ambitious claims about power consumption during gaming, so we logged CPU power consumption and calculated the efficiency (FPS per watt) during each benchmark run.<br><br>The DDR5-8200 CUDIMMs only yielded an extra 2% of gaming performance over DDR5-7200, but we might see larger improvements as the platform matures. Some titles leverage the increased bandwidth better than others, as seen in the individual benchmarks below.<br><br>Even with CUDIMMs, the previous-gen <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-core-i9-14900k-cpu-review">Core i9-14900K</a> is still 4% faster than the Core Ultra 9 285K, which falls short of Intel's claims of performance parity — but not by much. With both chips armed with DDR5-7200, the 14900K is 6% faster than the 285K.<br><br>Notably, the 285K ties the $599 <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-ryzen-9-9950x-cpu-review">Ryzen 9 9950X</a>, which aligns with Intel's performance claims. Regardless, we don't like to see regressions in gen-on-gen performance, or even a lateral. Arrow Lake doesn't make forward progress in gaming, thus ceding the leadership position entirely to AMD's gaming-specialized Ryzen 7000X3D processors.<br><br>The $476 <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-7-7800x3d-cpu-review">Ryzen 7 7800X3D</a> is 16% faster than the 285K CUDIMM config and 19% faster than the 285K with DDR5-7200, cementing its spot as the fastest gaming CPU on the market. AMD also has its <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-teases-ryzen-9000x3d-chip-coming-november-7-cuts-pricing-on-all-other-ryzen-9000-chips">next-gen Ryzen 9000X3D chips coming to market</a>, with the first slated to arrive early next month. As usual, you should take into account that X3D chips don't accelerate all games equally, and they deliver lower performance than standard models in productivity workloads.<br><br>The $309 Core Ultra 5 245K essentially offers the same overall gaming performance either with CUDIMMs or standard DDR5-7200 memory, with most of the individual benchmarks falling within the expected run-to-run variance or very close to it. At first blush, it appears the extra bandwidth from CUDIMMs isn't a huge benefit for this lower class of processor. However, we have much to learn about the new CUDIMMs moving forward, and we expect the platforms to become more refined over time, so this could change.<br><br>Regardless, the $256 Core i5-14600K is 5% faster in 1080p gaming than the $309 245K, which isn't great given the respective pricing. The plucky $209 <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-ryzen-7-5700x3d-cpu-review">Ryzen 7 5700X3D</a> also ties the 245K in gaming, putting the 245K at even more of a disadvantage. The 5700X3D does come with the older Zen 3 architecture and slower clock speeds due to its stacked L3 cache, so it suffers tremendously in our productivity benchmarks. However, it snaps into the inexpensive and plentiful AM4 motherboard ecosystem, scoring a knockout win for budget gaming systems.<br><br>The $249 <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-ryzen-5-9600x-cpu-review">Ryzen 5 9600X</a> is 6% faster than the Core Ultra 5 245K in gaming for $60 less, making for a potent adversary on the more modern AM5 platform. And with both platforms now requiring DDR5 memory, there's no potential savings to be had with DDR4 memory (unlike with the 14600K).</p><p>The Arrow Lake chips certainly don't paint a convincing picture for gamers chasing every last frame of performance, but they do consume less power during gaming than their predecessors and AMD's Zen 5-powered Ryzen 9000-series. </p><p>The 285K consumed an average of ~77W across our test suite, or about 36% less power than the 14900K. AMD's Ryzen 7000X3D processors consumed even less power than the 285K, though. However, the 285K consumes less power on average than AMD's Zen 5 Ryzen 9000 series during gaming.<br><br>Naturally, factoring in performance to generate our fps-per-watt metric is the best way to quantify power efficiency. Here, the 285K proves to be more efficient than the 9000 series, too. However, the Ryzen 7000X3D chips are even more efficient, with the 7800X3D running away with the win. Intel has made significant strides, though — the Core 9 285K delivers 52% more fps-per-watt than the prior-gen 14900K. That will inevitably lead to less thermal output.<br><br>We conducted a few basic temperature measurements for a general comparison, but our measurements weren't entirely equal. We used the ROG Ryujin III 360 ARGB Extreme 360mm AIO for the Core Ultra chips to ensure proper mounting pressure (Intel provided this cooler for the review), but all other test systems used the 360mm Corsair iCue Link H150i RGB (both coolers had fans and pumps at 100%). We also kept the room <em>around </em>72F ambient, but temperatures aren't tightly controlled, so we don't have an entirely scientific measure.<br><br>With those factors in mind, we recorded the Core 9 285K running at an average of 48C across the test suite, while the previous-gen 14900K logged 60C. That's a 12-degree delta, generally aligning with Intel's claim of up to 10C lower temps with Arrow Lake. The 245K was also plenty impressive at 44C.<br><br>Arrow Lake isn't a homerun on the gaming front, leaving the top of the market to AMD's X3D chips while also leaving room for either AMD's Ryzen 9 9950X or Intel's own less expensive prior-gen counterpart, the Core i9-14900K, to step in as better all-rounders. The Core Ultra 9 285K does pack substantial gains in productivity performance that might change the equation for some, particularly if pricing becomes more forgiving.<br><br>The competition between AMD and Intel chips can vary based on the title (particularly with X3D models) and the GPU you use. It's best to make an informed decision based on the types of titles you frequently play, so be sure to check out the individual game tests below.</p><h2 id="a-plague-tale-requiem-benchmarks-intel-core-ultra-9-285k">A Plague Tale: Requiem Benchmarks — Intel Core Ultra 9 285K</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vwVpfzQRUAGmXUSHQFcJbW.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, A plague tale" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kXmx3iw36ehg5YupegWxhW.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, A plague tale" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KaBfJis2FUEd4o64prebqW.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, A plague tale" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><h2 id="baldur-s-gate-3-benchmarks-intel-core-ultra-9-285k">Baldur's Gate 3 Benchmarks — Intel Core Ultra 9 285K</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ovAw7dyCfBPCq4dMssMFYg.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Baldur's gate" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xKyCZPfjdTLbdE3CQnEheg.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Baldur's gate" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Di4pM8VbYdoMXHPMs8drmg.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Baldur's gate" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><h2 id="borderlands-3-benchmarks-intel-core-ultra-9-285k">Borderlands 3 Benchmarks — Intel Core Ultra 9 285K</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RxXzmNUeR3uoVBwVuudjMn.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Borderlands" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/co4m6HoQuydfHU8UXu9MUn.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Borderlands" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/igX93gqQFb3pJmn9cf9van.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Borderlands" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>The Ryzen 7000X3D chips take impressive leads in this title, but it doesn't represent Ryzen 7000X3D's performance in most titles. It also illustrates how outliers can make the X3D seem more impressive in cumulative measurements. It's worth noting that <em>Borderlands 3</em> was an AMD promotional title, and that might play a role in its performance.</p><h2 id="cyberpunk-2077-benchmarks-intel-core-ultra-9-285k">Cyberpunk 2077 Benchmarks — Intel Core Ultra 9 285K</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UFnXMY6V59WHDfeW9tGqU6.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Cyberpunk" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RSijU8d875brkGNYsP5Ub6.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Cyberpunk" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/M56ihZ5cLtyZiq8zujhGi6.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Cyberpunk" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>Our <em>Cyberpunk 2077</em> results are suspiciously odd, especially because the 285K lags behind the 245K. We're working to diagnose this issue but have confirmed this result with multiple retests. Our GPU tester also noticed a lot of anomalies with the latest 2.13 patch that came out last month (and added FSR3.1 support), with inexplicable dips in performance.</p><h2 id="f1-2024-benchmarks-intel-core-ultra-9-285k">F1 2024 Benchmarks — Intel Core Ultra 9 285K</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UWMPg3dx8WZjx9rkkidpXC.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, F1 2024" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/nSpAUDhunQcpfuKRWWSSeC.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, F1 2024" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Uu5yoQek9oNh4FfJDZa8mC.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, F1 2024" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><h2 id="far-cry-6-benchmarks-intel-core-ultra-9-285k">Far Cry 6 Benchmarks — Intel Core Ultra 9 285K</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yWNCjqxS5waU5rnSsDFdnJ.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Far Cry" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tp2NT6Asw2Q5fAwhSDD9uJ.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Far Cry" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jFUvMhhYbvgZndrP4dZNBK.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Far Cry" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p><em>Far Cry 6</em> is another AMD-promoted game, and the 7800X3D truly excels thanks to its single-CCD design paired with its extra slab of L3 cache. </p><h2 id="final-fantasy-xiv-benchmarks-intel-core-ultra-9-285k">Final Fantasy XIV Benchmarks — Intel Core Ultra 9 285K</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bWHdwHkJtPWvnwcSJtZTXU.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Final Fantasy" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/P6EhGWRBAPfjy9vgSXxydU.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Final Fantasy" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PukJLwHHEx6gi6Xj7mfxkU.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Final Fantasy" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><h2 id="hitman-3-benchmarks-intel-core-ultra-9-285k">Hitman 3 Benchmarks — Intel Core Ultra 9 285K</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FLJYWMWA5Fy3nBXV33LsZ7.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Hitman 3" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pCwXcuwuTutYrhkcdkPqg7.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Hitman 3" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fZJrSijxP8uRuLqE5Kt7p7.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Hitman 3" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p><em>Hitman 3</em> leverages Intel's E-cores for certain game functions, but it also likes Ryzen X3D's voluminous L3 cache. </p><h2 id="hogwarts-legacy-benchmarks-intel-core-ultra-9-285k">Hogwarts Legacy Benchmarks — Intel Core Ultra 9 285K</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/a444pZ8MNCtEN7wHTCXVaC.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Hogwarts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bTiQmTF7Ns9mNXHSvau6hC.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Hogwarts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Pw3bUkvdWVnAXApNCQpzoC.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Hogwarts" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><h2 id="microsoft-flight-simulator-benchmarks-intel-core-ultra-9-285k">Microsoft Flight Simulator Benchmarks — Intel Core Ultra 9 285K</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/N5Levo7DcNxJHStMB9CaVh.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Flight Simulator" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RXDPMpoF32zYrGT8fN6Lch.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Flight Simulator" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/a29SWVoXY9P7ZC5pRbfnih.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Flight Simulator" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p><em>Microsoft Flight Simulator 2021 </em>obviously benefits from L3 cache — the Ryzen 7000X3D chips are incredible in this title. </p><h2 id="minecraft-benchmarks-intel-core-ultra-9-285k">Minecraft Benchmarks — Intel Core Ultra 9 285K</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GRqFwhEe8GQHW99ezwgyCJ.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Minecraft" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/B2UQVmAgFNdKrZVWDHAtKJ.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Minecraft" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UwYnBT5Yy9HwE7vSLWG7ZJ.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Minecraft" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p><em>Minecraft</em> can be taxing on the CPU in some scenarios, and we've devised a CPU benchmark by leveraging the built-in test in the <em>Portal Pioneers RTX</em> ray-tracing benchmark. However, we disable ray-tracing to limit the GPU overhead during this test and dial up the render distance to the maximum 95 chunks. Then, we simply hop into the minecart and take a ride around the track, which gives us a nice repeatable scene for benchmarking, albeit one that is more taxing than more mundane settings.<br></p><h2 id="spider-man-remastered-benchmarks-intel-core-ultra-9-285k">Spider-Man: Remastered Benchmarks — Intel Core Ultra 9 285K</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZWmFyZiupZkRGC44VZigAP.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Spiderman" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LBTvHbUyC3JvLaTjFLUWHP.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Spiderman" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/oYcFz9TywUTVL5semgYXQP.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Spiderman" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>Spider-Man represents one of the few high points for Arrow Lake in gaming performance. It has curious rankings in general, however, with the 7950X3D taking the top spot, and even the 7900X3D matches the 7800X3D in performance. It seems that the game appreciates CPU throughput at least as much as having large amounts of cache. Also curious is that Raptor Lake didn't do so well, and the 14900K result may need further investigation as it came out below both the 14600K and the 12900K. But the 13900K also did poorly, so it seems that in general the game doesn't appreciate the specific E-core/P-core split on certain Raptor Lake models.</p><h2 id="starfield-benchmarks-intel-core-ultra-9-285k">Starfield Benchmarks — Intel Core Ultra 9 285K</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GHVAHCwXfsCQp7zuixpeqU.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Starfield" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/AS3ZFuxEQB2bZK25L4BRxU.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Starfield" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/rZELv6Lq4z2YQJC27Tt36V.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Starfield" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>Here, finally, is the one game we've tested where Arrow Lake gets a win. And it's a fairly sizeable win considering it has trailed in many other games by 5–10 percent, so coming out up to 7% ahead of the 7800X3D represents a big shift. Starfield seems to care less about memory latency and more about CPU throughput, but this tends to be the exception (for gaming) rather than the rule.</p><h2 id="watch-dogs-legion-benchmarks-intel-core-ultra-9-285k">Watch Dogs Legion Benchmarks — Intel Core Ultra 9 285K</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/phfiT3B2TyzovUvyXDZyxZ.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Watch Dogs" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hJLLcv3M2GS9cNiFCbtV6a.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Watch Dogs" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cFRMYcFkTtXUtP6pLkvbFa.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Watch Dogs" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>Wrapping  up and summarizing the gaming results, Watch Dogs Legion has the 285K just ahead of the 14900K, with CUDIMMs providing a 4% improvement in performance on the 285K. With regular DDR5 memory, the old and new Intel chips are effectively tied. AMD's 7950X3D and 7800X3D still take the top two spots, while the 7900X3D falls well off the pace set by its siblings.<br><br>Overall, Arrow Lake fails to impress with its gaming performance. If you're not using a top-tier GPU, the differences are going to be a lot less noticeable, but any regression at all in performance can only be seen as a disappointment. If you want the fastest gaming CPU, that remains the Ryzen 7 7800X3D for now, though we anticipate at least a moderate bump in performance when the presumed Ryzen 7 9800X3D arrives on November 7.</p><div class="youtube-video" data-nosnippet ><div class="video-aspect-box"><iframe data-lazy-priority="low" data-lazy-src="https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/5NJmIYAomm8" allowfullscreen></iframe></div></div><h2 id="intel-core-ultra-9-285k-productivity-benchmarks-the-tldr">Intel Core Ultra 9 285K Productivity Benchmarks — The TLDR</h2><p>We boil down productivity application performance into two broad categories: single-threaded and multi-threaded. These slides show the geometric mean of performance in several of our most important tests in each of these categories, but be sure to look at the expanded results below for more granular analysis.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zRffDaCWXbaCy6uABSjaXo.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Geomean Applications" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EamMLGRFJsvzbbSd9yJjRo.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Geomean Applications" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>Intel claimed a 20% generational performance improvement in threaded workloads over its 14th Gen CPUs, and we measured a 15% test in the selection of workloads used for our ranking. However, we did see even larger gains in some distinct workloads, which you can see below. Despite Intel's impressive gains, the Ryzen 9 9950X remains 4% faster overall in threaded work, with much of that advantage stemming from its support for native AVX-512 that boosts performance in several of the workloads we use for measurements. As you can see below, both chips have their respective strengths and weaknesses.<br><br>The 285K made a small advance in single-threaded performance, outpacing the 14900K by 3%. That's good enough to stay at the top of the leaderboard, and also 6% faster than the Ryzen 9 9950X.<br><br>We tested with the 'Extreme" profile with unlocked power values for our standard configurations (more explanation in the power section). However, this profile resulted in much higher power draw. As such, we also tested performance with the more power-constrained and warrantied "performance" profile, which we've marked as "In-Spec" in the above chart. As you can see, the 'In-Spec" profile resulted in little to no performance loss in almost all workloads, but it consumed much less power (as you can see on the following page). To keep the charts as clean as possible, we excluded the "In-Spec" entry from the other benchmarks, as there is almost no difference in performance and it becomes a redundant entry.<br><br>You'll notice that the Ryzen 5 5700X3D, which delivers absolutely phenomenal performance for its price point in gaming, suffers tremendously in the application benchmarks due to its aging Zen 3 architecture. We also see the same trend with the Ryzen 7 7800X3D, the current fastest gaming chip in the world, so remember to proceed with caution when selecting these chips over more well-rounded competitors. They truly are specialist chips for gaming. </p><h2 id="rendering-benchmarks-intel-core-ultra-9-285k">Rendering Benchmarks — Intel Core Ultra 9 285K</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UobCT83YGqa9zhJYq9NAAS.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Rendering" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TU2fhaxPRnS8Bedf8EHhQS.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Rendering" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/oyTBd8URLgdYRUvZ9fBMVS.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Rendering" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mTBEit7X53KRDVcLDNj3aS.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Rendering" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FcTGgsfkcado2p9ToLLgES.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Rendering" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XxHBdbe9E7sjRsMkNW7YeS.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Rendering" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LvYvAEGomGEtxGYhbUxviS.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Rendering" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tbeVyRdo9oPNJQEYtsDVoS.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Rendering" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/747rsr2Z9skRjt4rPQYxsS.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Rendering" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YsdLoQYV5hTGzthb4TYMxS.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Rendering" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5HptUfDMhTUx3vtwCTVj3T.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Rendering" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YQUaRUxxUfaeHLWCerQJ8T.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Rendering" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PfZY2qLdTjbwHFJwZUNuCT.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Rendering" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aBcfa5kTcrjj659nos3eHT.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Rendering" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2gKCE4kfMVAHJLugbwyMNT.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Rendering" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fV69raGQjhVcWo384SSiKS.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Rendering" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>Intel has made strong gains with Arrow Lake, as we can see throughout this series of benchmarks. The increased throughput from the CUDIMMs doesn't often make a big impact, so unless there's a pricing benefit or future firmware updates that change the situation, regular DDR5 DIMMS seem just fine.<br><br>We see some remarkable gains in threaded workloads for the 285K, with performance in Cinebench 2024, POV-Ray, C-Ray, and Luxmark all taking giant strides forward. However, the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X remains strong in several tasks, like Embree, V-Ray 6, Blender, and Corona. </p><h2 id="encoding-benchmarks-intel-core-ultra-9-285k">Encoding Benchmarks — Intel Core Ultra 9 285K</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8hZ6NpfW6Tq8GnNRHjveqZ.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Encoding" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3n4Vr9s2U7mAmZdsJ5KGxZ.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Encoding" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JbVKEPGdhr6MQy3eseBTPZ.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Encoding" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wPaogrzDCRCue8RykdexVZ.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Encoding" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jbzyfQtjmiJnDDbqQ4UocZ.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Encoding" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WZ9DMZTwm6goBLZvD2REjZ.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Encoding" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TcBZf8qefvXos4WznpsD6a.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Encoding" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Tm9yJKzzZBMDZx5PcL3iCa.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Encoding" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tqGzpB2eDfZbYyFo66PCKa.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Encoding" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XqewXxoBJnkcdVhpDvCaRa.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Encoding" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>Most encoders tend to be either heavily threaded or almost exclusively single-threaded — and it takes an agile chip to master both disciplines. Handbrake, SVT-HEVC, and SVT-AV1 serve as our threaded encoders, while LAME and FLAC are indicative of how the chips handle lightly-threaded engines.<br><br>The 285K takes top honors in the Handbrake x264 encoding test, and only comes in just a bit behind the 9950X in the x265 and SVT_AV1 results. 285K also leads in the FLAC, libavif, and SVT-HEVC disciplines, while Raptor Lake still shows some skill in the LAME MP3 testing.</p><h2 id="adobe-photoshop-premiere-pro-davinci-resolve-intel-core-ultra-9-285k">Adobe Photoshop, Premiere Pro, DaVinci Resolve — Intel Core Ultra 9 285K</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bLqwSfjyvZkNtPBJoXhKXJ.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Adobe" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wruCSys6SKXYTq3dHUGSbJ.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Adobe" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bq3YsVFpc3VuMYKUAhe4fJ.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Adobe" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/a2iL7w6C6mteuFcMhkWk3K.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Adobe" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Fifnu4765CZpCErG78tTiJ.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Adobe" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/K3rMYkQ7hkd88tkZSQQ2uJ.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Adobe" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bWViL36kFz6FC3nn8Uy9nJ.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Adobe" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pW8pEpJ255CP3DNDk2aVqJ.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Adobe" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7cwfXCBPTqJbMSPjrcL4yJ.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Adobe" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9kjF3UJ9cmmyDpcahspB8K.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Adobe" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dSKm8KBwV62WrpGwSqj9DK.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Adobe" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>We've brought back the Puget Systems benchmark to our test suite. We previously used this benchmark in its beta form, but its final release is now available as the <a href="https://www.pugetsystems.com/pugetbench/creators/">PugetBench for Creators</a> suite. We used the benchmark for Photoshop, Premiere Pro, and DaVinci workloads.<br><br>Arrow Lake and the 285K fail to take the top spot in any of the tests, though it comes close in the Premiere Pro LongGOP and Lightroom batch processing tests. Everywhere else, it offers decidedly middling performance, falling behind both Zen 5 Ryzen 9000 and Raptor Lake 14th Gen CPUs in many of the tests.</p><h2 id="web-browser-office-benchmarks-intel-core-ultra-9-285k">Web Browser, Office Benchmarks — Intel Core Ultra 9 285K</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yH3uEnKXLZCYcN4wTgsdJ8.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Office" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/q7T7tHaeTpxWKP8kPiRFD8.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Office" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SyUFwEgtVXLjHG4MUQaye8.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Office" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FYve98XcVaFLxn8oXSGzP8.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Office" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ypzLBrGf9bPsbbLbkacwU8.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Office" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HQQuo3PyJ32CFBygj368a8.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Office" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sH9zENZ9ijKt87tX6ECej8.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Office" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>There's not much more to add here. As seen elsewhere, performance from Intel Arrow Lake offers mixed results. The 285K lands at or near the top in a few instances, but is just as likely to fall off the pace. Perhaps not too surprisingly, the WebXPRT WebAI result is one of the strong points, though it's not clear if that particular test makes use of the NPU.</p><h2 id="compilation-compression-avx-chess-engines-others-intel-core-ultra-9-285k">Compilation, Compression, AVX, Chess Engines, Others — Intel Core Ultra 9 285K</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/v4as8BXHSjLtjxzfVQCumR.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Compilation AVX" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/u2DY9GT9uFZyNgfhTffYrR.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Compilation AVX" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/f8tCWVESGegaESmn2crmJS.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Compilation AVX" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uJU3uXsD23FkL63fGPy8wR.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Compilation AVX" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dcEVUBuZQDnLs9TNLyU35S.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Compilation AVX" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gfrBdTvTVeZiuDCywPwKFT.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Compilation AVX" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QEFNjMnxQmUUYcay3N3h9S.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Compilation AVX" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jB3r7JFRDNHy9bHo4ZthKT.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Compilation AVX" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/26pyeyz6WLQeLzG48NSAES.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Compilation AVX" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xnEXHjKsXk9CWd7qK4GQaS.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Compilation AVX" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/D3R5r9HK3CB7uHT9JpoBfS.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Compilation AVX" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kyX7jfeajYKirbFewSdj5T.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Compilation AVX" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/V8QnxhCLEVqyMLS5a3ZMAT.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Compilation AVX" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bEKJL6AqiNjMSNneF8dHPS.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Compilation AVX" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sarHdfBzFLgmSxGUDZgrTS.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Compilation AVX" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KbUPsmRDEwzu9RcqTDahjS.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Compilation AVX" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/REzBHTcazFLwdJNys3EgpS.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Compilation AVX" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dP7kvwZoBXBbuzxRigUHuS.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Compilation AVX" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/nHuircCS84wQwGYZNRo4zS.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Compilation AVX" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>This selection of tests runs the gamut from massively parallel molecular dynamics simulation code in NAMD to compression/decompression performance.<br><br>Y-cruncher computes Pi with the AVX instruction set, making for an exceedingly demanding benchmark. This benchmark was recently updated with specific tuning for AMD's AVX-512 implementation. The new code delivers a big boost to Ryzen. Intel's new chips make big strides in this benchmark over the prior generation, but they only support AVX-256 natively, ultimately giving AMD an easy win.<br><br>Intel has historically performed well in compilation tasks, and here we can see the 285K taking back the leadership spot in the LLVM benchmark, albeit by a slim margin. The NAMD simulation code benchmark finds the 285K making a much more definitive claim for leadership with an easy win over all competing chips. </p><h2 id="geekbench-6-geekbench-ai-intel-core-ultra-9-285k">Geekbench 6, Geekbench AI — Intel Core Ultra 9 285K</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZX8HowGcwXFrKQvjbx5Fjg.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Geekbench AI" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wPw6zStdroZAP6tPff24pg.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Geekbench AI" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PjF6VNT9H8NPinHfaoiNEg.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Geekbench AI" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/K5TKMs6QdEPvYiuuRiBeKg.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Geekbench AI" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vWCowHEQvdxy8ref5qFYQg.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Geekbench AI" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3fHjA3nmHBSUFa7eW2aCVg.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Geekbench AI" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JKeeXhg9mmrVe3oV87PwZg.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Geekbench AI" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hwmbkNfCh48bNCDGNnGfeg.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Geekbench AI" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>The GeekBench AI results in the slide deck above show performance with the workload running on the CPU cores via OpenVino and ONNX. Only two CPUs in this group have in-built NPUs — the Core Ultra 9 285K and Ultra 5 245K — making them the only processors capable of running the workload on a dedicated NPU. Given that the NPU is focused on low-power inference tasks, the results are impressive relative to the performance when the workload executes on the CPU cores. </p><div ><table><caption>Intel Core Ultra 9 285K NPU Benchmarks GeekBench AI </caption><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Tom's Hardware</p></td><td  ><p>FP32</p></td><td  ><p>FP16</p></td><td  ><p>Quantized (typ. INT8)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core Ultra 9 285K NPU - ONNX</p></td><td  ><p>5038</p></td><td  ><p>2119</p></td><td  ><p>7056</p></td></tr></tbody></table></div><h2 id="specworkstation-3-1-intel-core-ultra-9-285k">SPECworkstation 3.1 — Intel Core Ultra 9 285K</h2><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QRXgUGEz8z4C5LtqJT7WFX.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, SPEC" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xocvtLWFWwks76Pbso9AbX.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, SPEC" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xEyFgBjCf7egkzfYxdQ3gX.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, SPEC" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xaGghPbfF8jTiZYP5zbckX.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, SPEC" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ymCcUgQiJxYhn7DxTEyJqX.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, SPEC" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4gAjFjMSD5e5N3Sw695F2Y.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, SPEC" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZCNrYY2p9ei8AiEzRSPB7Y.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, SPEC" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/nqrkXSqHbaitUBZEonLnBY.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, SPEC" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TAJ2PFHZwpysCg8LhorXGY.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, SPEC" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/H6GgTkhLPt5mpg9WMVkqNY.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, SPEC" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZSXGVspML94a5kZQfBExTY.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, SPEC" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2KtufHqXWNynDzJ7g962ZY.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, SPEC" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xrzaF2RdGg4pyMxqnR4WdY.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, SPEC" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aMCwhJoiNXBrgzLXb7Z5iY.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, SPEC" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5HokWsrPYgTs7z8kBEgynY.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, SPEC" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5eXsrEZikjLcV26eUQpesY.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, SPEC" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DgNDJveCjb52qMdXuPzcRX.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, SPEC" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NR5wJVSK2e9FV4UU9EBFWX.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, SPEC" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sonwVN5hTQArxxzWrrVwLX.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, SPEC" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>The SPECworkstation 3 benchmark suite is designed to measure workstation performance in professional applications. The full suite consists of more than 30 applications split among seven categories, but we've narrowed the list to tests that largely focus on CPU performance. We haven't submitted these benchmarks to the SPEC organization, so be aware that these are not official benchmarks.</p><h2 id="intel-core-ultra-9-285k-power-consumption-and-efficiency">Intel Core Ultra 9 285K Power Consumption and Efficiency</h2><p>We used the ASUS ROG Maximus Z890 Hero motherboard for testing and used the 'Extreme' profile for the Core Ultra 9 285K in our primary benchmarks. Unfortunately, this profile is located in a line item called "Intel Default Settings," but this profile sets PL1/PL2 power values to 250W/295W and the ICCMAX to 400A, which falls outside of Intel's warranty terms. We also ran another configuration with the warrantied 'Performance' profile that sets PL1/PL2 to 250W/250W and ICCMAX to 347A, which is within warranty, to show the differences.<br><br>As shown in our geometric mean of performance on the application benchmark page, this higher power setting didn't equate to meaningful performance differences in the overwhelming majority of our benchmarks, though it did result in higher power consumption during a few key benchmarks. As such, we included both the Extreme and Performance profiles (the latter named "In-Spec" in our power charts) to show the impact on power consumption....for little to absolutely no gain in almost every single benchmark. </p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/5UTHCgpnbr5zpvqcb2LJbD.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Power 1" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pbnm9SFa2CGYUVycgtZZWD.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Power 1" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4Z8GEboA6GJgLbq7W3iMPD.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Power 1" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LMS3A32uFLLbNBeL2xmqfD.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Power 1" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kHinBAzNdia4b4oZq5iUJD.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Power 1" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jVBUTfsk9VeHbJSBEurpkD.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Power 1" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DvjcujkmSmyQfr3NyK8zqD.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Power 1" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DovSW2D5hxy8foCz94fuvD.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Power 1" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4cRq4xvNPzkXp7qQosgv2E.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Power 1" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3QvQQoDB4endvREGLThm8D.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Power 1" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vv7mSVazfh5birVzaVS3ED.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Power 1" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>Intel's improvements to power efficiency and overall consumption are solid, but remember that most of these tests are designed to specifically stress the processor and reach its peak power consumption. Benchmarks like HandBrake and Blender are more reflective of real-world improvements in power consumption, and here, the Core Ultra chips deliver strong generational improvements. Naturally, the amount of performance delivered per watt is more important, which we'll cover in the next section. </p><p>But first, we have to comment on AMD's higher idle power draw. I've measured this on a few motherboards, so this might be applicable across the AM5 ecosystem. I'm contacting AMD to investigate this matter further, but it is clear now that this is no longer a teething pain of a new platform. AMD's AM5 chips can draw up to ~35W of power during idle compared to 12W with Intel's Core Ultra and 7W with Raptor Lake models, a significant disadvantage.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pBcP4vt9Xxzk6CTAGHRmDL.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Power 2" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dAWWGgUegNNqERoZerdRJL.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Power 2" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3vjVTYCAxVgV5kJMHe5aRL.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Power 2" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>The Core Ultra 9 285K pulls down roughly 6W per frame during the HandBrake power efficiency test, easily beating the entire lineup of previous-gen Intel processors by large margins, thus bringing itself into closer contention with AMD's standard Ryzen 9000 models. The X3D chips remain in a class of their own, but they also don't offer nearly the peak performance of the 285K. </p><p>The final two charts take a slightly different look at power consumption by plotting the <em>cumulative </em>energy required for an x265 HandBrake and Blender workload. We plot this 'task energy' value in Kilojoules on the left side of the chart, with performance charted on the x-axis.<br><br>These workloads consist of a fixed amount of work, so we can plot the task energy against the performance during the job (bottom axis), thus generating a useful power chart. Faster compute performance and lower task energy are ideal. That means processors closest to the bottom right corner of the chart are the best.</p><h2 id="test-setup">Test Setup</h2><ul><li><strong>Core Ultra 9 285K:</strong> Extreme profile — PL1/PL2 at 250W/295W, ICCMAX at 400A, DDR5-7200 XMP or CUDIMM DDR5-8200</li><li><strong>Core Ultra 5 245K: </strong>Performance profile — PL1/PL2 at 250W/250W, ICCMAX at 347A, DDR5-7200 (gaming) DDR5-6800 (Apps)</li></ul><p>All testing was conducted with Microsoft Windows 24H2, and all drivers and applications were updated to the latest versions. We also used all the latest BIOS updates for all platforms, including AMD's latest AGESA and Intel's instability bugfix updates. All test results are new.</p><p>To speed up the testing process, we transitioned to using XMP/EXPO as the default memory profiles for all tested configurations. The memory speeds used for each chip are shown in the table below. </p><p>Microsoft has advised gamers to turn off several security features to boost gaming performance. For maximum performance, we disabled Virtualization Based Security (VBS) on all systems. Be aware that, due to hardware acceleration, some processor architectures handle virtualization better than others. This can provide a performance advantage in gaming with VBS enabled. We're working to quantify the performance differences and may adjust our VBS policy in the future. The table below provides further hardware details.</p><div ><table><caption>AMD Ryzen 5 9600X Test System Config</caption><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><strong>Intel Socket 1851 (Z890)</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>Core Ultra 9 285K — CUDIMM-8200, DDR5-7200 | Core Ultra 5 265K — DDR5-7200 (gaming), DDR5-6800 (Apps) CUDIMM-8200</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Motherboard</p></td><td  ><p>ASUS ROG Maximus Z890 Hero</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>RAM</p></td><td  ><p>Teamgroup T-Force Xtreem DDR5-8200 CUDIMM / G.Skill Trident Z5 RGB DDR5-7200</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Cooler</p></td><td  ><p>Asus ROG Ryujin III 360 ARGB Extreme 360mm AIO </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><strong>Intel Socket 1700 DDR5 (Z790)</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>Core i9-14900K, i7-14700K, i5-14600K, i9-13900K — DDR5-7200 </strong></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p><strong>Core i5-14400 — DDR5-5600 / Core i9-12900K — DDR5-6800</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Motherboard</p></td><td  ><p>MSI Z790 Carbon Wifi</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>RAM</p></td><td  ><p>G.Skill Trident Z5 RGB DDR5-7200 / G.Skill Trident Z5 RGB DDR5-6000 / G.Skill Trident Z5 RGB DDR5-6800 </p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><strong>AMD Socket AM5 (X670E)</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>Ryzen 7 9700X, Ryzen 9 9900X, Ryzen 9 9950X, Ryzen 7 7800X3D, Ryzen 9 7900X3D, Ryzen 9 7950X3D, Ryzen 5 9600X — DDR5-6000</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Motherboard</p></td><td  ><p>ASRock X670E Taichi</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>RAM</p></td><td  ><p>G.Skill Trident Z5 Neo DDR5-6000</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>AMD Socket AM4 (X570)</p></td><td  ><p><strong>Ryzen 7 5700X3D — DDR4-3600</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Motherboard</p></td><td  ><p>MSI MEG X570 Godlike</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>RAM</p></td><td  ><p>2x 8GB G.Skill Trident Z Royal DDR4-3600</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><strong>All Systems</strong></p></td><td  ><p>2TB Sabrent Rocket 4 Plus, Silverstone ST1100-TI, Open Benchtable, Arctic MX-4 TIM, Windows 11 Pro</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Gaming GPU</p></td><td  ><p>Asus RTX 4090 ROG Strix OC</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Application GPU</p></td><td  ><p>Nvidia GeForce RTX 2080 Ti FE</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><strong>Cooling</strong></p></td><td  ><p>Corsair iCue Link H150i RGB</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Note:</p></td><td  ><p>Microsoft advises gamers to disable several security features to boost gaming performance. As such, we disabled secure boot, virtualization support, and fTPM/PTT.</p></td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>Intel’s $589 Core Ultra 9 285K brings substantial gains in productivity workloads and drastically reduces power consumption; however, the new Arrow Lake chips struggle to keep up with their prior generation counterparts in gaming, making the chips more of a lateral move for performance enthusiasts.<br><br>Below, we have the geometric mean of our gaming test suite at 1080p and a cumulative measure of performance in single- and multi-threaded applications. These are cumulative measurements, so outliers in specific titles can impact the values. The Ryzen X3D chips use 3D V-Cache tech, which doesn’t accelerate all titles equally and comes with performance penalties in productivity applications. Be sure to check our individual game and productivity benchmarks in the preceding sections to make an informed decision based on your intended workloads.<br><br>We conducted our gaming tests with an Nvidia RTX 4090, so performance deltas will shrink with lesser cards and higher resolution and fidelity settings.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Fdo5prUyCsvKbjrjNpDVCo.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, GEOMEAN" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EamMLGRFJsvzbbSd9yJjRo.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Geomean Applications" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zRffDaCWXbaCy6uABSjaXo.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, Geomean Applications" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pi7qoJspny7iUxEjFncCLo.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, GEOMEAN" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/32XXh2UmoAHjuju5RAduTo.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, GEOMEAN" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>Intel’s Arrow Lake platform still feels raw; we encountered a few odd characteristics during our testing, so it is possible that we could see at least slightly better performance in the future.<br><br>With Arrow Lake, Intel is transitioning to a chiplet-based design for desktop PCs for the first time, a process that AMD completed years ago. AMD notably encountered an almost unending number of odd performance issues in different types of software, particularly with games, when it first rolled out its then-new Zen architecture, and we expect that Intel could be facing some of those same challenges now. AMD worked with the software ecosystem rather quickly to optimize games and other software, but some of those efforts took years to come to fruition. However, given the scale of Intel’s user base, any needed adjustments might come along faster.<br><br>However, we don’t advise anyone to buy a processor based on what might happen in the future. Based on what we see now, it’s hard to recommend the Core Ultra 9 285K over competing processors.<br><br>The 285K’s gaming performance leaves the AMD X3D chips as the processors to beat for those that prize gaming performance above all else. AMD also has its next-gen Ryzen 9000X3D chips coming early next month, and they’ll undoubtedly ratchet gaming performance up another notch.<br><br>Meanwhile, the Ryzen 9 9950X runs neck-and-neck with the 285K in gaming while also offering a similarly well-balanced performance profile in productivity workloads. AMD recently reduced the 9950X’s pricing to increase the pressure on Arrow Lake, and its current positioning makes the chip a lot more attractive. The 9950X is also plenty competitive in terms of power consumption and cooling metrics (with the possible exception of idle power draw).<br><br>Intel’s own Core i9-14900K complicates matters further. At $445, this processor is a strong value for those seeking a solid blend of gaming and productivity performance. It will undoubtedly attract plenty of interest at $144 less than the new flagship.<br><br>Also, you should remember that the $354 Core i7-14700K is effectively the same as the 14900K in gaming for only a moderate trade-off in productivity workloads. With stiff competition from both AMD and Intel itself, the Core Ultra 9 285K needs a price adjustment.<br><br>It's not all bad news, however. Intel has been tuning its CPU designs for its own custom process nodes, and now for the first time in ages, we have Intel processors manufactured using a different company's process technology. The switch to TSMC may be part of the reason for a slight reduction in clock speeds and overall performance, but chiplet-based CPUs are undoubtedly the best path forward. The teething pains of Arrow Lake should make way for much improved future designs. And TSMC's N3B node combined with Intel's architectural designs has also resulted in healthy efficiency gains.<br><br>But we suspect few people that are looking to buy an 'enthusiast' processor are primarily concerned with efficiency. We also can't help but wonder how a future Intel CPU that incorporates a cache chiplet — similar to AMD's X3D line — might change the picture. That's a future potential, however, and right now Arrow Lake comes off as relatively uninspiring compared to the status quo.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ AMD Ryzen 9 9950X vs Intel Core i9-14900K Faceoff ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-ryzen-9-9950x-vs-intel-core-i9-14900k-faceoff</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ The battle for supremacy in the high-end desktop CPU market has reached a new pinnacle with the release of AMD's Ryzen 9 9950X, setting the stage for an intense showdown against Intel's Core i9-14900K. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">rwRF6hLTFtM7boUkqhYWJm</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MicpKwkwF55PtNgxvTtPCa-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Wed, 23 Oct 2024 12:54:57 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Wed, 15 Apr 2026 19:49:20 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[CPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ editors@tomshardware.com (Hassam Nasir) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Hassam Nasir ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SxxNFHt95eGK37mKPhJpdZ.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Hassam is a lifelong PC gamer and tech enthusiast with over five years of experience in PC hardware journalism. His passion began in childhood when he rescued a discarded Pentium 4 processor, straightening its pins with a kitchen knife to revive a Dell Dimension 2400 at the age of seven. Since then, he has followed the advancements in technology, witnessing the evolution of hardware from the era of AMD&#039;s Opteron architecture to Intel&#039;s Smithfield (Pentium D), and the rise of Voodoo GPUs alongside Nvidia&#039;s FX GPUs taking the market by storm to the latest innovations today. As a seasoned writer, Hassam loves to get into the nitty-gritty details of hardware, providing insights on everything from CPUs, Motherboards and RAM to GPUs. When he’s not writing, you’ll find him building custom water-cooled PCs for himself and his friends, attending drag racing events, or collecting niche fragrances.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MicpKwkwF55PtNgxvTtPCa-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Intel, AMD]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[AMD vs Intel CPU Faceoff]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[AMD vs Intel CPU Faceoff]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[AMD vs Intel CPU Faceoff]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MicpKwkwF55PtNgxvTtPCa-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>AMD's Ryzen 9 9950X emerges as the flagship for the company's latest Ryzen 9000 series, showcasing the new Zen 5 architecture. This new chip leverages <a href="https://pr.tsmc.com/english/news/2874">TSMC's advanced N4P node</a>, marking a significant leap forward from the 5nm process used in the previous Zen 4 generation. The technological advancements packed into the 9950X position it as AMD's most formidable offering in the consumer desktop space, bridging the gap between high-end desktop CPUs and the more specialized <a href="https://www.amd.com/en/products/processors/workstations/ryzen-threadripper.html">Threadripper workstation processors</a>.</p><p>On the other side of the ring, Intel's <a href="https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/sku/236773/intel-core-i9-processor-14900k-36m-cache-up-to-6-00-ghz/specifications.html">Core i9-14900K</a> is the current champion of Intel's lineup. However, it's worth noting that this processor, despite its impressive capabilities, is approaching the end of its reign—Intel's next-gen Arrow Lake CPUs loom on the horizon.</p><p>The pricing strategy for these processors adds another layer of intrigue to the competition. AMD has positioned the Ryzen 9 9950X at a premium price point of $650, reflecting its status as a top-tier offering that blends consumer and workstation-class performance, but you can now find it for around $550. This pricing decision sets high expectations for the chip's performance and versatility. In contrast, the Core i9-14900K, while still a high-end product, has an MSRP of $589, but you can find it for $450.</p><p>As we examine this comparison, it's crucial to look beyond raw performance metrics. Our analysis considers factors like platform costs, future compatibility, and each CPU's overall value proposition.</p><p>We'll unpack the strengths and weaknesses of each chip across six different categories, providing a comprehensive overview to help you understand which processor might best suit your specific requirements and preferences. You can also check out our in-depth reviews of both the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-ryzen-9-9950x-cpu-review">AMD Ryzen 9 9950X</a> and the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-core-i9-14900k-cpu-review">Intel Core i9-14900K</a> for further context.</p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-features-and-specifications-amd-ryzen-9-9950x-vs-intel-core-i9-14900k"><span>Features and Specifications: AMD Ryzen 9 9950X vs Intel Core i9-14900K</span></h3><p>The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X represents the latest iteration in AMD's high-end desktop processor lineup, building upon the foundation laid by its predecessor, the Ryzen 9 7950X. This new flagship “Granite Ridge” model retains many of the core specifications while introducing several key improvements to enhance overall performance.</p><div ><table><caption></caption><thead><tr><th class="firstcol " ><p>CPU</p></th><th  ><p>Street (MSRP)</p></th><th  ><p>Arch</p></th><th  ><p>Cores / Threads (P+E)</p></th><th  ><p>P-Core Base / Boost Clock (GHz)</p></th><th  ><p>E-Core Base / Boost Clock (GHz)</p></th><th  ><p>Cache (L2/L3)</p></th><th  ><p>TDP / PBP or MTP</p></th><th  ><p>Memory</p></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Ryzen+9+9950X&rh=n%3A229189">Ryzen 9 9950X</a></p></td><td  ><p>$599 ($599)</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 5</p></td><td  ><p>16 / 32</p></td><td  ><p>4.3 / 5.7</p></td><td  ><p>—</p></td><td  ><p>80MB (16+64)</p></td><td  ><p>170W / 230W</p></td><td  ><p>DDR5-5600</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Core+i9-14900K&rh=n%3A229189">Core i9-14900K / KF</a></p></td><td  ><p>$445 K / $442 KF</p></td><td  ><p>Raptor Lake Refresh</p></td><td  ><p>24 / 32 (8+16)</p></td><td  ><p>3.2 / 6.0</p></td><td  ><p><2.4 / 4.4</p></td><td  ><p>68MB (32+36)</p></td><td  ><p>125W / 253W</p></td><td  ><p>DDR4-3200 / DDR5-5600</p></td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>At the heart of the Ryzen 9 9950X lies the impressive Zen 5 core layout, featuring 16 cores and 32 threads. The processor boasts a peak frequency of 5.7 GHz, allowing for excellent single-threaded performance in tasks like gaming and lightly-threaded applications. With 80MB of combined L2 and L3 cache, the 9950X ensures rapid data access, which is crucial for lightly-threaded applications such as gaming.</p><p>One of the notable improvements in the Ryzen 9 9950X is its enhanced memory support. The processor now officially supports DDR5-5600 memory, up from DDR5-5200 in the previous generation. This upgrade not only provides faster out-of-the-box memory performance but also sets the stage for impressive memory overclocking potential. AMD suggests that users may achieve memory speeds up to DDR5-8000, particularly when paired with new 800-series motherboards. However, for most users, DDR5-6000 remains the sweet spot for the price-to-performance ratio.</p><p>Compatibility is a key feature of the Ryzen 9 9950X. It utilizes the AM5 LGA1718 socket, ensuring backward compatibility with existing 600-series chipsets. This compatibility allows users to upgrade their processors without necessarily replacing their entire motherboard, providing a cost-effective upgrade path.</p><p>The Ryzen 9 9950X is designed to work with AMD's upcoming 800-series motherboards, including the high-end X870 and X870E models, as well as the more mainstream B850 and B840 options. These new motherboards, while based on the same Promontory 21 chipset as the 600-series, come with enhanced feature sets. For instance, PCIe 5.0 support for both storage and graphics is now standard on X870 boards, and all X870 models will include USB4 40 Gbps interfaces, offering users access to the latest high-speed connectivity options.</p><p>In terms of power and thermal characteristics, the Ryzen 9 9950X maintains a 170W TDP (Thermal Design Power) with a maximum power rating of 230W. This high-performance processor is designed to operate efficiently at temperatures between 70-90°C during heavy workloads, with a maximum safe temperature of 95°C. Due to its power requirements and thermal output, AMD recommends pairing the 9950X with a robust cooling solution, suggesting a 240-280mm liquid cooler or equivalent for optimal performance.</p><p>It's worth noting that the Ryzen 9 9950X, like its predecessor, does not come with a bundled cooler. This decision allows enthusiasts and power users to choose their preferred cooling solution, potentially unlocking additional performance through AMD's Precision Boost 2 algorithms, which can take advantage of superior cooling to maintain higher clock speeds for longer periods.</p><p>Intel's latest flagship processor, the Core i9-14900K, stands at the forefront of the 14th-generation lineup and offers a refined hybrid architecture that pushes the boundaries of desktop computing performance.</p><p>The i9-14900K boasts an impressive 24 cores, divided into eight high-performance Raptor Cove P-cores and 16 efficient E-cores. This hybrid design allows for 32 threads, balancing raw power with energy efficiency. P-cores clock in at a base of 3.2 GHz, ramping up to a blistering 6.0 GHz boost, while E-cores operate between 2.4 GHz and 4.4 GHz.</p><p>A massive 68MB combined cache (32MB L2 + 36MB L3) ensures swift data access. Memory support is versatile, accommodating both DDR4-3200 and DDR5-5600, with overclocking potential reaching DDR5-8600 on specialized kits. With a base TDP of 125W and a maximum turbo power of 253W, the i9-14900K requires robust cooling. Intel suggests a 360mm radiator for optimal performance, especially when pushing clock speeds to their limits.</p><p>Leveraging the LGA1700 socket, the i9-14900K maintains compatibility with 600- and 700-series motherboards. New Z790 boards offer enhanced power delivery and cutting-edge connectivity like Wi-Fi 7 and USB 3.2 Gen 2. Building on the success of its predecessor, the i9-14900K features refined clock speeds and an improved voltage/frequency curve. These tweaks, coupled with advancements in core and memory overclocking, position it as a powerhouse for demanding applications and high-end gaming.</p><p>Priced at $550, the Core i9-14900K targets enthusiasts and professionals seeking top-tier performance. Its blend of high clock speeds, multi-threaded capability, and overclocking potential makes it a compelling choice for those who demand the utmost from their desktop systems.</p><p><em><strong>Winner: Tie</strong></em></p><p>It’s tough to have a definitive winner in this round. The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X barely edges out the Core i9-14900K when it comes to the tale of the tape, but you can take this comparison either way with a little bit of effort.</p><p>The Ryzen 9 9950X uses a newer architecture and has more “performance” cores (twice as many, actually). It’s also on a platform that will likely stick around for a few more years, unlike the competition, which is set to introduce a brand-new platform soon.</p><p>On the flip side, the Core i9-14900K also makes a solid claim for this round, as it supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory and has a slightly higher boost clock. Either way, both of these behemoths are neck and neck in our comparison so far.</p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-gaming-benchmarks-and-performance-amd-ryzen-9-9950x-vs-intel-core-i9-14900k"><span>Gaming Benchmarks and Performance: AMD Ryzen 9 9950X vs Intel Core i9-14900K</span></h3><p>This article provides an overview of the performance metrics of the Ryzen 9 9950X and Core i9-14900K. We have also published in-depth individual reviews of these two CPUs, which you can refer to for more details. In these graphs, you can see the geometric mean of our gaming test results with these two CPUs at 1080p and 1440p.</p><p>To minimize potential bottlenecks, we paired both CPUs with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 graphics card. Moreover, since the Core i9-14900K supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, we made sure to test both configurations to keep the playing field as level as possible. Testing at 1080p might seem irrelevant for such a powerful setup, but this resolution allows us to see the full potential of our CPUs in gaming.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/usBoy2wZ3Y5ayNgX4Dzhg.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CUDi5iejsJ9FS59qpLmaU.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xpmQBRx8yC8NZLfcdwJpa.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TEkMJKRXUMm6vuhabeUiM.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kxWf27Zd8yBSuaeUMzBg75.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QAkZUVXqXb9GuHR9wmMWF5.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QdiE6XpjyG5RcNAy3CBHg8.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kgqMAR8kYu4NUiaaqoQAm8.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/i9S97XN8p2PfVH5Pt3c3nC.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xLP3TZFtTGZ5qsfZbcQesC.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yQU7cgyrUSirsq8djcxPWG.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bcy7tuTXijz7fvuzZjnqbG.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hXewtxxQyXsTmqqLGjk5xK.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wxsnkYBDbxBHWVYtHu4L4L.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/M93uskcsrnbJK6aPfxLXWS.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GjbGFKwinCPKnfLBdrymbS.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>The Intel Core i9-14900K is the clear winner when it comes to 1080p gaming performance. With an average FPS of 181 in our Geomean, the Core i9-14900K outpaces the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X by a significant 10%.</p><p>The Raptor Lake Refresh lineup isn’t Zen 5's long-term competitor, as Intel is gearing up to release Arrow Lake sometime in the near future. This means that Intel's offering not only outperforms AMD's but also does so at a lower price point, making it an attractive option for gamers looking to maximize their bang for the buck.</p><p>Glancing at the 99th percentile results at 1080p, the ranking remains largely the same, but the Core i9-14900K does gain a few steps and manages to claim the lead in this category. The gap between the Core i9-14900K and the Ryzen 9 9950X grows to 13.6% when looking at 99th percentile results at 1080p.</p><p>AMD's Ryzen 7 7800X3D, with its innovative 3D V-Cache technology, manages to outpace both the Ryzen 9 9950X and Core i9-14900K by a significant margin, achieving an average of 203 FPS. Meanwhile, Intel's more affordable Core i7-14700K also manages to edge out the Ryzen 9 9950X by a 5% margin, showcasing the strength of Intel's mainstream Raptor Lake offerings.</p><p>At 1440p resolution, the Core i9-14900K achieves an average FPS of 161, while the Ryzen 9 9950X manages 150 FPS. This represents a more modest 7.3% performance advantage for the Intel processor compared to the 10% lead it held at 1080p.</p><p>The narrower gap between the two CPUs at 1440p shows that the GPU becomes more of a bottleneck at this higher resolution, reducing the impact of the CPU's raw performance. This indicates that the choice between the Ryzen 9 9950X and Core i9-14900K may be less critical for gamers who primarily play at 1440p or higher resolutions.</p><p>Interestingly, the data also shows that AMD's Ryzen 7 7800X3D, with its 3D V-Cache technology, still maintains a significant lead over both the Ryzen 9 9950X and Core i9-14900K. The 99th percentile results at 1440p remain consistent with our average FPS results, but the gap between the Core i9-14900K and the Ryzen 9 9950X grows to 12.8% at this resolution.</p><p>Overall, the 1440p gaming performance data paints a more nuanced picture, with the Intel Core i9-14900K holding a relatively slim advantage over the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X. However, the data shows that the Intel Core i9-14900K is the superior choice for gamers seeking the absolute best 1080p performance. The roughly 10% advantage over the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X, combined with its more affordable pricing, makes the Core i9-14900K an extremely compelling option for those prioritizing high-refresh-rate gaming experiences at 1080p</p><p><em><strong>Winner: Intel</strong></em></p><p>With a substantial 10% lead on average over the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X at 1080p, the Core i9-14900K runs away with this round. Moreover, the Core i9-14900K improves its lead when the 99th percentile results.</p><p>Even beyond that, the Core i9-14900K is more affordable than the Ryzen 9 9950X, and it is essentially a last-gen Intel product. In some categories, the choice between the two CPUs may come down to subjective factors, but it is quite clear that Intel’s flagship processor claims a clean victory in this round.</p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-productivity-performance-amd-ryzen-9-9950x-vs-intel-core-i9-14900k"><span>Productivity Performance: AMD Ryzen 9 9950X vs Intel Core i9-14900K</span></h3><p>Productivity performance can be broadly divided into multi-threaded performance and single-threaded performance. While most productivity applications nowadays are biased towards the former, that is not always the case. Our extensive testing spans across a wide variety of application benchmarks that give us a well-rounded idea of the productivity capabilities of these two CPUs.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yGAcB8ezD4aziWfBk73kYB.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Fyhnjs5xAN4haRh3zmcaNB.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PBo5LYRBprDLLgAozLdi56.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DL5jgaXnG77sHqo8Rf2kv5.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/e8oXa7HCQLrN6HgTdkWfTB.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4hQxtLFKxdgBf66vXkqudB.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/f2FSS7bjKUjVJRkswQvykB.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xbG4SC2LXjGg7cjKTUezHC.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mDPsxUUMqoqPhwVpHWrJPC.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dwpmAPhrK9dSJYRrxnd9rB.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/j3XtfsAY68BDrS8YWvzv7C.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Bd2REDLc22TFB45rd7F4DC.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/97AgxmVEJ2zgWp8hn6uUUC.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6HACu6W3R8J5y43JGiHmZC.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NvG2wVt7hEwThhGtD6q3wB.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SV8eH6GvF7PqSwCFYZPLZX.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HXHSVZr7RXMysa4C8w6yHX.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yWknrC5tRemTj7gkij5QeX.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YYomJEeYSjcFSmsE4Ap5PX.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Dsdumukjf4cC6QYhA6wMUX.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2Qxg88uCZgz5hk7Ms8QKjX.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/muDw2fJFqu4uvS6JcZp8pX.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GB5coZcTAoKCaofe9Z6TuX.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jibydwkBma6F2sNWGDtxne.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ATitGinttoKeGQnwMwDPSe.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SXYJZ5kuRNTb6vcLVQjfXe.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bSNFZQm7wrGUfMNQhNVuce.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QBefnzVsU58ZMPqc9JTthe.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yLsfy5FeH5EYKLnXiUBzse.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>Taking a quick glance at our overall performance ranking, the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X demonstrates superior multi-threaded performance compared to the Intel Core i9-14900K across a range of benchmarks. The Ryzen 9 9950X scores 472 points at stock settings and an impressive 499 points with Precision Boost Overdrive (PBO) enabled. This significantly outperforms the Core i9-14900K's 382 points, representing a substantial 23% advantage for the AMD chip in heavily threaded workloads.</p><p>This performance gap is particularly noteworthy given that it factors in a variety of benchmarks, including Cinebench, POV-ray, V-Ray, Blender, Handbrake, and Y-cruncher. Even when excluding AVX-heavy benchmarks, the 9950X still maintains a 13% lead over the 14900K, highlighting its strong performance even in more conventional multi-threaded tasks.</p><p>While the Core i9-14900K retains an edge in single-threaded tasks, the gap has narrowed significantly compared to previous generations. The single-threaded performance ranking shows the 14900K scoring 235 points compared to the 9950X's 222 points with PBO enabled, representing about a 5% advantage for Intel in single-threaded workloads.</p><p>The Ryzen 9 9950X and 9900X both show approximately 9% improvement over their predecessors, which has allowed AMD to close the gap with Intel's traditionally strong single-core performance. This enhancement is particularly important for applications that don't scale well across multiple cores, such as some gaming scenarios and certain productivity applications.</p><p>The Y-Cruncher multi-threaded benchmark provides a good example of the Ryzen 9 9950X's capabilities, especially in AVX-512 workloads. The 9950X completes the task in 40.52 seconds (or 40.37 seconds with PBO), while the Core i9-14900K takes 55.64 seconds. This represents a substantial 27% performance advantage for the AMD chip in this specific AVX-heavy workload.</p><p>The y-cruncher benchmark, which computes Pi and leverages the AVX instruction set, is particularly demanding and showcases the benefits of AMD's implementation of native AVX-512 support. This advantage extends to other computationally intensive tasks that can leverage these advanced instructions, making the Ryzen 9 9950X an attractive option for users working with complex scientific simulations, financial modeling, or other high-performance computing applications.</p><p>The Cinebench 2024 multi-core performance benchmark shows the Ryzen 9 9950X scoring 2340 points with PBO enabled, compared to the Core i9-14900K's 2188 points. This represents a 7% advantage for AMD in this popular rendering benchmark. However, it's worth noting that at stock settings, the two CPUs perform nearly identically in this test, with the 9950X scoring 2208 points and the 14900K scoring 2188 points.</p><p>Our test results also indicate strong performance for the Ryzen 9 9950X in various Blender renders, V-Ray, Corona renderer, and C-Ray. These results further reinforce the AMD chip's prowess in professional visualization and rendering workloads, which are crucial for industries such as architecture, product design, and visual effects.</p><p><em><strong>Winner: AMD</strong></em></p><p>The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X demonstrates superior multi-threaded performance across a wide range of productivity tasks, particularly in scenarios that can leverage its AVX-512 support. It excels in rendering, encoding, and compute-heavy workloads, offering significant performance advantages over the Intel Core i9-14900K in these areas. Implementing native AVX-512 support gives the AMD chip a particular edge in certain high-performance computing scenarios.</p><p>While the Intel Core i9-14900K maintains a slight edge in single-threaded performance, which can benefit certain lightly-threaded applications and some aspects of gaming, the gap has narrowed significantly compared to previous generations. This improvement in single-threaded performance, combined with its multi-threaded prowess, makes the Ryzen 9 9950X a well-rounded option for users with diverse workloads.</p><p>It's important to consider that the Ryzen 9 9950X is priced approximately 15% higher than the Core i9-14900K. For users who can fully utilize the multi-threaded performance advantage, particularly in AVX-512 accelerated workloads, this price premium may be justified. However, for users with more balanced workloads or those who prioritize single-threaded performance, the Core i9-14900K remains a competitive option at a lower price point.</p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-overclocking-amd-ryzen-9-9950x-vs-intel-core-i9-14900k"><span>Overclocking: AMD Ryzen 9 9950X vs Intel Core i9-14900K</span></h3><p>We have long since reached the land of diminishing returns for overclocking the highest-end Ryzen 9 and Core i9 chips from AMD and Intel. Both companies are in a dogfight for performance superiority on the high end, so now much of the overclocking frequency headroom is rolled right into standard out-of-the-box performance. You’ll see bigger overclocking gains with the downstream models, but there are still at least some gains to be had. Both Intel and AMD expose tunable parameters and sophisticated software overclocking utilities, like Intel's XTU and AMD's Ryzen Master.</p><p>Like most AMD chips, the Ryzen 9 9950X is best tuned using AMD’s Precision Boost Overdrive (PBO), a simple automated quasi-overclocking utility that boosts the power limits and other parameters, like boost duration. However, PBO primarily adjusts the power thresholds, and the Ryzen processors are generally not very receptive to manual clock manipulations. As a result, they yield very little improvements in raw frequency, so using PBO is the best option for most users.</p><p>AMD’s Ryzen 9000 processors only gain one to two percentage points of performance improvement in gaming from these alterations — most of their gains come from memory overclocking rather than tuning the cores. The 9950X does gain about 6% in multi-threaded applications, but single-threaded performance remains the same after tuning.</p><p>The Intel Core i9-14900K exposes every knob possible for tweaking and tuning, but its aggressive out-of-the-box power and boosting algorithms already consume most of the overclocking headroom you could achieve with conventional cooling. You can gain a few extra percentage points in multi-threaded workloads with a highly-tuned 14900K, but stability quickly becomes an issue with traditional cooling solutions.</p><p>Conversely, Intel’s chips benefit strongly from adjusting the clock ratio multipliers, thus yielding higher core clocks. Pushing to max clocks results in higher single-threaded performance of up to five percentage points, which also pays higher dividends in gaming than AMD’s PBO overclocking. Additionally, the Intel platform has generally higher memory overclocking ceilings than AMD’s AM5 platform.</p><p><em><strong>Winner: Intel</strong></em></p><p>Both platforms have a wealth of tunable parameters for enthusiasts, their respective overclocking advantages, and a suite of auto-overclocking and software utilities available. However, Intel’s Core i9-14900K has more room for manual overclocking than AMD’s Ryzen 9 9950X. It can also eke out extra performance in single-threaded and lightly-threaded workloads, which also benefits gaming. AMD’s primary advantage resides in heavily threaded workloads only. Additionally, Intel’s platform has superior memory overclocking capabilities.</p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-power-consumption-efficiency-and-cooling-amd-ryzen-9-9950x-vs-intel-core-i9-14900k"><span>Power Consumption, Efficiency, and Cooling: AMD Ryzen 9 9950X vs Intel Core i9-14900K</span></h3><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TbHCRbLqzozeagRPru43vP.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bQddZ4pvYLrVoJHp6RopCQ.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yeDDWWzodWxFA499YjNd7Q.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CPo4QNQY6CMsNFYbN4TDJQ.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6wp3ACEKrFiFMvXS4Y95PQ.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ia6q2n27pJLyaFLb7EqCUQ.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qP5mAULWusrGgHLoUn2CZQ.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/34vLDAgBv5uFSdeZjZNyjQ.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/AiaRpdujoNaJFG4J2CmvpQ.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zRLC78PHnBgrzKKE6vHSeQ.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/JKKFE5ZuB6G5nu6Zc9Bf2Q.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>The AMD Ryzen 9 9950X and Intel Core i9-14900K have markedly different performance and efficiency characteristics. According to our testing across a range of benchmarks and real-world scenarios, the Ryzen 9 9950X consistently demonstrates lower power consumption than its Intel counterpart while maintaining competitive performance levels in standard creativity applications.</p><p>Starting with the Prime95 power consumption test, a notorious stress test that pushes CPUs to their limits, the Ryzen 9 9950X draws only 198W. This is a substantial 20.8% less than the Core i9-14900K's power draw of 250W. This efficiency doesn't come at the cost of performance, as the 9950X remains competitive in various benchmarks despite its lower power consumption.</p><p>The efficiency gap becomes even more pronounced in video encoding tasks, a common workload for many professionals and enthusiasts. During HandBrake x265 encoding, the Ryzen 9 9950X uses 188W, representing an 18% reduction compared to the Core i9-14900K's 230W. This substantial difference could result in significant energy savings over time for users who frequently encode videos. Moreover, the lower power consumption usually correlates with lower heat output, potentially allowing for quieter system operation or more headroom for overclocking.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wAiqeUTXPfTUgspa6M9qVZ.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zmeYcVfV3tezsYuq9prqaZ.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9950X" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>The HandBrake x265 power efficiency scatter plot provides a visual representation of these differences. It clearly shows the Ryzen 9 9950X completing the task faster and with less energy consumption than the Core i9-14900K, positioning itself closer to the optimal bottom-left corner of the graph.</p><p>Comparing the 9950X to its predecessor, the Ryzen 9 7950X reveals notable generational improvements in efficiency. The newer chip consumes 7-15% less power across various workloads while simultaneously delivering improved performance. Specifically, it shows a 10% efficiency gain in HandBrake x264 rendering and a 15% improvement in x265 rendering compared to the previous generation. These improvements demonstrate AMD's commitment to refining its architecture and manufacturing process, resulting in tangible benefits for end-users.</p><p>In real-world scenarios, the Ryzen 9 9950X's power draw peaks at 194W during HandBrake x265 encoding and 200W in the synthetic Prime95 stress test. These figures are notably lower than the Core i9-14900K's power consumption across the board, with the AMD chip using 10% to 23% less power at stock settings, depending on the workload.</p><p>It's worth noting that enabling AMD's Precision Boost Overdrive (PBO) auto-overclocking feature increases the 9950X's power consumption, as expected with any overclocking scenario. With PBO active, the chip can draw up to 210W in the Blender Classroom render and 235W in Prime95 with AVX instructions disabled. While this narrows the efficiency gap with the stock 14900K, it's important to remember that Intel's chip would likely exceed these figures if similarly overclocked.</p><p>Moreover, the Ryzen 9 9950X's efficiency makes it an attractive option for users building high-performance systems in smaller form factors. The lower power consumption and heat output allow for more flexibility in chassis and cooling design, potentially enabling powerful yet compact workstations or gaming rigs.</p><p><em><strong>Winner: AMD</strong></em></p><p>While both the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X and Intel Core i9-14900K are exceptional processors, the 9950X's consistent efficiency advantage across a wide range of tests is noteworthy.</p><p>For users who prioritize a balance of high performance and energy efficiency, whether for cost savings, system design flexibility, or environmental concerns, the Ryzen 9 9950X presents a compelling option in the high-end CPU market.</p><p>The implications of this efficiency extend beyond mere power consumption figures. Lower power draw often correlates with reduced heat generation, which can have cascading benefits throughout a system. It may allow for the use of smaller, quieter cooling solutions or provide more thermal headroom for other components like high-performance graphics cards.</p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-pricing-amd-ryzen-9-9950x-vs-intel-core-i9-14900k"><span>Pricing: AMD Ryzen 9 9950X vs Intel Core i9-14900K</span></h3><p>The pricing landscape for high-end CPUs is always a critical factor. The Ryzen 9 9950X entered the market with an MSRP of $650, positioning itself as the flagship option in AMD's Zen 5 lineup. It now retails for around $600. In contrast, the Core i9-14900K, which was initially released at $589, currently sells for $445, representing a significant price difference between the two competing chips.</p><p>This price gap becomes even more pronounced when considering the Core i9-14900KF variant, which is available for $530. The KF model, lacking integrated graphics, offers an even more budget-friendly option for users who plan to use a dedicated graphics card, further widening Intel's price advantage in this comparison.</p><p>When it comes to platform costs, the Ryzen 9 9950X faces some additional challenges. While AMD's decision to maintain compatibility with 600-series motherboards is commendable from a value perspective, the motherboards for the 9950X tend to be slightly more expensive than their Intel counterparts. This price difference in motherboards can add to the overall cost of building a system around the 9950X.</p><p>Memory support is another factor that impacts a system's overall cost. The Ryzen 9 9950X exclusively supports DDR5 memory, which, while offering superior performance, comes at a higher price point than DDR4. In contrast, the Core i9-14900K's support for both DDR4 and DDR5 provides users with more flexibility in balancing performance and budget.</p><p>It's worth noting that both CPUs require high-end cooling solutions, especially for users interested in overclocking. This requirement somewhat levels the playing field in terms of additional costs, as both platforms will need a similar investment in cooling hardware to achieve optimal performance.</p><p>When examining the performance-to-price ratio, the picture becomes a bit more unfavorable for the Red Team. The Ryzen 9 9950X offers significant generational improvements in both gaming and productivity workloads. However, its higher price point makes it a harder sell in many scenarios. In 1080p gaming, for instance, the 9950X is about 8% faster than its predecessor, the 7950X, but it falls behind the cheaper Intel offerings. The Core i9-14900K, despite its lower price, outperforms the 9950X by 10% in 1080p gaming, while even the $400 Core i7-14700K is 5% faster.</p><p>The Ryzen 9 9950X's value proposition becomes more apparent in multi-threaded workloads, where it shows a 23% overall gain compared to the Core i9-14900K. However, this advantage narrows to 13% when excluding the AVX-512 heavy y-cruncher benchmark. The 9950X's superior power efficiency compared to the 14900K is noteworthy, but both chips still require high-end motherboards and cooling solutions to maximize their performance potential.</p><p><em><strong>Winner: Intel</strong></em></p><p>While the Ryzen 9 9950X offers impressive performance, particularly in multi-threaded applications, its higher price point and platform costs make it a more niche option. For gamers, the cheaper Intel alternatives or AMD's own X3D processors might offer better value. The 9950X seems best suited for users who prioritize multi-threaded performance and power efficiency and are willing to pay a premium for these attributes.</p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-bottom-line-amd-ryzen-9-9950x-vs-intel-core-i9-14900k"><span>Bottom Line: AMD Ryzen 9 9950X vs Intel Core i9-14900K</span></h3><div ><table><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><p><strong>Intel Core i9-14900K</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>AMD Ryzen 9 9950X</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Features and Specifications</p></td><td  ><p>❌</p></td><td  ><p>❌</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Gaming</p></td><td  ><p>❌</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Productivity Applications</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p>❌</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Overclocking</p></td><td  ><p>❌</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Power Consumption, Efficiency, and Cooling</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p>❌</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Pricing</p></td><td  ><p>❌</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><strong>Total</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>4</strong></p></td><td  ><p><strong>3</strong></p></td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>So, after putting both flagship CPUs through our grueling gauntlet of tests, we have finally arrived at the verdict. The Ryzen 9 9950X and the Core i9-14900K exchanged blows and were practically neck-and-neck in our comparison, which does not bode well for the brand-new AMD flagship.</p><p>Looking at the score tally, the Intel Core i9-14900K takes a marginal victory over the new AMD Ryzen 9 9950X in our face-off, which is excellent news for Team Blue. On the flip side, it is quite a big question mark on AMD’s Zen 5 lineup of CPUs since their flagship is unable to put away the Core i9-14900K for good, especially when the latter is already a year old at this point.</p><p>The Core i9-14900K gained a noticeable 10% lead in our gaming benchmarks at 1080p and a relatively modest 7.3% lead over the Ryzen 9 9950X at 1440p. AMD struck back in our productivity testing, with a substantial 23% lead over the Intel chip in multi-threaded workloads. However, that was to be expected from the more core-heavy (and more expensive) Ryzen 9 9950X.</p><p>Overclocking is generally a tossup in 2024, but Intel does manage to provide some respectable results in manual overclocking, albeit at a very noticeable thermal cost. The real difference maker between the two CPUs is the pricing. AMD’s higher price tag and more expensive platform could not justify the performance delta between the two CPUs in our testing.</p><p><em><strong>Winner: Intel</strong></em></p><p>Taking all the categories into account, the Intel Core i9-14900K wins this faceoff with a final score of 4-3. AMD managed to put up a respectable fight, but the new architecture does not have the gaming horsepower to justify the additional costs.</p><h2 id="more-cpu-faceoffs">More CPU Faceoffs</h2><ul><li><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-i5-14400-vs-amd-ryzen-5-7600x-faceoff">Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X</a></li><li><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-ryzen-7-7800x3d-vs-intel-core-i9-13900k-vs-intel-core-7-13700K">AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D vs Intel Core i9-13900K vs Core i7-13700K</a></li><li><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-ryzen-9-7950x3d-vs-intel-core-i9-13900k-faceoff">AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D vs Intel Core i9-13900K Faceoff</a></li></ul>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Intel Core Ultra 9 285K beats the 14900K by 13% in leaked Cinebench R23 multi-core benchmark — Ryzen 9 9950X still leads the pack by 4% ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-ultra-9-285k-beats-the-14900k-by-13-percent-in-leaked-cinebench-r23-multi-core-benchmark-ryzen-9-9950x-still-leads-the-pack-by-4-percent</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Intel's Core Ultra 9 285K leads the i9-14900K in multi core performance despite lacking Hyperthreading but might lose to the Ryzen 9 9950X. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">FvM2BCUnyoycEqda2pbgC4</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UDzY92fk6zuyMAsJ4MTsAd-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Sun, 20 Oct 2024 15:00:08 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 09:48:34 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[CPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ editors@tomshardware.com (Hassam Nasir) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Hassam Nasir ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SxxNFHt95eGK37mKPhJpdZ.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Hassam is a lifelong PC gamer and tech enthusiast with over five years of experience in PC hardware journalism. His passion began in childhood when he rescued a discarded Pentium 4 processor, straightening its pins with a kitchen knife to revive a Dell Dimension 2400 at the age of seven. Since then, he has followed the advancements in technology, witnessing the evolution of hardware from the era of AMD&#039;s Opteron architecture to Intel&#039;s Smithfield (Pentium D), and the rise of Voodoo GPUs alongside Nvidia&#039;s FX GPUs taking the market by storm to the latest innovations today. As a seasoned writer, Hassam loves to get into the nitty-gritty details of hardware, providing insights on everything from CPUs, Motherboards and RAM to GPUs. When he’s not writing, you’ll find him building custom water-cooled PCs for himself and his friends, attending drag racing events, or collecting niche fragrances.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UDzY92fk6zuyMAsJ4MTsAd-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Intel]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Intel Arrow Lake]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Intel Arrow Lake]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Intel Arrow Lake]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UDzY92fk6zuyMAsJ4MTsAd-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Intel's upcoming flagship <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intels-core-ultra-9-285k-packaging-leaks">Core Ultra 9 285K</a> appears to have been tested in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where it exhibits a strong lead over the last generation despite having eight fewer threads. A screenshot of the CPU's benchmark results has leaked via a hardware enthusiast on <a href="https://www.facebook.com/duythanh.le.182/posts/pfbid034TBvb1EGcGKV4a7h2Y4h7RN1JoDU2SpKHUcjVarLpG6945J7CnTf96jLKsfZttXdl">Facebook</a>, where the processor is seen sipping up to 250W of power but that is offset by its performance. </p><p>We are unaware of the test bench used and the settings applied so this benchmark might not be indicative of the final performance of the 285K. Moreover, it is mentioned that these results were obtained after some tweaking in the BIOS - though the settings were not specified. </p><p>In this leak, the Core Ultra 9 285K scores 45,563 points in Cinebench R23 multi-core while consuming roughly 250W of power. This puts it 13% faster than the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-core-i9-14900k-cpu-review">Core i9-14900K</a>; an impressive outcome as Arrow Lake skips out on Hyperthreading. The temperature also remained relatively cool, at 76 degrees Celsius, so the CPU wasn't thermal throttling. </p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1097px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:24.34%;"><img id="EhWx7BrGbDchDLdtiP7s5H" name="Core Ultra 9 285K in Cinebench R23 multi core" alt="Core Ultra 9 285K in Cinebench R23 multi core" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EhWx7BrGbDchDLdtiP7s5H.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1097" height="267" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: <a href="https://www.facebook.com/duythanh.le.182/posts/pfbid034TBvb1EGcGKV4a7h2Y4h7RN1JoDU2SpKHUcjVarLpG6945J7CnTf96jLKsfZttXdl">Lê Duy Thanh</a> on Facebook)</span></figcaption></figure><p>Interestingly, despite using an optimized profile, the Core Ultra 9 285K falls short of the Ryzen 9 9950X which scores roughly 47,500 points with PBO (Precision Boost Overdrive) and  Curve Optimizer settings applied. This puts the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-ryzen-9-9950x-cpu-review">Ryzen 9 9950X</a> 4% ahead of the 285K, at least in Cinebench. It is pertinent to mention that Cinebench is a synthetic benchmark and this is a leaked sample of one. However, Cinebench is based on Maxon's commercial Cinema 4D rendering app so can give a good indication of real-world performance in this niche content creator workload - if the result is genuine.</p><p>Ultimately, efficiency will play a key role in determining Arrow Lake's success. So far, the leaked 65W <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/core-ultra-9-285-65w-cpu-beats-core-i9-14900k-in-early-geekbench-benchmark-arrow-lake-chip-shows-15-percent-better-multithreaded-performance-than-predecessor-despite-lacking-hyper-threading">Core Ultra 9 285</a> has been able to catch up to last-generation's unlocked i9-14900K in multithreading - proving that Arrow Lake can shine in power-limited scenarios. </p><p>Arrow Lake, on paper, should be slightly better than Zen 5 in efficiency. But will this compensate for the expensive packaging and outsourced TSMC wafers? Despite a complete architectural overhaul, the slow ring bus frequencies and the disaggregated chiplet approach could stagger Arrow Lake's <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-launches-arrow-lake-core-ultra-200s-big-gains-in-productivity-and-power-efficiency-but-not-in-gaming">gaming potential</a>. </p><p>The review and sale embargo on Intel's Core 200S CPUs will be lifted this Thursday. We suggest users wait for independent reviews here on <em>Tom's Hardware</em>, as we'll cover everything about these processors, in depth. Furthermore, the mobile and non-K Arrow Lake family should arrive by the next CES. </p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Intel Core i7-13700K 16-core CPU can be yours for $249 ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-i7-13700k-16-core-cpu-can-be-yours-for-usd249</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Right now, the Intel Core i7-13700K is available at Amazon for $249, its lowest price to date. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">AFs8JKDyk6zu7TDSQMdUPh</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ToAhr627FLJ7UXTY4beXd9-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Sat, 19 Oct 2024 16:43:17 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 08:44:55 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[CPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Ash Hill ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/p9HsnLCwBpTQYCBBhYXgrS.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Ash is a self-employed tech writer and illustrator with a serious affinity for the Raspberry Pi, 3D printing, retro gaming and finding the best tech deals and coupons. She has over a decade of IT experience and has been featured in the official Raspberry Pi magazine MagPi.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ToAhr627FLJ7UXTY4beXd9-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Intel]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Intel CPU]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Intel CPU]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Intel CPU]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ToAhr627FLJ7UXTY4beXd9-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Anyone holding out for a good processor should look at this offer on the <a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BCF57FL5"><u>Intel Core i7-13700K CPU</u></a>. This powerful CPU has been discounted to its lowest price—just $259 instead of its recommended $419. This is a good deal and one of the best we&apos;ve encountered in the current market for a previous generation processor.</p><p>The <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-core-i7-13700k-cpu-review">Core i7-13700K</a> CPU is a 16-core, 24-thread processor with eight P-cores and eight E-cores. The Raptor Lake chip features a boost clock speed of up to 5.4 GHz. Despite its age, the Core i7-13700K still possesses incredible performance and would make an excellent addition to any gaming rig. It also comes with Intel UHD Graphics 770 if you don&apos;t plan on using a discrete graphics card.</p><p>This processor natively supports up to 192GB of RAM and memory modules up to DDR5-5600. The Core i7-13700K doesn&apos;t come with a stock cooler, so you must pick up an aftermarket cooler for the 16-core processor.</p><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="00e1caa0-3b06-4b41-9f08-e108623f0179" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="Intel Core i7-13700K CPU: now $249 at Amazon" data-dimension48="Intel Core i7-13700K CPU: now $249 at Amazon" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BCF57FL5" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1152px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="YUCTMy2bHckHkH4wJ6kMoA" name="1729353598.jpg" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YUCTMy2bHckHkH4wJ6kMoA.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1152" height="648" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a><p><strong>Intel Core i7-13700K CPU: </strong><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BCF57FL5" data-dimension112="00e1caa0-3b06-4b41-9f08-e108623f0179" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="Intel Core i7-13700K CPU: now $249 at Amazon" data-dimension48="Intel Core i7-13700K CPU: now $249 at Amazon"><strong>now $249 at Amazon</strong></a> (was $419)<br>The Intel Core i7-13700K is a 16-core CPU with 24 threads. It supports DDR5 RAM as well as PCIe 5.0 interfaces.<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BCF57FL5" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="00e1caa0-3b06-4b41-9f08-e108623f0179" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="Intel Core i7-13700K CPU: now $249 at Amazon" data-dimension48="Intel Core i7-13700K CPU: now $249 at Amazon">View Deal</a></p></div><p>As a K-series part, the Core i7-13700K has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking if you want to squeeze every megahertz of performance out of the Raptor Lake processor. However, make sure you have a capable air or liquid cooler to keep the Core i7-13700K&apos;s temperature under control.</p><p>Raptor Lake chips previously experienced <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/intel-raptor-lake-instability-troubles-everything-you-need-to-know">instability and crashing issues</a>. However, Intel has since fixed the problem with <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-finally-announces-a-solution-for-cpu-crashing-errors-claims-elevated-voltages-are-the-root-cause-fix-coming-by-mid-august">a microcode update,</a> so it&apos;s recommended that Raptor Lake owners update their motherboard&apos;s firmware to the latest version. The chipmaker has also extended the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-releases-extended-warranty-details-for-13th-and-14th-gen-chips-list-includes-core-i5-i7-and-i9-processors">warranty period</a> for Raptor Lake chips, so your investment is further protected.</p><p>Visit Amazon&apos;s <a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BCF57FL5">Intel Core i7-13700K CPU</a> product page for more details and purchase options. As of this writing, it&apos;s not clear how long the offer will be available.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Intel Core 200 series CPU specifications reportedly leaked — up to 14 cores, 5.8 GHz, and 45W TDP ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-200-series-cpu-specifications-reportedly-leaked-up-to-14-cores-5-8-ghz-and-45w-tdp</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ A hardware leaker provides the alleged specifications for Intel's upcoming Core 200 series of chips. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">6Vygqczyob3KVFVVGkM3aj</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/23Nu3CSRLgQy67VQFM8GPi-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Sat, 19 Oct 2024 15:28:05 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 08:42:40 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[CPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ editors@tomshardware.com (Jowi Morales) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Jowi Morales ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gM7E2WSDg2wgCFoaDPz9yK.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Jowi Morales is a writer and journalist covering the tech beat since 2021. However, he’s been interested in technology far earlier than that. He started discovering desktop computers when his father brought home a Windows 95 PC, but his first real experience working under the hood of the PC was when the old computer’s hard drive was filled to the brim in the year 2000. He deleted the Windows folder to attempt to rectify the situation, which led to his dad buying a new desktop PC. Since then, he learned a lot more about computers, and he’s always been the go-to tech expert for his family and friends.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Jowi primarily uses a Windows workstation and an Android phone, but he also bought into the Apple ecosystem with the 6th-gen iPad, iPhone 14 Pro Max, and the M1 MacBook Air. Today, Jowi covers hardware and software from Redmond and Cupertino, while also looking at the tech industry in general.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Aside from covering technology, Jowi is an avid photographer and writes about automobiles, aviation, and tanks. You can find his bylines at &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.makeuseof.com/author/jowi-morales/&quot;&gt;MakeUseOf&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.slashgear.com/author/jowimorales/&quot;&gt;SlashGear&lt;/a&gt;, and, of course, &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.tomshardware.com/author/jowi-morales&quot;&gt;Tom’s Hardware&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/23Nu3CSRLgQy67VQFM8GPi-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Intel]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[13th Generation Intel CPU]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[13th Generation Intel CPU]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[13th Generation Intel CPU]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/23Nu3CSRLgQy67VQFM8GPi-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Hardware leaker <a href="https://x.com/jaykihn0/status/1847608859873202213">@jaykihn0</a> has shared the alleged specifications for Intel's forthcoming Core 200 processors. These are based on previous Raptor Lake/Alder Lake silicon and should not be confused with the chipmaker's recently announced <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-launches-lunar-lake-claims-arm-beating-battery-life-worlds-fastest-mobile-cpu-cores">Core Ultra 200V</a> (codenamed Lunar Lake) or <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-launches-arrow-lake-core-ultra-200s-big-gains-in-productivity-and-power-efficiency-but-not-in-gaming">Core Ultra 200S</a> (codenamed Arrow Lake) processors.</p><p>The Core 200-series lineup is reportedly comprised of seven SKUs. Five H-series parts adhere to a 45W TDP, and two more power-efficient U-series parts carry a 15W TDP.</p><p>The Core 270H appears to be the flagship of the Core 200 series. The processor packs 14 cores, six P-cores, eight E-cores, and a 24MB L3 cache. The chip is essentially a Core i8-13900H with a 400 MHz higher P-core boost clock.</p><p>If we go further down the stack, there are similarities between the Core 240H and the Core i7-13620H or the Core 220H with the Core i5-13500H. The difference is that the Core 200 series has better clock speeds.</p><p></p><div ><table><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Processor    </strong></td><td  ><strong>TDP (W) </strong>   </td><td  ><strong> P-Cores    </strong></td><td  ><strong> E-Cores </strong>   </td><td  ><strong>P-Core Turbo Boost (GHz)</strong></td><td  ><strong>E-Core Turbo Boost (GHz)</strong></td><td  ><strong>Graphics EUs</strong></td><td  ><strong>Graphics Max Freq (GHz)</strong></td><td  ><strong>L3 Cache (MB)</strong></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >270H</td><td  >45</td><td  >6</td><td  >8</td><td  >5.8</td><td  >4.1</td><td  >96</td><td  >1.55</td><td  >24</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >250H</td><td  >45</td><td  >6</td><td  >8</td><td  >5.4</td><td  >4.0</td><td  >96</td><td  >1.55</td><td  >24</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >240H</td><td  >45</td><td  >6</td><td  >4</td><td  >5.2</td><td  >4.0</td><td  >64</td><td  >1.55</td><td  >24</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >220H</td><td  >45</td><td  >4</td><td  >8</td><td  >4.9</td><td  >3.7</td><td  >80</td><td  >1.50</td><td  >18</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >210H</td><td  >45</td><td  >4</td><td  >4</td><td  >4.8</td><td  >3.6</td><td  >48</td><td  >1.40</td><td  >12</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >250U</td><td  >15</td><td  >2</td><td  >8</td><td  >5.4</td><td  >4.0</td><td  >96</td><td  >1.30</td><td  >12</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >220U</td><td  >15</td><td  >2</td><td  >8</td><td  >5.0</td><td  >1.25</td><td  ></td><td  ></td><td  ></td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>This won’t be the first time Intel has reused last-generation silicon, given it a new name and sticker, and sold it alongside current-generation chips.</p><p>For example, the Meteor Lake processors headline the Intel Core Ultra 100 family. However, you could also get non-Ultra Series 1 chips from the Raptor Lake Refresh generation. This makes the Intel Core Ultra 200V processors a confusing mess of chips lumped together under the 200-series branding.</p><ul><li>Intel Core Ultra 200V: Lunar Lake</li><li>Intel Core Ultra 200S: Arrow Lake desktop chips</li><li>Intel Core Ultra 200H/HS: Arrow Lake mobile</li><li>Intel Core 200U/H: Raptor Lake Refresh mobile processors</li></ul><p>The Core Ultra 200V processors are already shipping inside laptops, while the Core Ultra 200S chips will hit the retailer market on October 24. The Core 200H and 200U series could potentially arrive in the first half of 2025. With all these options available to consumers, you might have difficulty differentiating between the two unless you're well-informed about Intel's latest architectures or have an expert to suggest which one you should choose.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Intel Core 200U CPU spotted with Alder Lake silicon — Core 7 250U shows identical configuration as the Core 7 150U, Core i7-1355U and Core i7-1255U  ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-200u-cpu-spotted-with-alder-lake-silicon-core-7-250u-shows-identical-configuration-as-the-core-7-150u-core-i7-1355u-and-core-i7-1255u</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ The newly spotted Core 7 250U cache configuration indicates that Intel's Core "Non-Ultra" 200 series will still use Alder Lake. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">iqrieMYx9HykgxcKPrxLVH</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/imVKk2MJb3PfJ3L5sBVkrn-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Fri, 18 Oct 2024 14:55:39 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 09:51:22 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[CPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ editors@tomshardware.com (Hassam Nasir) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Hassam Nasir ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SxxNFHt95eGK37mKPhJpdZ.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Hassam is a lifelong PC gamer and tech enthusiast with over five years of experience in PC hardware journalism. His passion began in childhood when he rescued a discarded Pentium 4 processor, straightening its pins with a kitchen knife to revive a Dell Dimension 2400 at the age of seven. Since then, he has followed the advancements in technology, witnessing the evolution of hardware from the era of AMD&#039;s Opteron architecture to Intel&#039;s Smithfield (Pentium D), and the rise of Voodoo GPUs alongside Nvidia&#039;s FX GPUs taking the market by storm to the latest innovations today. As a seasoned writer, Hassam loves to get into the nitty-gritty details of hardware, providing insights on everything from CPUs, Motherboards and RAM to GPUs. When he’s not writing, you’ll find him building custom water-cooled PCs for himself and his friends, attending drag racing events, or collecting niche fragrances.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/imVKk2MJb3PfJ3L5sBVkrn-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Intel]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Intel Alder Lake Mobile CPU]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Intel Alder Lake Mobile CPU]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Intel Alder Lake Mobile CPU]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/imVKk2MJb3PfJ3L5sBVkrn-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>As spotted by hardware enthusiast <a href="https://x.com/momomo_us/status/1847257811518107811">momomo_us</a> on X (formerly Twitter), new entries of Intel's upcoming Core 7 250U at <a href="https://ranker.sisoftware.co.uk/show_device.php?q=c9a598d1bfcbaec2e2a1cebcd9f9ceeedce9d98caacdf0ddeccab885b593fac7f5d3bb86b395edd0e1c7a2c7facaec9fa29a&l=en">SiSoftware</a>, under Intel's Core "Non Ultra" 200U series, indicate that it is rebranded Alder Lake silicon. This can be attributed to the cache layout, which has remained unchanged in Intel's U family of processors with Alder Lake, Raptor Lake, Core 100, and now Core 200 series.</p><p>The Core 7 250U hosts a deca-core layout divided into two performance cores and eight efficient cores. In this benchmark, the CPU hit 5 GHz across the performance cores, 400 MHz lower than last generation's Core 7 150U. The efficient cores remained at 4 GHz, which aligns with this CPU's predecessor.</p><p>Raptor Lake's primary reasons for beating Alder Lake, despite being on par in terms of<a href="https://www.techpowerup.com/298887/ipc-comparisons-between-raptor-cove-zen-4-and-golden-cove-spring-surprising-results"> IPC</a>, were more cache and higher clock speeds. Raptor Lake offered 3MB of L3 cache per slice, 2MB of L2 cache per each P-core, and 4MB of L2 cache per each E-core cluster.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:941px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:47.50%;"><img id="gvqHahSALUftPCPwo6J7ji" name="Core 7 250U spotted at SiSoftware" alt="Core 7 250U spotted at SiSoftware" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gvqHahSALUftPCPwo6J7ji.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="941" height="447" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: <a href="https://ranker.sisoftware.co.uk/show_run.php?q=c2ffcfe988e9d4ecdbebdfe9d9ff8db080a6c3a69bab8dfec3fb&l=en">SiSoftware</a>)</span></figcaption></figure><p>Funnily enough, this particular CPU's Result ID confirms our suspicion as it cuts the cache down to Alder Lake levels. For those who'd like a more statistical perspective, the Core 7 250U currently has 6.5MB of L2 cache, and had it been based on Raptor Lake, we could've seen 12MB, almost 2x more.</p><p>The same conclusion may also extend to the recently discovered <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-200-non-ultra-cpus-may-be-rebranded-raptor-lake-alder-lake-chips-core-5-210h-spotted-with-slower-performance-than-the-core-i5-12450h" target="_blank">Core "Non Ultra" 200H</a> CPUs. While the argument of low production costs is valid, this strategy might confuse the not-so-tech-savvy folk in our community who may hold on to the idea that any CPU with the "Core 200" moniker is based on Arrow Lake. However, that isn't the case since the chips that lack the Ultra branding are based on previous silicon.</p><p>AMD's approach is no different. The <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-updates-mobile-cpu-numbers" target="_blank">Ryzen 7000</a> mobile series consisted of Zen 2, Zen 3, and Zen 4 under a new naming scheme, but AMD abandoned that naming scheme with Zen 5 this year, following the AI hype train (see <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-unveils-ryzen-ai-pro-300-cpus-zen-5-and-copilot-pcs-for-businesses-and-enterprise">AMD Ryzen AI 300</a>).</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Leaked Intel Core 3 N350 iGPU benchmarks point toward last-gen performance — Geekbench 5 OpenCL score lower than Intel UHD Graphics, GeForce 940M ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/leaked-intel-core-3-n350-igpu-benchmarks-point-toward-last-gen-performance-geekbench-5-opencl-score-lower-than-intel-uhd-graphics-geforce-940m</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Early Intel Core N350 iGPU benchmarks seem to have leaked. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">xd6ySGahtq4q9Kn67fyMbe</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jiPZkpmYTgVgTGbjXosdbA-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Wed, 16 Oct 2024 17:52:56 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 12:54:06 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[CPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Christopher Harper ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qS2hbWnXwNUSmgyAHBQqKB.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Christopher Harper has been a successful freelance tech writer specializing in PC hardware and gaming since 2015, and ghostwrote&amp;nbsp;for various B2B clients in High School before that. Outside of work, Christopher is best known to friends and rivals as an active competitive player in various eSports (particularly fighting games and arena shooters) and a purveyor of music ranging from Jimi Hendrix to Killer Mike to the&amp;nbsp;Sonic Adventure 2&amp;nbsp;soundtrack.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jiPZkpmYTgVgTGbjXosdbA-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Intel]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Intel Core CPU]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Intel Core CPU]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Intel Core CPU]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jiPZkpmYTgVgTGbjXosdbA-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>A Geekbench 5 OpenCL (GPU) score was <a href="https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/compute/6808817" target="_blank">uploaded</a> and shared on <a href="https://x.com/BenchLeaks/status/1846009784287301985" target="_blank">Twitter </a>for the yet-unannounced Intel Core 3 N350, which seems to be an 8-core processor using last-gen Intel graphics. </p><p>The total OpenCL scoring of 6,191 points places the Core 3 N350's iGPU within range of Intel UHD Graphics (6,316, previously highest-end Intel iGPUs before integrated Arc/Iris graphics), Intel Iris Graphic Plus Graphics 650 (6,295) and the Nvidia GeForce 940M (6,244) discrete mobile GPU. Now, it's worth noting that even if these benchmarks reflect final performance, and there's a fair chance they're not, synthetic benchmarks are fundamentally flawed at communicating the actual end-user experience one should expect from a given product, particularly in pre-release.</p><p>However, if these results hold in the long term, they speak to Intel's non-Ultra Core 3 CPUs being left with somewhat anemic integrated graphics solutions. Now, no available onboard NPU (the main difference between Core and Core Ultra per the original name change announcement) probably won't matter much to most of you. However, entry-level users like decent iGPUs, and this move from Intel points toward entry-level iGPU users still gravitate toward AMD systems for their vastly superior integrated graphics.</p><p>For users who don't bother with integrated graphics, the Intel Core 3 N350 will likely still find a comfy enough spot within the market, even just as a cheap entry point to the ecosystem. The Intel Core 3 N350 designation also suggests that this design will likely utilize E-cores solely like the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intels-newest-e-core-only-twin-lake-cpus-are-on-the-way-starting-with-intel-n250" target="_blank">Intel Core N100 and N305</a>. We can't ascertain the value of the CPU part here until we have benchmarks of those cores and not just the iGPU, though.</p><p>In any case, the appearance of the Intel Core 3 N350 on Geekbench running at up to 3,886 MHz from a 1 GHz base clock rate does seem attractive. The iGPU appears to reach a maximum frequency of 1,350 MHz, and the most curious part of the benchmarks identifies that the iGPU only has an allocation of 1.34GB— with the device totaling 3.78GB RAM, implying some harsh limits on RAM capacity for this testing. Since RAM capacity and speed tie directly to iGPU performance, there's still a chance that a better setup would likely improve these scores if they are legitimate to start.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Intel Core 200 "Non Ultra" CPUs may be rebranded Raptor Lake/Alder Lake chips — Core 5 210H spotted with slower performance than the Core i5-12450H ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-200-non-ultra-cpus-may-be-rebranded-raptor-lake-alder-lake-chips-core-5-210h-spotted-with-slower-performance-than-the-core-i5-12450h</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Intel's new Core 200 "Non Ultra" series of processors will again be based on Raptor Lake instead of Arrow Lake. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">AcGHhH4iwayQSVRBTdheJA</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/imVKk2MJb3PfJ3L5sBVkrn-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Wed, 16 Oct 2024 15:55:42 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 08:44:48 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[CPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ editors@tomshardware.com (Hassam Nasir) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Hassam Nasir ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SxxNFHt95eGK37mKPhJpdZ.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Hassam is a lifelong PC gamer and tech enthusiast with over five years of experience in PC hardware journalism. His passion began in childhood when he rescued a discarded Pentium 4 processor, straightening its pins with a kitchen knife to revive a Dell Dimension 2400 at the age of seven. Since then, he has followed the advancements in technology, witnessing the evolution of hardware from the era of AMD&#039;s Opteron architecture to Intel&#039;s Smithfield (Pentium D), and the rise of Voodoo GPUs alongside Nvidia&#039;s FX GPUs taking the market by storm to the latest innovations today. As a seasoned writer, Hassam loves to get into the nitty-gritty details of hardware, providing insights on everything from CPUs, Motherboards and RAM to GPUs. When he’s not writing, you’ll find him building custom water-cooled PCs for himself and his friends, attending drag racing events, or collecting niche fragrances.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/imVKk2MJb3PfJ3L5sBVkrn-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Intel]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Intel Alder Lake Mobile CPU]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Intel Alder Lake Mobile CPU]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Intel Alder Lake Mobile CPU]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/imVKk2MJb3PfJ3L5sBVkrn-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Spotted by hardware sleuth <a href="https://x.com/Olrak29_/status/1846156865610346707">Everest </a>at <a href="https://results.bapco.com/fdr/69568">Bapco</a>, the unreleased Core 5 210H looks similar to the Alder Lake-based <a href="https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/sku/132222/intel-core-i512450h-processor-12m-cache-up-to-4-40-ghz/specifications.html">Core i5-12450H</a>. One would expect anything under the "Core 200" series to be based on Arrow Lake, but the non-Ultra models appear to be based on the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-13th-gen-raptor-lake-release-date-specifications-pricing-benchmarks-all-we-know-specs">Raptor Lake</a> or <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-alder-lake-specifications-price-benchmarks-release-date">Alder Lake</a> silicon.</p><p>The fresh sighting of the Core 5 210H has sparked concerns regarding Intel's <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intels-new-core-ultra-branding-drops-the-i-looks-like-amds-ryzen">updated naming scheme</a>. The 200-series monicker will be confusing for consumers with less experience. For example, only Core Ultra 200 parts are based on the Arrow Lake architecture. Meanwhile, the Core 200 parts could be rebadged Raptor Lake/Alder Lake chips.</p><p>Going into the specifics, the Core 5 210H packs eight cores and twelve threads, pointing towards a configuration of four P-cores and four E-cores. The cache layout is not mentioned, so we are unable to determine if this chip will be based on Alder Lake or Raptor Lake. The former would net this chip 7MB of L2 cache, with the latter coming in at 12MB, so there is an apparent difference between the two.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:373px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:39.68%;"><img id="qtrGmBZmEHnRVe8d6JiseX" name="Sighting of the Core 5 210H at Bapco" alt="Sighting of the Core 5 210H at Bapco" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qtrGmBZmEHnRVe8d6JiseX.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="373" height="148" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: <a href="https://results.bapco.com/fdr/69568">Bapco</a>)</span></figcaption></figure><p>It is pertinent to mention that this CPU has also been benchmarked; therefore, we can get a basic idea of its performance. The CPU achieves an overall average result of 1,399 in CrossMark. For context, the aforementioned <a href="https://bapco.staging.portinos.com/performance/12th%20Gen%20Intel%20Core%20i5-12450H?benchmark=CrossMark&form_factor=notebook">iCore i5-12450H</a> reaches 1,445 points, so this may be an early engineering sample. Here's a basic rundown of Intel's Core 200 series:</p><ul><li><strong>Core Ultra 200S</strong> - Arrow Lake Desktop</li><li><strong>Core Ultra 200V</strong> - Lunar Lake</li><li><strong>Core Ultra 200H/HX</strong> - Arrow Lake Mobile</li><li><strong>Core 200U/H</strong> - Alder Lake / Raptor Lake Mobile</li></ul><p>As the saying goes, "Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me." When Meteor Lake launched, Intel also announced a Core-U (Series 1) lineup of processors, essentially rebranded Raptor Lake-U CPUs. Surprisingly, Intel is again sticking, based on the performance metrics, with Raptor Lake / Alder Lake for the Core 200 "Non-Ultra" series.</p><p>The <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-launches-arrow-lake-core-ultra-200s-big-gains-in-productivity-and-power-efficiency-but-not-in-gaming">Core Ultra 200S</a> family will launch on October 24. As is tradition, the non-K lineup will likely be announced at CES 2025, where we may also see mobile variants.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Best Gaming PCs of 2026 — the top PCs we've benchmarked and reviewed ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/best-picks/best-gaming-pcs</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ We test the best gaming PCs with our typical gauntlet of real-world and synthetic benchmarks to measure overall prebuilt system performance. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">eD58hVp4ApHDi92thX7isZ</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kj3ZbACtQnnhFTB6nCMFUC-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Tue, 15 Oct 2024 20:26:07 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Fri, 26 Jun 2026 04:19:58 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[Gaming PCs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[Desktops]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Andrew E. Freedman ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MTveuGNKPqpzrLttEA9ebb.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Andrew oversees laptop and desktop coverage and keeps up with the latest news in tech and gaming. His work has been published in Kotaku, PCMag, Complex, Tom’s Guide and Laptop Mag, among others. He fondly remembers his first computer: a Gateway that still lives in a spare room in his parents&#039; home, albeit without an internet connection. When he’s not writing about tech, you can find him playing video games, checking social media and waiting for the next Marvel movie. Follow him on Threads &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.threads.net/@freedmanae&quot;&gt;@FreedmanAE&lt;/a&gt; and BlueSky &lt;a href=&quot;https://bsky.app/profile/andrewfreedman.net&quot;&gt;@andrewfreedman.net&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;a href=&quot;https://bsky.app/profile/andrewfreedman.net&quot;&gt; &lt;/a&gt;You can send him tips on Signal: andrewfreedman.01&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kj3ZbACtQnnhFTB6nCMFUC-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Tom&#039;s Hardware]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Mirror Maze PC Build]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Mirror Maze PC Build]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Mirror Maze PC Build]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kj3ZbACtQnnhFTB6nCMFUC-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <div  class="fancy-box"><div class="fancy_box-title">Best Gaming PCs 2026</div><div class="fancy_box_body"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' ><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="kj3ZbACtQnnhFTB6nCMFUC" name="Cover Alternate.jpg" caption="" alt="Mirror Maze PC Build" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kj3ZbACtQnnhFTB6nCMFUC.jpg" mos="" link="" align="" fullscreen="" width="" height="" attribution="" endorsement="" class="pinterest-pin-exclude"></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=""><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure></div></div><p>Gaming PCs are great because of the flexibility they offer. You can choose the parts you want to fit your needs and the type of games you play. While plenty of people like to put together their own PCs like the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/best-picks/best-pc-builds-gaming"><u>best PC builds</u></a>, others prefer the simplicity of buying a rig that's ready to play out of the box.</p><p>If you're playing at 1080p, you may not need the highest-end CPU and graphics cards. But if you step up to 1440p or 4K, you'll want higher-end components. While a GPU is typically considered the gaming workhorse, a CPU is tied to gaming acumen and can help in multi-threaded workloads, including video processing, rendering, and encoding. <br><br>Intel's latest chips are its <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-ultra-9-285k-cpu-review">Core Ultra 200S series</a>, which are more efficient but aren't great gaming performers compared to previous generations. For Intel loyalists, 13th and 14th Gen chips are still good choices. AMD's <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-ryzen-5-9600x-cpu-review">Ryzen 9000 processors </a>are a bit more powerful, but the true gaming champion is the cache-heavy <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-ryzen-7-9800x3d-review-devastating-gaming-performance">Ryzen 7 9800X3D</a>.  AMD's Ryzen 7 9850X3D, and Ryzen 9 9950X3D Dual Edition arrived in prebuilts this year.<br><br>Nvidia's RTX 50-series GPUs, including the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-geforce-rtx-5090-review">RTX 5090</a>, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-geforce-rtx-5080-review">RTX 5080</a>, and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-geforce-rtx-5070-ti-review-asus">RTX 5070 Ti</a> are still the latest in graphics, as the company hasn't announced anything to replace them.  <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/amd-radeon-rx-9070-xt-review">AMD's RX 9070 XT and RX 9070</a> offer mainstream graphics with 16GB of VRAM. One other big component to look at is RAM, as the increasing price of memory is likely to lead to pricier builds; some boutique brands have options to <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/desktops/gaming-pcs/this-memory-situation-is-a-multi-year-problem-says-maingear-ceo-custom-pc-company-offers-up-byo-ram-builds-to-combat-shortages">find your own RAM</a> and send it in to be included. <br><br>At Computex, we didn't see any major CPU or GPU announcements, suggesting that at least until the end of the year, we're likely to be looking at parts similar to what's out now. But AMD is <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-had-to-re-engineer-the-ryzen-7-5800x3d-for-a-re-release-10th-anniversary-edition-chip-had-a-whole-body-of-engineering-work-put-into-it">re-releasing the Ryzen 7 5800X3D</a>, so we'll have to wait and see if AM4 builds come back.</p><p>We'll jump into our tested picks for best prebuilt gaming PCs directly below. But if you want more advice about how to shop and specific things to look for, our buying advice follows our top gaming PC picks.</p><h2 id="prime-day-exceptional-gaming-pc-deal">Prime Day Exceptional Gaming PC deal</h2><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="1467392a-8f94-495c-85a4-91e0c8f3f34e" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="The MSI Condex Z2 powered by the Ryzen 7 8700F and RTX 5060 Ti is currently selling at $1,499 saving you $400 and the hassle of choosing the right parts and assembling them." data-dimension48="The MSI Condex Z2 powered by the Ryzen 7 8700F and RTX 5060 Ti is currently selling at $1,499 saving you $400 and the hassle of choosing the right parts and assembling them." data-dimension25="$1499" href="https://www.newegg.com/msi-gaming-desktop-pc-geforce-rtx-5060-ti-amd-ryzen-7-8700f-16gb-ddr5-2tb-nvme-ssd-codex-z2-a8nvm-485us/p/N82E16883151717" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:544px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:122.43%;"><img id="bt989dFVF3UQZaDSbahDbK" name="MSI Codex Z2.PNG" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bt989dFVF3UQZaDSbahDbK.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="544" height="666" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a><p>The MSI Condex Z2 powered by the Ryzen 7 8700F and RTX 5060 Ti is currently selling at $1,499 saving you $400 and the hassle of choosing the right parts and assembling them. <a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.newegg.com/msi-gaming-desktop-pc-geforce-rtx-5060-ti-amd-ryzen-7-8700f-16gb-ddr5-2tb-nvme-ssd-codex-z2-a8nvm-485us/p/N82E16883151717" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="1467392a-8f94-495c-85a4-91e0c8f3f34e" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="The MSI Condex Z2 powered by the Ryzen 7 8700F and RTX 5060 Ti is currently selling at $1,499 saving you $400 and the hassle of choosing the right parts and assembling them." data-dimension48="The MSI Condex Z2 powered by the Ryzen 7 8700F and RTX 5060 Ti is currently selling at $1,499 saving you $400 and the hassle of choosing the right parts and assembling them." data-dimension25="$1499">View Deal</a></p></div><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="7ed1a942-889e-44bb-8f7a-9ba46b34c5f8" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="A powerful gaming PC from PC building outfit CyberPowerPC, this formidable rig comes equipped with the specs you'll need for serious 1440p and 4K gameplay. It has an AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D, Nvidia GeForce RTX 5070, 32GB of DDR5 RAM, and a 1TB NVMe SSD." data-dimension48="A powerful gaming PC from PC building outfit CyberPowerPC, this formidable rig comes equipped with the specs you'll need for serious 1440p and 4K gameplay. It has an AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D, Nvidia GeForce RTX 5070, 32GB of DDR5 RAM, and a 1TB NVMe SSD." data-dimension25="$1899.99" href="https://www.newegg.com/cyberpowerpc-gaming-desktop-pc-geforce-rtx-5070-amd-ryzen-7-7800x3d-32gb-ddr5-1tb-nvme-ssd-gm70928-black/p/N82E16883230894?Item=N82E16883230894" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1280px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:105.63%;"><img id="mox7irNjwb5AFkmsSWDp9T" name="Gaming PC (7800X3D w/ RTX 5070 & 32GB DDR5)" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mox7irNjwb5AFkmsSWDp9T.webp" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1280" height="1352" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a><p>A powerful gaming PC from PC building outfit CyberPowerPC, this formidable rig comes equipped with the specs you'll need for serious 1440p and 4K gameplay. It has an AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D, Nvidia GeForce RTX 5070, 32GB of DDR5 RAM, and a 1TB NVMe SSD.<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.newegg.com/cyberpowerpc-gaming-desktop-pc-geforce-rtx-5070-amd-ryzen-7-7800x3d-32gb-ddr5-1tb-nvme-ssd-gm70928-black/p/N82E16883230894?Item=N82E16883230894" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="7ed1a942-889e-44bb-8f7a-9ba46b34c5f8" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="A powerful gaming PC from PC building outfit CyberPowerPC, this formidable rig comes equipped with the specs you'll need for serious 1440p and 4K gameplay. It has an AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D, Nvidia GeForce RTX 5070, 32GB of DDR5 RAM, and a 1TB NVMe SSD." data-dimension48="A powerful gaming PC from PC building outfit CyberPowerPC, this formidable rig comes equipped with the specs you'll need for serious 1440p and 4K gameplay. It has an AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D, Nvidia GeForce RTX 5070, 32GB of DDR5 RAM, and a 1TB NVMe SSD." data-dimension25="$1899.99">View Deal</a></p></div><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="8b0af5fb-93e1-4f04-b5b6-bd4f3047d781" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="This SKU of the Alienware Aurora features one of Nvidia's high-end RTX 5080 GPUs, an Intel Core Ultra 285K CPU, 32GB of DDR5 RAM, and 2TB of PCIe NVMe SSD storage. Other features of this build include a 1000W Platinum-Rated PSU and a 240mm AIO liquid cooler for the CPU." data-dimension48="This SKU of the Alienware Aurora features one of Nvidia's high-end RTX 5080 GPUs, an Intel Core Ultra 285K CPU, 32GB of DDR5 RAM, and 2TB of PCIe NVMe SSD storage. Other features of this build include a 1000W Platinum-Rated PSU and a 240mm AIO liquid cooler for the CPU." data-dimension25="$3159.99" href="https://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/desktop-computers/alienware-aurora-gaming-desktop/spd/alienware-aurora-act1250-gaming-desktop/useact1250hbtshnsc" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1313px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:88.88%;"><img id="Cem58gxryoFToHGCZZcnHc" name="Alienware Aurora R16 Desktop Gaming PC.png" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Cem58gxryoFToHGCZZcnHc.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1313" height="1167" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a><p>This SKU of the Alienware Aurora features one of Nvidia's high-end RTX 5080 GPUs, an Intel Core Ultra 285K CPU, 32GB of DDR5 RAM, and 2TB of PCIe NVMe SSD storage. Other features of this build include a 1000W Platinum-Rated PSU and a 240mm AIO liquid cooler for the CPU. <a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/desktop-computers/alienware-aurora-gaming-desktop/spd/alienware-aurora-act1250-gaming-desktop/useact1250hbtshnsc" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="8b0af5fb-93e1-4f04-b5b6-bd4f3047d781" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="This SKU of the Alienware Aurora features one of Nvidia's high-end RTX 5080 GPUs, an Intel Core Ultra 285K CPU, 32GB of DDR5 RAM, and 2TB of PCIe NVMe SSD storage. Other features of this build include a 1000W Platinum-Rated PSU and a 240mm AIO liquid cooler for the CPU." data-dimension48="This SKU of the Alienware Aurora features one of Nvidia's high-end RTX 5080 GPUs, an Intel Core Ultra 285K CPU, 32GB of DDR5 RAM, and 2TB of PCIe NVMe SSD storage. Other features of this build include a 1000W Platinum-Rated PSU and a 240mm AIO liquid cooler for the CPU." data-dimension25="$3159.99">View Deal</a></p></div><p><em>Here are a few standout deals from the Prime Day event, which is currently taking place. Our list of best overall picks continues below.</em></p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-quick-list"><span>Quick List</span></h3>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="e8456239-885a-4fb0-8369-0341f7d4c8de">            <a href="#section-a-powerful-gaming-pc-with-top-notch-build-quality" data-model-name="Corsair Vengeance a7500" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:123.18%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ztbL82MRSCUzTMFumicGee.jpg" alt="Corsair Vengeance i7600"><span class='featured__label hero__label'>Best Overall</span></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">1. Corsair Vengeance a7500</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p><p><em><strong>A Powerful Gaming PC With Top-Notch Build Quality</strong></em></p><p>Corsair's Vengeance i7600 gaming PC stands out with its superior build quality, excellent gaming performance, quiet operation, and an extensive two-year warranty. It's an excellent choice for those looking to invest in a premium gaming rig.</p><p><a href="#section-a-powerful-gaming-pc-with-top-notch-build-quality"><strong>Read more below</strong></a></p></p>                </div>                            </div>        </div>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="35024b7c-2628-4a15-ad29-ee57a7e1c6fe">            <a href="#section-best-mid-range-gaming-pc" data-model-name="Asus ROG G700" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:123.00%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vVzXE954s8u4Tp6Zc4tzrg.png" alt="Asus ROG G700"><span class='featured__label hero__label'>Best Mid-range</span></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">2. Asus ROG G700</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p><p><em><strong>Best Mid-range Gaming PC</strong></em></p><p>The Asus ROG G700 is a powerful mid-range gaming desktop with plenty of room to grow. It comes in a glass case that shows off components, albeit with a lot of branding. We appreciate that you can get it for 32GB of RAM and 2TB of storage for a price that isn't crazy. It also offers a 240 mm liquid cooler, which some PCs in this price range don't include.</p><p><a href="#section-best-mid-range-gaming-pc"><strong>Read more below</strong></a></p></p>                </div>                            </div>        </div>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="46a70ac4-960e-40b0-84f0-a088693e2ca0">            <a href="#section-best-configurable-gaming-pc" data-model-name="Maingear MG-1 (2026)" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:123.00%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2DuzNEkJVNKYnjmZeKWwVk.png" alt="Maingear MG-1"><span class='featured__label hero__label'>Best Configurable</span></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">3. Maingear MG-1</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p><p><em><strong>A very configurable PC with clean cable management</strong></em></p><p>The Maingear MG-1 and its MK.II chassis can be configured with silicon and components from many major manufacturers, but what's most impressive is how well the system is cable-managed. Add in the possibility of powerful components, and you can get great airflow and strong performance.</p><p><a href="#section-best-configurable-gaming-pc"><strong>Read more below</strong></a></p></p>                </div>                            </div>        </div><div class="collapsible-block-start"></div><div class="collapsible-block-title"show-more"><p>Show More ⬇</p></div>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="db20c7cb-d201-410b-aafb-eb8f262f815b">            <a href="#section-a-powerful-quiet-pc-with-room-to-upgrade" data-model-name="Alienware Area-51 Gaming Desktop" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:123.00%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/U9BkMdFMUnd4k2aNH7k8FP.jpg" alt="Alienware Area-51"><span class='featured__label hero__label'>Best Full-Size PC</span></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">4. Alienware Area-51</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p><p><em><strong>Best Full-Size Gaming PC</strong></em></p><p>Alienware makes a much-needed return to more standardized parts in this full-sized tower meant for upgrades down the line. Gaming performance is strong, and this is one of the quieter high-end gaming rigs we've tested.</p><p><a href="#section-a-powerful-quiet-pc-with-room-to-upgrade"><strong>Read more below</strong></a></p></p>                </div>                            </div>        </div>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="c16e9638-3bf4-4500-b57f-3d721bc31d3b">            <a href="#section-best-budget-gaming-pc" data-model-name="Cyberpowerpc Gamer Xtreme (2025)" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:123.00%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wLsCPPgBstNze4hmgPFXS.jpg" alt="CyberPowerPC Gamer Xtreme 2025"><span class='featured__label hero__label'>Best Budget Gaming PC</span></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">5. CyberPowerPC Gamer Xtreme</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p><p><em><strong>Best Budget Gaming PC</strong></em></p><p>The CyberPower PC Gamer Xtreme puts components for strong 1080p performance in a stylish chassis. At $1,099.99, it's a value-focused machine, but you still get a bloat free Windows 11 install. The major downside is that the air cooler is very loud.</p><p><a href="#section-best-budget-gaming-pc"><strong>Read more below</strong></a></p></p>                </div>                            </div>        </div>        <div class="featured_product_block featured_block_hero" data-id="c7816dbc-f2e5-4f0f-9261-94b2b6a90472">            <a href="#section-a-small-pc-to-fit-on-your-desk" data-model-name="Corsair One i500" data-model-brand="" ><div class='product-image-widthsetter'><p class='vanilla-image-block' data-bordeaux-image-check style='padding-top:115.96%';><img style="width: 100%" class="featured_image" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/V5xW3rSbbyB2x6su7EJiF9.jpg" alt="Corsair One i500"><span class='featured__label hero__label'>Best Small PC</span></p></div></a>            <div class="featured_product_details_wrapper">                <div class="featured_product_title_wrapper">                                                                                <div class="featured__title">6. Corsair One i500</div>                                    </div>                <div class="subtitle__description">                                                            <p><p><em><strong>A Small PC to Fit on Your Desk </strong></em></p><p>The Corsair One i500 is bigger than it used to be due to the size of today's GPUs, but it also got a makeover with wooden paneling. The larger size also makes it easy to upgrade, but this PC is only available in pricey configurations. </p><p><a href="#section-a-small-pc-to-fit-on-your-desk"><strong>Read more below</strong></a></p></p>                </div>                            </div>        </div><div class="collapsible-block-end"></div><h2 id="best-prebuilt-gaming-pcs-you-can-buy-today">Best Prebuilt Gaming PCs You Can Buy Today</h2><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-a-powerful-gaming-pc-with-top-notch-build-quality"><span>A powerful gaming PC with top-notch build quality</span></h3><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:5215px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:42.86%;"><img id="RbiNXdTsyMjhYMBGmaSSzT" name="IMG_5176" alt="Corsair Vengeance a7500" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RbiNXdTsyMjhYMBGmaSSzT.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="5215" height="2235" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RbiNXdTsyMjhYMBGmaSSzT.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><div class="buying-guide-block"><h3 id="1-corsair-vengeance-a7500"><span class="title__text"><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/desktops/gaming-pcs/corsair-vengeance-a7500-review-high-performance-blended-with-high-style">1. Corsair Vengeance a7500</a></span><span class="chunk rating"><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star half"></span></span></h3><div class="_hawk subtitle"><p>Best Overall</p></div><p class="specs__container"><strong>CPU: </strong>AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D | <strong>GPU: </strong>Gigabyte GeForce RTX 5070 Ti Gaming OC | <strong>RAM: </strong>Corsair Vengeance 32GB DDR5-6400 (2x 16GB) | <strong>Storage: </strong>Corsair MP700 Elite 1TB PCIe 5.0 SSD</p><div class="hawk-wrapper"></div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Impressive gaming performance</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Fast PCIe 5.0 SSD</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">High-quality case</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Two-year warranty</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">Pricey</div></div><div  class="fancy-box"><div class="fancy_box-title">Buy if</div><div class="fancy_box_body"><p class="fancy-box__body-text"><br>✅ <strong>You want a quality build:</strong> Corsair is using its own case and standardized parts here, and the PC feels and looks premium.</p><p class="fancy-box__body-text">✅ <strong>You want peace of mind:</strong> Corsair sells the a7500 with a 2-year warranty, which is more support than most pre-builts gaming PCs.</p></div></div><div  class="fancy-box"><div class="fancy_box-title">Don't Buy if</div><div class="fancy_box_body"><p class="fancy-box__body-text">❌ <strong>You want to save money: </strong>Computers from big box vendors may not be as nice, but you can often find them a bit cheaper.</p></div></div><p>A great gaming PC feels like you could've built it yourself. Corsair's Vengeance a7500 uses a mix of its own components, an AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D, and a GeForce RTX 5070 Ti to make a premium system that runs fast and looks great.</p><p>In my testing, the Vengeance a7500 showed strong performance at 1080p, while most games, including <em>Shadow of the Tomb Raider</em> and <em>Red Dead Redemption 2</em> were also playable at 4K.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7p55MQ9gLfZc4cjZk2PmeR.png" alt="Corsair Vengeance a7500" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Xie2ehkzfCx8M4f8HiU9eR.png" alt="Corsair Vengeance a7500" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sWGX7UADecXbgABPr3MidR.png" alt="Corsair Vengeance a7500" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Cj4oi2Puo6dNaetUtFd5cR.png" alt="Corsair Vengeance a7500" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PAb4DhtuBLnggWfi58WYdR.png" alt="Corsair Vengeance a7500" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>Typically, machines like Vengeance a7500 are pricier than the options that you also find from big box vendors. In the current environment, with pricey RAM and GPUs, the pricing here isn't as crazy as it used to be. And you get a two-year standard warranty that is better than what prebuilt buyers have come to expect.</p><p>If you dislike RGB, you may have some lighting to turn off, but between high-end components and strong build quality, the Vengeance is a great option.</p><p><strong>Read:</strong> <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/desktops/gaming-pcs/corsair-vengeance-a7500-review-high-performance-blended-with-high-style"><u>Corsair Vengeance a7500 review</u></a></p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-best-mid-range-gaming-pc"><span>Best Mid-range gaming PC</span></h3><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1920px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:42.86%;"><img id="MpeWmvWyPaVpTAHpymFmVg" name="Asus ROG G700TF - Cover" alt="Asus ROG G700TF" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MpeWmvWyPaVpTAHpymFmVg.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="1920" height="823" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MpeWmvWyPaVpTAHpymFmVg.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><div class="buying-guide-block"><h3 id="2-asus-rog-g700"><span class="title__text"><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/desktops/asus-rog-g700-review">2. Asus ROG G700</a></span><span class="chunk rating"><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span></span></h3><div class="_hawk subtitle"><p>Best Mid-range</p></div><p class="specs__container"><strong>CPU: </strong>Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF | <strong>GPU: </strong>Nvidia GeForce RTX 5070 | <strong>RAM: </strong>32GB DDR5-4800 | <strong>Storage: </strong>2TB PCIe 4.0 SSD</p><div class="hawk-wrapper"></div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Solid gaming performance</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Well-put together</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Liquid-cooled CPU at this price</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">Outdated Wi-Fi 6</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">Limited RGB customization</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">No room for 2.5-inch or 3.5-inch drives</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">XMP not enabled out of the box</div></div><div  class="fancy-box"><div class="fancy_box-title">Buy if</div><div class="fancy_box_body"><p class="fancy-box__body-text">✅ <strong>You want something with room to grow: </strong>The glass case is roomy, and the 850W PSU should offer enough power for some future GPUs. The 32GB of RAM and 2TB of storage are great starting points.</p><p class="fancy-box__body-text">✅ <strong>You want a PC that feels premium: </strong>The case is nice and the system is well-put together.</p></div></div><div  class="fancy-box"><div class="fancy_box-title">Don't Buy if</div><div class="fancy_box_body"><p class="fancy-box__body-text">❌<strong>You want something subtle:</strong> The amount of Asus and gamer branding on this PC can be a bit much<br>❌<strong>You want to add 2.5-inch or 3.5-inch drives: </strong>This case doesn't have mounting points or cages for larger drives. You can only use SSDs that fit on the motherboard.</p></div></div><p>The Asus ROG G700 is a mainstream PC verging on the premium market, with its Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF, Nvidia GeForce RTX 5070, and the fact that it's well put-together.<br><br>The glass case is quite nice, perhaps with the exception of a gamer manifesto printed on the PSU shroud, which I found to be a bit excessive, even for a gaming PC. In fact, I'd rather have more RGB customization options. But if you put your system on the floor, this won't matter so much.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZMSEz597iGs5a5NigLRRVc.png" alt="Asus ROG G700TF" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QWCPMBDJnVSwgrermidJEc.png" alt="Asus ROG G700TF" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/q6QYLBf9YgDiXnsSsU2MVc.png" alt="Asus ROG G700TF" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SUS3u2tdydiyfxMMPec8Wc.png" alt="Asus ROG G700TF" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eXsuB4Mn9YmZVfjZgocMVc.png" alt="Asus ROG G700TF" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>But beyond the aesthetics, you get solid gaming performance that should serve well both at 1080p and 1440p, and even 4K on less intensive games. At this price, you'd be surprised that you don't always get water cooling on the CPU, so I was very glad to see it here.</p><p>Some of the other specs should serve you well into the future. The system comes with 32GB of RAM and a roomy 2TB of storage. That's good, because the case doesn't have room for any 2.5- or 3.5-inch drives, just the SSDs on the motherboard.<br><br>If you game over Wi-Fi, you might be disappointed that this system has Wi-Fi 6 rather than Wi-Fi 7, but that can be updated down the line. If you can, we encourage you to play online games with an Ethernet connection.</p><p><strong>Read: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/desktops/asus-rog-g700-review"><u>Asus ROG G700 review</u></a></p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-best-configurable-gaming-pc"><span>Best Configurable gaming PC</span></h3><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1999px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:42.87%;"><img id="BXku5fLQ24YgGmuLSU3aZe" name="image14" alt="Maingear MG-1 (2026)" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BXku5fLQ24YgGmuLSU3aZe.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="1999" height="857" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BXku5fLQ24YgGmuLSU3aZe.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><div class="buying-guide-block"><h3 id="3-maingear-mg-1"><span class="title__text"><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/desktops/gaming-pcs/maingear-mg-1-2026-review">3. Maingear MG-1</a></span><span class="chunk rating"><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span></span></h3><div class="_hawk subtitle"><p>Best Configurable gaming PC</p></div><p class="specs__container"><strong>CPU: </strong>AMD Ryzen 9950X3D2 | <strong>GPU: </strong>Nvidia GeForce RTX 5090 Founders Edition | <strong>RAM: </strong>32GB DDR5-6000 | <strong>Storage: </strong>2TB PCIe Gen 5 SSD</p><div class="hawk-wrapper"></div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Extremely clean build</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Strong performance</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Lots of configuration options</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">Expensive</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">Not enough front panel ports</div></div><div  class="fancy-box"><div class="fancy_box-title">Buy if</div><div class="fancy_box_body"><p class="fancy-box__body-text">✅<strong>You want a wide variety of parts to configure: </strong>Maingear's configurator features components from most major vendors, including Intel, AMD, and Nvidia.</p><p class="fancy-box__body-text">✅ <strong>You love good cable management: </strong>This system is impeccably cleaned up in the back, and rear-connector motherboards move cords out of the front.</p></div></div><div  class="fancy-box"><div class="fancy_box-title">Don't Buy if</div><div class="fancy_box_body"><p class="fancy-box__body-text">❌<strong>You plug a lot of peripherals into the front of the case: </strong>Maingear has just one USB-C and one USB-A port and a single headphone jack, where most cases would have anothehr port.</p></div></div><p>While you can often get the best deals at big box stores, if you want something that truly feels like you built it yourself, going with a boutique shop is the answer. The Maingear MG-1 has a ton of configurable options, including both Intel and AMD processors and GPUs from AMD or Nvidia.</p><p>The biggest benefit to many will be the extremely clean cable management job. Maingear's new MK.II chassis supports backside motherboard connections, putting some cables out of sight and out of mind. If you like to personalize your system, the new chassis also has a replaceable front plate that you can pull off and swap out.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Rbm3Thf4YVbT6i8idGR6Qe.png" alt="Maingear MG-1 (2026)" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/on7zZA79tnuYzyUwGosWNe.png" alt="Maingear MG-1 (2026)" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/AGRKx6mTuyqBouvKgN4TNe.png" alt="Maingear MG-1 (2026)" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cnkW5drK39t4wLDrPea2Ne.png" alt="Maingear MG-1 (2026)" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/c9vCTqFzDmZRRJxSwvWtMe.png" alt="Maingear MG-1 (2026)" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>Our review unit, with an Nvidia GeForce RTX 5090 Founders Edititon GPU and AMD Ryzen 9950X3D2, absolutely thrashed our benchmark suite, playing nearly everything in an excellent fashion at both 1080p and 4K resolutions. </p><p>Of course, to get the that configuration in this day and age costs a ton of money. Our review unit was over $7,000, but Maingear's systems start at $2,249 with its pre-configurd builds, so there's quite a range.This system doesn't have the hard tubing or automotive paint that some boutique builds have, but I'm OK with that. Perhaps its biggest issue int he build is that there aren't enough ports on the front of the case. I wish Maingear would include at least one more USB-A port.</p><p><strong>Read: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/desktops/gaming-pcs/maingear-mg-1-2026-review">Maingear MG-1 review</a></p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-a-powerful-quiet-pc-with-room-to-upgrade"><span>A Powerful, Quiet PC with Room to Upgrade</span></h3><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:2519px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:42.87%;"><img id="AqTsu33mRf7tHYeAQNrQLd" name="21-9" alt="Tom's Hardware" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/AqTsu33mRf7tHYeAQNrQLd.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="2519" height="1080" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/AqTsu33mRf7tHYeAQNrQLd.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Future)</span></figcaption></figure><div class="buying-guide-block"><h3 id="4-alienware-area-51"><span class="title__text"><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/desktops/gaming-pcs/alienware-area-51-review">4. Alienware Area-51</a></span><span class="chunk rating"><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span></span></h3><div class="_hawk subtitle"><p>Best Full-Size PC</p></div><p class="specs__container"><strong>CPU: </strong>Intel Core Ultra 9 285K / AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D | <strong>GPU: </strong>OEM GeForce RTX 4090 | <strong>RAM: </strong>Kingston Fury Beast 64GB DDR5-6400 | <strong>Storage: </strong>2TB NVMe M.2 SSD</p><div class="hawk-wrapper"></div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Mostly standardized parts</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Runs quiet</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Strong gaming performance</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Great port selection, including Thunderbolt 4 (or USB4 on AMD models)</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">Expensive</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">Needs adapter kit to replace the motherboard</div></div><div  class="fancy-box"><div class="fancy_box-title">Buy if</div><div class="fancy_box_body"><p class="fancy-box__body-text">✅ <strong>You want a PC that runs quiet: </strong>Say what you will about the fact that the Area-51 has no exhaust fans — it ran surprisingly quiet in our testing. The mix of intakes on the radiator, front of the case, and bottom brought in plenty of air.</p><p class="fancy-box__body-text">✅ <strong>You need help upgrading: </strong>The Area-51 comes with a series of QR codes that give you advice on how to make upgrades in the future.</p></div></div><div  class="fancy-box"><div class="fancy_box-title">Don't Buy if</div><div class="fancy_box_body"><p class="fancy-box__body-text">❌ <strong>You don't have a lot of room: </strong>The 80-liter chassis is really big. It's great for adding massive graphics cards down the line and has room for a 480 mm radiator, but many gaming PCs have smaller cases that better fit on or under your desk.<br><br>❌  <strong>You're on a budget: </strong>Both the Intel and AMD versions of the Area-51 can easily go over $5,000 in top configurations.</p></div></div><p>Alienware's Area-51 has returned after a hiatus, and it's bringing standardized parts with it. Finally, we're getting back to an Alienware rig with an ATX motherboard and a PSU meant for a gaming rig, not a server.<br><br>What excited me the most about this PC was just how quiet it ran. I won't tell you the fans are silent, but between our stress tests and my playing games on it, I never felt the need to rush for a headset. And this was the case on both the Intel and AMD variants of this gamaing. PC. This surprised me, because there's no exhaust fan here — Alienware is using a series of large intakes to push cool air through the system and out the back.<br><br>While the RTX 5090 we tested the Alienware with is powerful, the Intel Core Ultra 285K isn't the best for gaming at 1080p. Surprisingly, the AMD version wasn't significantly better at 1080p in our testing, suggesting Alienware's implementation could be improved.</p><p>While the parts are standardized, you will need a $35 adapter kit to replace the motherboard, as it needs to attach to a special daughterboard for fans, RGB lighting, and the power button. For many parts of the system, you can scan QR codes with your phone to get detailed instructions on how to make the upgrade, which is a nice perk for PC builders getting into the space with the Area-51.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/D2RE7TWPSe6FyFDW7goVab.png" alt="Alienware Area-51" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LdbLfhc9PrKn7FFSCAcbab.png" alt="Alienware Area-51" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SdwZ32KvTXFWcmBbpwAYab.png" alt="Alienware Area-51" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/caPFB2zdJ35ycvTAwXLGab.png" alt="Alienware Area-51" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hPdiTwXEkcGi8wvxTFZCab.png" alt="Alienware Area-51" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>The 80-liter chassis is massive, and takes up a ton of space on either a desk or a floor. While this leaves room for huge GPUs and plenty of uninterrupted airflow, you might want to consider other options if you prefer a mid-tower.<br><br><strong>Read: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/desktops/gaming-pcs/alienware-area-51-review">Alienware Area-51 review</a></p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-best-budget-gaming-pc"><span>Best Budget Gaming PC</span></h3><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:5712px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:42.86%;"><img id="LcBj8Phf4FJiwEssh7SqCH" name="cover_photo" alt="CyberPowerPC Gamer Xtreme 2025" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LcBj8Phf4FJiwEssh7SqCH.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="5712" height="2448" attribution="" endorsement="" class=""></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><div class="buying-guide-block"><h3 id="5-cyberpowerpc-gamer-xtreme"><span class="title__text">5. CyberPowerPC Gamer Xtreme</span><span class="chunk rating"><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span></span></h3><div class="_hawk subtitle"><p>Best Budget Gaming PC</p></div><p class="specs__container"><strong>CPU: </strong>Intel Core Ultra 5 225F | <strong>GPU: </strong>MSI GeForce RTX 5060 Shadow 2X OC | <strong>RAM: </strong>32GB Team Group T-Force Vulcan DDR5-6400 (2x 16GB) | <strong>Storage: </strong>2TB MSI M470 Pro NVMe PCIe 4.0 SSD</p><div class="hawk-wrapper"></div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Strong build quality</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Fairly affordable starting price</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Neatly, professionally built</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">No bloatware</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">Needs more dust protection</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">SSD is slow</div></div><div  class="fancy-box"><div class="fancy_box-title">Buy if</div><div class="fancy_box_body"><p class="fancy-box__body-text">✅ <strong>You play games at 1080p:</strong> The Intel Core Ultra 5 225F and GeForce RTX 5060 is fine for FHD, but won't run most games at higher resolutions, especially 4K.</p><p class="fancy-box__body-text">✅ <strong>You don't want to spend a ton:</strong> We tested the CyberPowerPC Gamer Xtreme at $1,099.99, which isn't a ton for a gaming rig.</p></div></div><div  class="fancy-box"><div class="fancy_box-title">Don't Buy if</div><div class="fancy_box_body"><p class="fancy-box__body-text">❌ <strong>You want your system to run quietly</strong>: The Gamer Xtreme's CPU cooler is very loud. You may want to wear headphones or change the cooler down the line.</p></div></div><p>PC gaming is an expensive hobby, and prebuilt rigs can be expensive. That's why we were so impressed by the CyberPowerPC Gamer Xtreme, a budget PC that we tested at just $1,099.99 that's perfectly suitable for 1080p play.</p><p>That price also gets you 32GB of RAM and a 2TB SSD alongside the Intel Core Ultra 5 225F and MSI GeForce RTX 5060 Shadow 2X OC graphics cars. That SSD upgrade alone often costs a fortune from some competitors, but here you won't have to worry too much about installing a bunch of games.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qHrp4VEToXb5hkBTokV2JD.png" alt="CyberPowerPC Gamer Xtreme 2025" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7mkKBT7LYXnxi2ZvW438ED.png" alt="CyberPowerPC Gamer Xtreme 2025" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tk9yM8HV4qFLtqfgkNDZJD.png" alt="CyberPowerPC Gamer Xtreme 2025" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Ptfs9exvSjEtqbeKFq2HFD.png" alt="CyberPowerPC Gamer Xtreme 2025" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vGTiwQLvewZoTChLFR7EED.png" alt="CyberPowerPC Gamer Xtreme 2025" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>The Phanteks NV5 mid-tower case is stylish if you like fishbowl style. I particularly appreciate that this came without any bloatware — just stock Windows 11.</p><p>The only major issue we had with this machine at this price was the CPU cooler, which is very loud even when the system is at idle. You might want to make sure you have a good pair of headphones while you're gaming. Or you could use the cost savings from this PC to buy a better cooler down the line.</p><p><strong>Read: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/desktops/gaming-pcs/cyberpowerpc-gamer-xtreme-review">CyberPowerPC Gamer Xtreme</a></p><h2 class="article-body__section" id="section-a-small-pc-to-fit-on-your-desk"><span>A Small PC to Fit on Your Desk</span></h2><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:2520px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:42.86%;"><img id="Bsx5yqJbVi7RxnzGCoLnSk" name="21-9.jpg" alt="Corsair One i500" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Bsx5yqJbVi7RxnzGCoLnSk.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="2520" height="1080" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Bsx5yqJbVi7RxnzGCoLnSk.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><div class="buying-guide-block"><h3 id="6-corsair-one-i500"><span class="title__text">6. Corsair One i500</span><span class="chunk rating"><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span><span class="icon icon-star"> </span></span></h3><div class="_hawk subtitle"><p>Best Small PC</p></div><p class="specs__container"><strong>CPU: </strong>Intel Core i9-14900K | <strong>GPU: </strong>Zotac RTX 4080 Super Trinity (16GB GDDR6X, 2,550 MHz boost clock), liquid-cooled | <strong>RAM: </strong>32GB Corsair Vengeance DDR5-6000 | <strong>Storage: </strong>2TB Samsung MZVL22T0HBLB-00B00  PCIe NVMe SSD</p><div class="hawk-wrapper"></div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Wood paneling looks great</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Strong gaming performance</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Easier to upgrade than prior versions</div><div class="icon icon-plus_circle _hawk">Doesn't use iCue software</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">Only comes with very expensive components</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">Need customer support for GPU upgrades</div><div class="icon icon-minus_circle _hawk">120 mm radiator on Core i9-14900K</div></div><div  class="fancy-box"><div class="fancy_box-title">Buy if</div><div class="fancy_box_body"><p class="fancy-box__body-text">✅ <strong>You want something small: </strong>While the latest Corsair One has increased in size since the previous generation, it's still among the smallest pre-built gaming desktops you can get with real power.</p><p class="fancy-box__body-text">✅ <strong>You're into mid-century modern: </strong>The wood paneling on the Corsair One certainly makes a statement. I happen to love it.</p></div></div><div  class="fancy-box"><div class="fancy_box-title">Don't Buy if</div><div class="fancy_box_body"><p class="fancy-box__body-text">❌ <strong>CPU cooling is your priority: </strong>There's room for something bigger, burt Corsair has only put a 120 mm radiator on the processor.</p></div></div><p>It's not exactly a secret that many desktops end up sitting on the floor, not a desk. The Corsair One i500 is designed to fit on your desk, even if this version is a bit larger than previous iterations. The new model can fit large graphics cards, like the Nvidia RTX 4080 and RTX 4090, and also has a bit more room for upgradeability.<br><br>The One also follows another recent trend, offering wood paneling on the case. Corsair offers both dark and light wood, and in theory no two should look exactly the same. I'm a fan of the look, which mixes in some mid-century modern sensibilities with a bunch of metal and RGB.<br><br>Some of the cooling could use work, particularly on the CPU. There's a 120 mm radiator on the Core i9, but there's room for something bigger. That being said, performance didn't seem to suffer too much in my testing. It did great at 1080p and 4K, though it's not surprising that systems with RTX 4090 cards did even better.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kRcvCF3pxMe4ppdzyaPRwJ.png" alt="Corsair One i500" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GdSutrwMg7R2PYy5zPon4K.png" alt="Corsair One i500" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Ei5KmtyNjBQYzCZjvbNeBK.png" alt="Corsair One i500" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MXfpQWF7DHDTVoQfMpHFHK.png" alt="Corsair One i500" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/i9uDJrvqLqgNFmMCJUB5PK.png" alt="Corsair One i500" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>If you don't like bloatware, you'll like that the One comes largely clean. Corsair doesn't even use its own iCue software, instead opting for a minimalist app to control the RGB lighting. There's also a touch strip on the front to control the effects, but the software is more exact.</p><p><strong>Read: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/desktops/gaming-pcs/corsair-one-i500-review">Corsair One i500 review</a></p><h2 class="article-body__section" id="section-other-gaming-pcs-we-tested"><span>Other Gaming PCs We Tested</span></h2><p>👾 <strong>CyberPowerPC Gamer Supreme</strong></p><p>This big-box PC pairs an AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D and Asus GeForce RTX 5060 Ti in a mostly-white build with quiet fans. The fit and finish of the case could be nicer, though.</p><p><em>Read: </em><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/desktops/gaming-pcs/cyberpowerpc-gamer-supreme-review"><u><em>CyberPowerPC Gamer Supreme review</em></u></a></p><p>👾 <strong>GMKTec Evo X2 AI</strong><br><br>This mini PC uses AMD's Ryzen AI Max+ 395 with powerful integrated graphics, allowing for strong 1080p gaming at a small size. It's tough to customize, however, and it feels cheap for what you're paying.</p><p><em>Read: </em><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/desktops/mini-pcs/gmktec-evo-x2-ai-mini-pc-review"><u><em>GMKTec Evo X2 AI Mini PC review</em></u></a></p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-how-we-test-gaming-pcs"><span>How We Test Gaming PCs</span></h3><h2 id="how-we-test-gaming-pcs">How we test gaming PCs</h2><p>We put prebuilt gaming PCs through a number of benchmarks and other tests as part of our review process.<br><br>Currently, games that we run and may include in our reviews are:</p><div ><table><thead><tr><th class="firstcol " ><p>Game</p></th><th  ><p>Preset</p></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><em>Shadow of the Tomb Raider</em></p></td><td  ><p>Highest</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><em>Grand Theft Auto V</em></p></td><td  ><p>Very High</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><em>Cyberpunk 2077</em></p></td><td  ><p>Ray Tracing Ultra</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><em>Far Cry 6</em></p></td><td  ><p>Ultra</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><em>Red Dead Redemption 2</em></p></td><td  ><p>Medium</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><em>Borderlands 3</em></p></td><td  ><p>Badass</p></td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>We also run a stress test, which currently consists of the <em>Metro Exodus</em> benchmark on the RTX preset, run 15 times in a loop while recording system statistics with HWInfo.</p><p>While productivity performance takes a backseat to gaming, we also run benchmarks such as Geekbench, Handbrake, and our proprietary file transfer test.<br><br>We also pore over a PC's build quality, components, cable management, and port selection. Ideally, we like to see a system that you can buy off the shelf, but upgrade or repair down the line if you need to. We prefer standardized parts and want to see clean cable management that makes it easy to swap out parts. In some more unique form-factors, we may give some of these a pass, but it has to provide benefits elsewhere.<br><br>If a test system includes a keyboard and mouse, we use them to evaluate if they add value or if you'll want to replace them. We don't typically penalize systems for not including peripherals.</p><p>Additionally, we spend time playing games and using systems on our own, playing games, listening for fan noise, and seeing how systems perform outside of benchmarks.</p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-gaming-pc-faqs"><span>Gaming PC FAQs</span></h3><section class="article__schema-question"><h3>◼ Is a gaming PC worth it?</h3><article class="article__schema-answer"><p>Gaming PCs are different from consoles in that they provide significant levels of flexibility, from the components inside to tons of settings to tweak and adjust. If you want to make your gaming experience completely yours, a gaming PC is worth it. <br><br>There are other benefits. Games you buy once on stores like Steam or Epic Games will stay with you when you upgrade your rig, and you'll have access to decades of games.<br><br>If you don't care about those benefits and just want simplicity, you might be better off with a console. But even a cheaper gaming PC can be upgraded later.</p></article></section><section class="article__schema-question"><h3>◼ How much storage space do I need?</h3><article class="article__schema-answer"><p>Look for at least a 256GB SSD boot drive, ideally paired with a larger secondary SSD or a <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/best-picks/best-hard-drives">best hard drive</a> for storage. Get an SSD if at all possible; This will make your computer far faster than loading off of a traditional HDD, and has no moving parts.</p></article></section><section class="article__schema-question"><h3>◼ How much RAM do I need?</h3><article class="article__schema-answer"><p>8GB is OK in a pinch, but 16GB is ideal for most users. Serious game streamers and those doing high-end media creation working with large files will want more, but will have to pay a lot for options going as high as 64GB or even 128GB.</p></article></section><section class="article__schema-question"><h3>◼ Are bigger gaming PCs better?</h3><article class="article__schema-answer"><p>Bigger isn't always better: You don’t need a huge tower to get a system with high-end components. Only buy a big desktop tower if you like the look of it and want lots of room to install future upgrades.</p></article></section><section class="article__schema-question"><h3>◼ Why are gaming PCs expensive?</h3><article class="article__schema-answer"><p>Gaming PC parts are expensive, partially due to intense demand for the latest graphics cards. But when you buy a pre-built system, you're also paying for labor, warranty service, and support. But with the price of GPUs these days, getting one in a desktop can sometimes be cheaper than going the standalone route.<br><br>Not all gaming PCs will break the bank. Some start for as little as $1,500, and you can upgrade down the line. </p></article></section><section class="article__schema-question"><h3>◼ Are gaming PCs good for video editing?</h3><article class="article__schema-answer"><p>Gaming PCs often have high-power CPUs and graphics cards, both of which can be great for video editing. If you're using an Nvidia GPU, you might want to consider installing Studio drivers that offer the most compatibility with creative applications.<br><br>If you're a professional video editor, you may want to consider professional-grade CPUs and GPUs.</p></article></section><section class="article__schema-question"><h3>◼ Do gaming PCs use a lot of electricity?</h3><article class="article__schema-answer"><p>It depends on the gaming PC, but in general, using a PC for playing intense video games requires more power than browsing the web, running spreadsheets, or streaming videos. In general, both CPUs and GPUs have been consuming more and more power year after year in order to improve performance. Anything higher than a mid-range system will use more electricity than a console.<br><br>If energy use is a primary concern, consider sticking to something like one of the best <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/video-games/handheld-gaming/best-pc-gaming-handhelds"><u>PC gaming handhelds</u></a>.</p></article></section><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-gpu-hierarchy"><span>GPU Hierarchy</span></h3><p>The GPU is widely seen as the most important component in a gaming PC because it is the powerhouse behind graphics performance. In a pre-built, that's still the case, but you need to make sure you're getting a good value between the GPU, CPU, RAM, storage, motherboard, and other components.<br><br>Our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gpu-hierarchy,4388.html"><u>GPU benchmarks hierarchy</u></a> ranks current and past GPUs by performance so you can get an idea where your card stands. Here's a sampling of cards you may find in pre-built gaming PCs on the market now and how they rank:</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/REFp4Q4gif5ePToRx33Rde.png" alt="GPU Hierarchy" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YiXE3saQCvqSc92CGnrNde.png" alt="GPU Hierarchy" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cuZoUPCWrzaREDZrCVyUde.png" alt="GPU Hierarchy" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7xGA2P5PyJRTA7APqwtQde.png" alt="GPU Hierarchy" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-discounts-on-the-best-gaming-pcs"><span>Discounts on the Best Gaming PCs</span></h3><h2 id="discounts-on-the-best-gaming-pcs">Discounts on the Best Gaming PCs</h2><p>If you're looking for a system that's among our best gaming PCs or something similar, you may find savings by checking out the latest <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/coupons/newegg.com">Newegg promo codes</a>, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/coupons/corsair.com">Corsair coupon codes</a>, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/coupons/dell.com">Dell coupon codes</a>, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/coupons/hp.com">HP coupon codes</a>, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/coupons/lenovo.com">Lenovo coupon codes</a> or <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/coupons/razer.com">Razer promo codes</a>.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Micron launches DDR5-6400 CUDIMMs and CSODIMMs for Intel Core Ultra 200S CPUs — DDR5-6400 kits up to 32GB capacity with C52 timings ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/ram/micron-launches-ddr5-6400-cudimms-and-csodimms-for-intel-core-ultra-200s-cpus-ddr5-6400-kits-up-to-32gb-capacity-with-c52-timings</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Micron expands the company's memory portfolio with new Crucial CUDIMMs and CSODIMMs that run at DDR5-6400. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">7hEzRFQ8e97KK2rWCM5nBW</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EAcPG8TZ8PSxVvJFwcbhJJ-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Tue, 15 Oct 2024 13:54:00 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 08:42:59 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[RAM]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Zhiye Liu ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HhmwL5w9ggUtLCPfqGjTi4.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Zhiye’s love for PC hardware began when he accidentally set his Pentium P54CS PC on fire, short-circuiting his entire home. From that day on, he has constantly pursued greater hardware knowledge, which ultimately led him from being a power user to a writer at Tom’s Hardware. When Zhiye’s not covering the latest news on CPUs or GPUs, you can find him overclocking RAM to the latest trance hits.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EAcPG8TZ8PSxVvJFwcbhJJ-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Crucial]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Crucial CUDIMM and CSODIMM]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Crucial CUDIMM and CSODIMM]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Crucial CUDIMM and CSODIMM]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EAcPG8TZ8PSxVvJFwcbhJJ-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Micron has expanded the brand's extensive memory portfolio with Crucial DDR5-6400 Clocked Unbuffered DIMM (CUDIMM) and Clocked SODIMM (CSODIMM) memory kits to rival the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-ram,4057.html">best RAM</a>. Although the memory kits target Intel's latest <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-launches-arrow-lake-core-ultra-200s-big-gains-in-productivity-and-power-efficiency-but-not-in-gaming">Core Ultra 200S</a> (codenamed Arrow Lake) processors, they are compatible with any existing platform that leverages <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/features/ddr5-vs-ddr4-is-it-time-to-upgrade-your-ram">DDR5</a> memory.</p><p>CUDIMMs and CSODIMMs incorporate an onboard clock driver (CKD). Without diving too much into the technical aspect, the clock driver has an important role: It buffers the base clock signal between the memory controller and the memory chips. As a result, the signal's integrity remains intact, and the data rate is preserved. It effectively removes the processor's integrated memory controller (IMC) from the equation, allowing CUDIMMs and CSODIMMs to run at the advertised speed regardless of the quality of the IMC.</p><p>While other memory manufacturers are releasing CUDIMMs up to DDR5-9600, Micron is sticking with JEDEC's baseline, which is DDR5-6400. It doesn't come as a complete surprise, as Micron has been out of the enthusiast market since the company decided to <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/micron-discontinues-crucial-ballistix-gaming-ram">retire the Ballistix</a> brand in 2022. Since then, Micron has been releasing JEDEC-complaint (DDR5-4800) or slightly overclocked memory kits (DDR5-6000). It's uncertain if Micron will offer faster CUDIMMs and CSODIMMs down the line.</p><p>In the meantime, Micron's CUDIMMs and CSODIMMs only come in the 16GB flavor. However, the company has already validated memory modules up to 64GB with Arrow Lake, paving the way for up to 256GB on a consumer platform with four DDR5 memory slots. CUDIMMs and CSODIMMs with 64GB of capacity won't be available until the first half of 2025.</p><p></p><div ><table><caption>Crucial DDR5-6400 CUDIMM and CSODIMM Specifications</caption><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Part Number</strong></td><td  ><strong>Description</strong></td><td  ><strong>Pricing</strong></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >CT16G64C52CS5 </td><td  >Crucial 16GB DDR5-6400 CSODIMM CL52</td><td  >$84.99</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >CT2K16G64C52CS5</td><td  >Crucial 32GB Kit (2x16GB) DDR5-6400 CSODIMM CL52</td><td  >$169.99</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >CT16G64C52CU5</td><td  >Crucial 16GB DDR5-6400 CUDIMM CL52</td><td  >$84.99</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >CT2K16G64C52CU5 </td><td  >Crucial 32GB Kit (2x16GB) DDR5-6400 CUDIMM CL52</td><td  >$169.99</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>Micron sells the 16GB CUDIMMs and CSODIMMs as individual sticks and dual-channel memory kits with two memory modules. Currently, the only available kit capacity is 32GB, comprising two 16GB CUDIMMs or CSODIMMs. Regardless of the form factor and presentation, the memory kits run at DDR5-6400 with 52-52-52-103 timings and a 1.1V DRAM voltage.</p><p>Micron's CUDIMMs and CSODIMMs run at different speeds, depending on the platform. They will conform to the processor's natively supported specification. For example,  the memory modules run at DDR5-6400 alongside a Core Ultra 200S processor because Arrow Lake embraces DDR5-6400 memory natively. On the contrary, when paired with a 14th Generation <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-launches-18-new-14th-gen-raptor-lake-refresh-processors-new-locked-65w-and-t-series-35w-chips-are-available-now">Raptor Lake Refresh</a> chip or older, the memory modules will drop to DDR5-5600.</p><p>On an AMD platform, the memory modules default to DDR5-3200 or DDR5-5600 when connected to a <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-announces-zen-5-ryzen-9000-processors-launches-in-july-four-new-ryzen-9-7-and-5-processors-with-a-16-ipc-improvement">Ryzen 9000 </a>processor since Zen 5 has native support for DDR5-5600 memory. However, Micron cautions consumers not to overclock the memory modules beyond JEDEC's specifications, rated speeds, or timings since that would void the warranty.</p><p>The CUDIMMs and CSODIMMs are available on Crucial's website. They are the first products to hit the retail market. We've seen many CUDIMM announcements, but none of the announced CUDIMM memory kits are available for purchase. Micron sells the 16GB CUDIMM for <a href="https://www.crucial.com/memory/ddr5/CT16G64C52CU5" target="_blank">$84.99</a>, whereas the 32GB (2x16GB) CUDIMM memory kit costs <a href="https://www.crucial.com/memory/ddr5/CT2K16G64C52CU5">$169.99</a>. The pricing is identical for the CSODIMMs: <a href="https://www.crucial.com/memory/ddr5/CT16G64C52CS5">$84.99</a> for a single 16GB module and <a href="https://www.crucial.com/memory/ddr5/CT2K16G64C52CS5">$169.99 </a>for the 32GB (2x16GB) memory kit.</p><p><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-announces-zen-5-ryzen-9000-processors-launches-in-july-four-new-ryzen-9-7-and-5-processors-with-a-16-ipc-improvement"></a></p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ The Intel Core i9-13900KF CPU is now only $387 at Amazon ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/the-intel-core-i9-13900kf-cpu-is-now-only-usd387-at-amazon</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Right now at Amazon, you can pick up the Intel Core i9-13900KF processor for $387, its lowest price to date. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">PUfBssdLrcEPky78TYEy58</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/F3hyufyuYtoYXQdEdWtZt5-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Sun, 13 Oct 2024 16:07:57 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 10:10:06 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[CPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Ash Hill ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/p9HsnLCwBpTQYCBBhYXgrS.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Ash is a self-employed tech writer and illustrator with a serious affinity for the Raspberry Pi, 3D printing, retro gaming and finding the best tech deals and coupons. She has over a decade of IT experience and has been featured in the official Raspberry Pi magazine MagPi.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/F3hyufyuYtoYXQdEdWtZt5-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Intel]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Intel CPU]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Intel CPU]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Intel CPU]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/F3hyufyuYtoYXQdEdWtZt5-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>If you've been in the market for a beefy new CPU, you should take a look at this offer from Amazon on the <a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BCFM3CJ4"><u>Intel Core i9-13900KF</u></a>. This processor is equipped for much more than office work or browsing and is available today for its lowest price yet. It usually goes for around $430, but today you can buy it for just $387.</p><p>It's important to note that this is a powerful unlocked Raptor Lake processor which was caught up with a bit of <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/leaked-internal-reports-allegedly-reveal-intels-instability-problems-are-not-over-elevated-voltages-could-be-only-one-of-the-causes-of-cpu-crashing"><u>controversy</u></a> this year. These processors were reportedly subject to voltage regulation issues that were causing CPUs to become unstable, crash, or even become unusable. However, this serious issue has been officially fixed as long as you can install a <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/motherboards/intel-motherboard-partners-begin-to-roll-out-raptor-lake-microcode-updates-to-banish-vmin-shift-instabilities"><u>BIOS update</u></a> for your respective motherboard.</p><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="b8ac706b-f2b5-4a92-aa49-c6af14690b55" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="Intel Core i9-13900KF CPU: now $387 at Amazon" data-dimension48="Intel Core i9-13900KF CPU: now $387 at Amazon" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BCFM3CJ4" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1152px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="WKSm3sqCFJ9pVpTbHUUPX4" name="1728833848.jpg" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WKSm3sqCFJ9pVpTbHUUPX4.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="1152" height="648" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a><p><strong>Intel Core i9-13900KF CPU: </strong><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BCFM3CJ4" data-dimension112="b8ac706b-f2b5-4a92-aa49-c6af14690b55" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="Intel Core i9-13900KF CPU: now $387 at Amazon" data-dimension48="Intel Core i9-13900KF CPU: now $387 at Amazon" data-dimension25=""><strong>now $387 at Amazon</strong></a> (was $430)<br>This CPU comes with a whopping 24 cores and a total of 32 threads. The base frequency of its efficiency cores is 2.0 GHz but the performance cores can get as high as 5.8 GHz. It supports both PCIe 5.0 and can use DDR5-5600 RAM.<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BCFM3CJ4" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="b8ac706b-f2b5-4a92-aa49-c6af14690b55" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="Intel Core i9-13900KF CPU: now $387 at Amazon" data-dimension48="Intel Core i9-13900KF CPU: now $387 at Amazon" data-dimension25="">View Deal</a></p></div><p>The Intel Core i9-13900KF is a 'Raptor Lake' Socket 1700 processor with 24 cores and 32 threads. Out of those cores, 16 are dedicated efficiency cores, while 8 are performance cores with Hyperthreading support. The base speed of the efficiency cores is just 2.0 GHz but the performance cores can clock as high as 5.8 GHz.</p><p>This processor can support up to 192GB of DDR5-5600 via two memory channels. It can offer both PCIe 5.0 and 4.0 interfaces and has up to 20 PCIe lanes to take advantage of. This version is marked with the KF suffix which indicates it's unlocked for overclocking but has no integrated graphics, so you will need a separate GPU to get off the ground.</p><p>The 13900KF could be a great upgrade for those already on the LGA 1700 platform, using a prior-generation CPU from the Alder Lake series, or a lower-end Raptor Lake chip. However, if you are moving up from something like a Core i5-12400, for example, you should remember that an overclocking-friendly motherboard will be required to get the most from tuning the 13900KF.</p><p>Visit the <a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0BCFM3CJ4">Intel Core i9-13900KF</a> CPU product page at Amazon for more details and purchase options.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ AMD Ryzen AI 300 CPU beats Intel Core Ultra 200V CPU in Linux showdown — Strix Point was up to 1.6X faster than Lunar Lake ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-ryzen-ai-300-cpu-beats-intel-core-ultra-200v-cpu-in-linux-showdown-strix-point-was-up-to-1-6x-faster-than-lunar-lake</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ According to one review, Lunar Lake's performance in Linux disappoints, which found Ryzen AI 300 APUs to be much better. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">zkm4eH2wiy3tnKyHfgcdYK</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7oDUnn676Uj6LsGsWnQ7hT-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Sat, 05 Oct 2024 16:59:19 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 12:56:48 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[CPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ mc@matthewconnatser.net (Matthew Connatser) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Matthew Connatser ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TfpJxvjuU9Tby95CGPyATT.jpeg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Matthew first got into PC gaming after the Wii U launched out of pure disappointment, building his first desktop in 2015. Ever since, he&#039;s been burning money buying PC parts he really doesn&#039;t need, like a custom liquid cooling setup that may or may not have caused an electrical fire in his last PC build. All this experience in PC building led to a career in writing about them, and Matthew has written for Tom&#039;s Hardware, Digital Trends, HotHardware, and a few other publications. He mainly reports on PC news but would spend all of his time benchmarking if he could. Matthew originally went to college to get a computer engineering degree to complement his journalistic career but instead got a degree in history and linguistics, which he enjoyed studying much more than physics and math.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7oDUnn676Uj6LsGsWnQ7hT-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Intel]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Lunar Lake CPU]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Lunar Lake CPU]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Lunar Lake CPU]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7oDUnn676Uj6LsGsWnQ7hT-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>According to in-depth testing from <a href="https://www.phoronix.com/review/core-ultra-7-lunar-lake-linux" target="_blank">Phoronix</a>, Intel’s latest <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-launches-lunar-lake-claims-arm-beating-battery-life-worlds-fastest-mobile-cpu-cores">Lunar Lake</a> mobile CPUs are not performing well in Linux benchmarks.</p><p>The Linux-focused publication tested the Core Ultra 7 256V found inside Asus’s Zebook S14, which doesn’t support Linux. The lack of official support for Linux on Lunar Lake laptops might raise some eyebrows regarding testing. Still, Intel has released Linux updates crafted explicitly for Lunar Lake throughout 2024 and even 2023. Phoronix also tested two Zenbook S16 laptops equipped with Ryzen AI 300 APUs, the AI 9 HX 370 and AI 9 365, and like the Zenbook S 14, they do not officially support Linux either.</p><p>In over 300 benchmarks, the 265V only scored a few victories over the Ryzen AI 300 chips, doing well almost solely in encryption, random read, video encoding tests, and Python, Perl, and JSON benchmarks. But when Lunar Lake lost, it lost hard, sometimes to the point where the Ryzen AI 300 APUs racked up double the performance. The average performance for these chips reflects that, as the AI 9 365 was 57% faster.</p><p>However, Lunar Lake even struggled against its predecessors; not only did the Meteor Lake-based Core Ultra 7 155H outperform the 265V by 24% on average, but the Alder Lake-powered Core i7-1280P from 2022 barely eked out a win, too. The 265V did at least beat the Core i7-1185G7 from 2020, a Tiger Lake processor.</p><p>Phoronix did note that the 265V was at least power efficient and did well in single-threaded benchmarks, but it lost primarily when workloads could utilize more threads. That’s not entirely surprising since Lunar Lake caps out at four E-cores and four P-cores, while both the 155H and 1280P have more E- and P-cores. Intel’s latest CPU is more geared towards lighter and less performance-focused laptops, similar to the M3 in the MacBook Air.</p><p>But clearly, something other than Lunar Lake’s architectural design must be at play. In our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/asus-zenbook-s14-review-lunar-lake-ultra-7-258v"><u>review of the Zenbook S14</u></a> with the Core Ultra 7 258V (which is just a tad faster than the 256V), we found that Lunar Lake was nipping on the heels of the 155H and even the AI HX 370 in multi-threaded benchmarks like Cinebench 2024. Phoronix speculates these performance problems could either be down to the laptop precisely (perhaps a firmware problem) or something to do with how Lunar Lake interacts with Linux.</p><p>Some strange things are happening with Lunar Lake in the Zenbook S14. Somehow, the higher-end Core Ultra 9 288V model of the S14 <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/the-only-shipping-intel-core-ultra-9-equipped-laptop-is-slower-than-the-core-ultra-7-258v-used-in-reviews"><u>performs worse than the 258V-equipped model</u></a>, which is incorrect. Intel claims this is because of an issue with the laptop’s current BIOS. However, it’s unclear if this problem is also responsible for the poor performance Phoronix demonstrated in Linux.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ How to Check Your PC's CPU Temperature ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/how-to/how-to-check-cpu-temp-temperature</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ How can you check your CPU's temperature and what's a good or normal range? We break it down for you. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">pfuqHH3HcFUGWfneFWiZVi</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/99MwxisePp5bTNWEVKUYjd-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Fri, 04 Oct 2024 10:04:12 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Tue, 30 Sep 2025 17:13:12 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[CPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ palcorn@outlook.com (Paul Alcorn) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Paul Alcorn ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RZRmFeQfPy3etHjBQitbGW.jpeg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;As a teenager, Paul scraped up enough money to buy a 486-powered PC with a turbo button (yes, a turbo button). Back when floppies were still popular he was already chasing after the fastest spinners for his personal computer, which led him down the long and winding storage road, covering enterprise storage. His current focus is on consumer processors, though he still keeps a close eye on the latest storage news. In his spare time, you’ll find Paul hanging out with his kids or indulging his love of the Kansas City Chiefs and Royals.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/99MwxisePp5bTNWEVKUYjd-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Shutterstock]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[CPU Temperature]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[CPU Temperature]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[CPU Temperature]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/99MwxisePp5bTNWEVKUYjd-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <h2 id="tl-dr-how-to-check-your-pc-s-cpu-temperature">TL;DR How to Check Your PC's CPU Temperature</h2><ul><li>Every CPU has a built-in temperature sensor that can be used to periodically monitor the health of your CPU.</li><li>Tools like CoreTemp or NZXT's CAM provide a graphical interface to sensors and enable users to check their temps at-a-glance.</li><li>Other tools to monitor CPU temperature include AIDA64, HWiINFO and HWMonitor.</li><li>Each CPU has a safe temperature range in which they operate.</li><li>CPUs at idle run at around a temperature of 50C but under heavier loads the CPU temperature can increase to 80C and even 100C for 12-14th Gen Intel i9.</li></ul><p>Checking your CPU temperature isn't hard to do and you don't need to open the case as every CPU has built-in digital temperature sensors. You don't need to check your CPU temperature everyday, but you should check every few months to make sure your system operates at its peak potential. Checking your CPU temperature can also be used to diagnose your system and spot drastic performance slow-downs.</p><p></p><p>Luckily, checking your CPU temperature is easy and doesn't require opening your PC and sticking a thermometer inside. Every CPU has built-in digital temperature sensors, so you only need a software tool to read the measurements in Windows 11 or other operating systems. The easiest way to check your CPU temperature is to download a simple utility, like Core Temp or NZXT's CAM, to see your CPU temps. </p><p>Ultimately, keeping your CPU temperatures under control improves performance and reliability. This is especially true if you regularly strain your system with heavy loads like you'll do with the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">best CPUs for gaming</a>, or if you're an enthusiast who strives for the best performance in <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">CPU benchmarks</a>. </p><p>Below, we'll explain how to check your CPU temperature, define the safe range of temperatures for a CPU, and outline what to do if your CPU's temperatures are too high.</p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-how-to-check-your-cpu-temperature-in-2025"><span>How to Check Your CPU Temperature in 2025</span></h3><p>Checking your CPU temperature is as easy as installing and using a software tool and then reading the output. There are multiple CPU temperature monitoring programs to choose from, with the best tools for checking CPU temp being any of the following (click to download):</p><ul><li><a href="https://www.nzxt.com/camapp">NZXT's CAM</a></li><li><a href="https://www.alcpu.com/CoreTemp/">Core Temp</a></li><li><a href="https://www.aida64.com/">AIDA64</a></li><li><a href="https://www.hwinfo.com/download/">HWiINFO</a></li><li><a href="https://www.cpuid.com/softwares/hwmonitor.html">HWMonitor</a></li></ul><p>However, there are other tools you can use to monitor CPU temperature. If you're overclocking your CPU and want more in-depth measurements, <a href="https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/download/17881/intel-extreme-tuning-utility-intel-xtu.html">Intel's eXtreme Tuning Utility (XTU)</a> and <a href="https://www.amd.com/en/technologies/ryzen-master">AMD's Ryzen Master</a> software are designed by chipmakers and also offer expansive tuning options.<br><br>These are just a few examples, but we'll show you how NZXT's CAM and Core Temp work because our testing found that these two are the easiest to install and use. You can <a href="https://www.nzxt.com/camapp">download CAM here</a>.<br><br>While the CPU temp monitor CAM is intended to be used with NZXT's products, it works well as a casual monitoring tool in Windows 11, even if you don't have any NZXT hardware. You can use the software in Guest Mode to avoid creating a user account, and you can also disable the program from starting automatically with Windows if you don't plan on using it often.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xnAd8oq2tJVw6p5PrW75iS.jpg" alt="NZXT Monitor Software" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bgK8mdEUhU3E5iQ8NN8onS.jpg" alt="NZXT Monitor Software" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>Once installed, CAM offers an easy-to-use interface. The first block (PC Monitoring) lists the CPU's status, which shows the load, temperature, clock speed, and cooler fan speed. You can click on this block to access further details. As you can see, the current temperature of this system's CPU is 36 degrees Celcius (C), which is a healthy temperature for your CPU when idle. </p><p>CAM also has an overlay, which automatically turns on when you enter a game while CAM runs. This overlay can show your CPU's status and display temperature measurements while you play games. </p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/iVqPoxtZSS8MAKwHH68aAF.jpg" alt="HWInfo" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bBGMXixtSvfhd7LA8Vm9FF.jpg" alt="HWInfo" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>You can also use the Core Temp tool, one of the best CPU temperature tools for Windows 11, to monitor the temperatures (<a href="https://www.alcpu.com/CoreTemp/">download here</a>). This is a simpler tool with a more basic interface. Just be sure to untick the freeware option during installation. </p><p>Core Temp provides temperature measurements for every core in your CPU. The left-hand side of the measurements shows the real-time temperature of each CPU core, and you can also see the measurements in the taskbar. But we're more interested in the Min and Max columns, which show the absolute minimum and the absolute peak temperature recorded while the program runs. For example, the CPU in the above image has a minimum temperature of 32C and a maximum of 51C, both of which are normal temperatures.<br><br>If you want to check your PC's CPU temperature during normal use, you can leave Core Temp running while you perform common tasks. However, if you want to measure the maximum possible temperature, you can check by running a Prime95 stress test for about 30 minutes (<a href="https://www.mersenne.org/download/">download here</a>). Just be aware that this program puts an extremely heavy load on your PC, so you might encounter a <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/how-to/fix-windows-bsod">blue screen of death</a> (BSOD). </p><p>The best way to check your CPU temperature while gaming is to game for an hour or more and then check the program to see the maximum recorded CPU temperature. You should be concerned if this figure is at or beyond 95C. Anything between 80C and 95C (or above) leaves room for improvement.</p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-how-to-check-your-cpu-temperature-in-the-bios"><span>How to Check Your CPU Temperature in the BIOS</span></h3><p>You can check your CPU temperature in the system <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/bios-firmware-definition,37646.html">BIOS</a> or <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/-uefi-bios-definition,5768.html">UEFI</a>, but be aware that this will only show your CPU temperature when the system is idle. That means you will see much higher temps when you are booted into Windows 11 or other operating systems, and the chip is under load. Not all motherboards list the CPU temperature in the BIOS, but nearly all enthusiast or DIY motherboards do.<br><br>It's pretty simple to <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/bios-keys-to-access-your-firmware,5732.html">enter the BIOS</a> to check your CPU temperature. On most platforms, you simply reboot the system and click delete or F2 repeatedly as it restarts. Once you're in the BIOS, you will see the temperature listed in the Hardware Monitor section, which can also be named PC Health Status or Status, among other similar names. You should also check from within Windows 11 to get a better idea of CPU temperatures when using the PC (see below). </p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-what-s-a-safe-cpu-temperature"><span>What's a Safe CPU Temperature?</span></h3><p>When the CPU is idle but inside of the operating system (at the desktop), a great temperature is anything under or around 50C. Under higher loads, such as when playing a game, rendering a video, or other intensive tasks, your CPU consumes more power and, thus, runs at a higher temperature. This 'load temperature' is more important than idle temperatures (assuming idle temps are fine), so you'll want to periodically check your CPU temperature under load to ensure it's adequately cooled. </p><p>Under load, you want your CPU to stay under 80C, though some CPUs may run hotter in <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gaming-laptops,4828.html" target="_blank">gaming laptops</a> or small-form-factor (SFF) computers. Additionally, certain newer chips are designed to run at much higher temperatures, so it's important to double-check the specifications for your processor. For instance, AMD's <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-zen-3-ryzen-5000-announcement-19-percent-ipc-1080p-gaming-lead">Ryzen 5000</a> processors are <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-9-5950x-5900x-zen-3-review/3">designed to operate at up to 95C</a> with a stock air cooler, while the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-zen-4-ryzen-7000-release-date-specifications-pricing-benchmarks-all-we-know-specs">Ryzen 7000</a> series is also designed to run at 95C even with a watercooler (notably, some models, like the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-9-7950x3d-cpu-review">Ryzen 9 7950X3D</a> chips, have a lower 89C threshold - be sure to check).</p><p>Meanwhile, Intel's highest-end Core i9 12th-Gen <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-alder-lake-specifications-price-benchmarks-release-date">Alder Lake</a>, 13th-Gen <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-13th-gen-raptor-lake-release-date-specifications-pricing-benchmarks-all-we-know-specs">Raptor Lake</a>, and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-core-i9-14900k-cpu-review">14th-Gen Raptor Lake Refresh</a> processors can run up to <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-core-i9-12900ks-cpu-review">100C during normal operation</a>. These temperatures are within spec and expected for these specific processors. Luckily, Intel's newer <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-ultra-9-285k-cpu-review">Arrow Lake</a> processors tend to run at much more ammenable temperatures, making them easier to cool. <br><br>As such, while the 80C threshold serves as a good general indicator, it is important to ensure that your processor doesn't exceed its '<strong>TJ Max</strong>' (Temperature Junction Maximum). This is the safe limit for any given processor. This can also be listed as the <strong>TJunction</strong> or the <strong>Max Operating Temperature</strong>.</p><p>The TJ Max varies by chip, but most monitoring software lists the value, or you can check the chip's specifications on the manufacturer's page. </p><p>For older chips, you have some wiggle room to creep past 80C, but anything above 95C is typically critical. At this point, some CPUs will begin throttling, meaning the chip will reduce its <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/clock-speed-definition,37657.html" target="_blank">clock speed</a> and slow down to ensure it doesn't overheat, and your PC may turn off. This indicates the chips' self-protection mechanisms have been activated. </p><p>More advanced users who want the utmost confidence that their CPU can handle aggressive workloads should <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/stress-test-cpu-pc-guide,5461.html" target="_blank">stress test their CPU</a> to 100% using a program like <a href="https://www.mersenne.org/download/" target="_blank">Prime95 </a>or <a href="https://www.aida64.com/downloads" target="_blank">AIDA64</a>. When running a stress test, keep a close eye on the CPU temperatures and back off once they reach too high (above 95C). We consider an ideal stress test to be one hour long, though your maximum temperature will likely level off after 10-15 minutes. If you're looking for specific advice about temperatures and overclocking, head to our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/how-to/how-to-overclock-a-cpu">How to Overclock a CPU</a> guide.  </p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-how-to-fix-high-cpu-temperatures"><span>How to Fix High CPU Temperatures</span></h3><p>If your CPU temperature exceeds its safe temperature thresholds under load, you should check your system to ensure the CPU's cooling is adequate. Here's a checklist of things to look for:</p><ul><li>Basic clean-up: Is your PC clean and dust-free (including the heatsink, radiator and intake fans/filters)? Canned air is a great solution for blowing out the built-up dust and grime.</li><li>Are all your PC's fans spinning under load?</li><li>When did you last apply fresh thermal paste between your CPU and CPU cooler? Thermal paste can degrade, so if it's been over three years, consider re-applying it with one of the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/best-picks/best-thermal-paste">best TIMs</a>.</li><li>Right-size your CPU cooler: Does your model CPU cooler specify a higher cooling capacity than your CPU's rated TDP?</li></ul><p>For SFF PCs and laptops, it's possible that there's minimal cooling, as the device was never intended to be used under high loads for extended periods of time. For example, most laptops come with very compact cooling solutions that work well for short-term performance bursts but need to slow down during extended gaming sessions to stay below the shut-off threshold. <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gaming-laptops,4828.html" target="_blank">Gaming laptops</a> are often bulky because they're packed with extensive cooling systems.  </p><p>If you are using a full-size <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gaming-desktops,5198.html" target="_blank">gaming PC</a>, however, and think your cooling should be adequate, you may want to <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/thermal-paste-heat-sink-heat-spreader,3600-5.html" target="_blank">re-apply thermal paste to your CPU</a>. Most thermal paste's performance seriously degrades after about three years. Applying fresh paste (here's a list of the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/best-picks/best-thermal-paste">best thermal pastes</a>) and cleaning the system from dust can offer much better cooling power and significantly better performance. This applies both to pre-built and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/how-to-build-a-pc,5867.html" target="_blank">custom-built PCs</a>, and perhaps doubly so to pre-built systems; these systems often use sub-par paste that isn't applied consistently. It is always a best practice to re-apply thermal paste to any new pre-built system.</p><p>Additionally, as part of any PC tune-up, you'll want to ensure that your cooler is adequate. Many of the stock CPU coolers that come either bundled with the CPU or installed in pre-built systems aren't adequate to give you the full performance of the chip. This often applies to Intel CPU coolers on Core i5 and above processors. You'll need to follow the stress testing steps outlined above to check CPU temperatures under load in Windows 11 to ensure that the cooler doesn't get overwhelmed by the CPU when it is under heavy load.   </p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-faqs-frequently-asked-questions"><span>FAQs: Frequently Asked Questions</span></h3><section class="article__schema-question"><h3>🌡How do you track CPU temperature?</h3><article class="article__schema-answer"><p>The best method for tracking your CPU temperature over weeks and months is to simply create an Excel sheet or make a list in a notepad application, as most utilities do not support long-term temperature logging. For shorter-duration logging tasks, AIDA 64 and Core Temp, both outlined above, are great options.</p></article></section><section class="article__schema-question"><h3>🌡What is a normal CPU temperature?</h3><article class="article__schema-answer"><p>Idle temperatures below 50C are generally fine, while temperatures over 80-85C under load are often considered excessive. Some chips, such as Intel's 14900K, are designed to operate up to 100C under normal operation, so be sure to check the vendors specs for the TJMax value to determine if you are in a safe range. </p></article></section><section class="article__schema-question"><h3>🌡How to lower your CPU temperature?</h3><article class="article__schema-answer"><p>As outlined above, clean your PC's filters, ensure your fans are operational, blow dust out of your heatsink or all-in-one (AIO) water cooler, and consider reapplying thermal paste. </p></article></section><ul><li><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/how-to/how-to-overclock-a-cpu"><strong>How to Overclock a CPU</strong></a></li><li><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html"><strong>Best CPU for gaming</strong></a></li><li><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html"><strong>CPU Benchmark Hierarchy</strong></a></li><li><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/features/amd-vs-intel-cpus"><strong>Intel vs AMD</strong></a></li></ul><iframe src="https://content.jwplatform.com/players/dBMx1ASv.html" id="dBMx1ASv" title="How to Choose a CPU" width="960" height="540" frameborder="0" scrolling="auto" allowfullscreen></iframe>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Asus Zenbook S14 review: Intel Core Ultra 7 258V makes its debut ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/asus-zenbook-s14-review-lunar-lake-ultra-7-258v</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ The Asus Zenbook S14, the first laptop we’ve tested with Intel’s Lunar Lake. It has longer battery life than last year, but lesser performance in multi-core workloads. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">JdhVaUT8FUz8yRB9PaQhMS</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fbf3gZpUBkQCHbigDs6HcL-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Tue, 24 Sep 2024 13:00:20 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 09:51:48 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[Laptops]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Andrew E. Freedman ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MTveuGNKPqpzrLttEA9ebb.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Andrew oversees laptop and desktop coverage and keeps up with the latest news in tech and gaming. His work has been published in Kotaku, PCMag, Complex, Tom’s Guide and Laptop Mag, among others. He fondly remembers his first computer: a Gateway that still lives in a spare room in his parents&#039; home, albeit without an internet connection. When he’s not writing about tech, you can find him playing video games, checking social media and waiting for the next Marvel movie. Follow him on Threads &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.threads.net/@freedmanae&quot;&gt;@FreedmanAE&lt;/a&gt; and BlueSky &lt;a href=&quot;https://bsky.app/profile/andrewfreedman.net&quot;&gt;@andrewfreedman.net&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;a href=&quot;https://bsky.app/profile/andrewfreedman.net&quot;&gt; &lt;/a&gt;You can send him tips on Signal: andrewfreedman.01&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fbf3gZpUBkQCHbigDs6HcL-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Tom&#039;s Hardware]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Asus Zenbook S14]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Asus Zenbook S14]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Asus Zenbook S14]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fbf3gZpUBkQCHbigDs6HcL-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>After years of the component industry taking on Moore&apos;s Law with extra cores and threads, higher clocks, and often increased power consumption, Intel is going for efficiency with its Intel Core Ultra 200 "Lunar Lake" chips. That&apos;s following in the footsteps of some of the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/best-picks/best-ultrabooks-premium-laptops"><u>best ultrabooks</u></a>, which have seen increased battery life as several laptop manufacturers have started adding Arm chips to their lineups. Among the first devices to get Intel&apos;s new chips, the Asus Zenbook S14 is a lovely PC with slightly more battery life than we saw last year.<br><br>That makes Asus&apos; ultraportable good for people who want an x86 notebook — and all of the Windows application compatibility that it brings — and want it to last most of the day on a charge. But we also found in testing that this laptop was weaker in multi-core performance and in some more intense tasks.</p><p>Asus could also do more to make the Zenbook S14 feel more premium, like removing account and subscription requirements on its software and improving the webcam. But between the beautiful design and Intel’s improved efficiency, there&apos;s plenty to like if you don&apos;t mind giving up some performance.</p><h2 id="design-of-the-asus-zenbook-s14">Design of the Asus Zenbook S14</h2><p>Asus sticks with a tried and true design here, and I can&apos;t blame the company. The Zenbook S14, like the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/gaming-laptops/asus-zenbook-s16-amd-ryzen-ai-9-hx-370-review">AMD-based Zenbook S16</a> we reviewed recently, is a stunner, with a "Ceraluminim" lid that is clunky to say but pretty to look at. The lid really does feel a bit like pottery, just not as fragile. The gray coloring does, however, attract fingerprints. A series of slick lines make Asus’ Zenbook logo in silver. (Our configuration will come with a white chassis if you buy it. The gray chassis will sell in a Best Buy configuration with a lower-end version of the processor.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fbf3gZpUBkQCHbigDs6HcL.jpg" alt="Asus Zenbook S14" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kSj3UMBEk6qdE53RK4TDxL.jpg" alt="Asus Zenbook S14" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ShEnvcy5CFym2jFoRkWhcM.jpg" alt="Asus Zenbook S14" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>With the lid open, the Zenbook looks more like a standard laptop, with thin bezels around the display and a dark gray aluminum chassis with little flex. A series of vents above the keyboard is almost artistic, with two layers of holes drilled in an intricate pattern.</p><p>Along the laptop&apos;s thin sides, Asus managed to cram in some impressive ports. The left side has two Thunderbolt 4 ports over USB Type-C, a 3.5 mm headphone jack, and a full-size HDMI 2.1 port — just barely fitting on the thickest edge. On the left side, there&apos;s a single USB 3.2 Gen 2 (10Gbps) Type-A port.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/c49pzoto24fmnaF5rE7VkL.jpg" alt="Asus Zenbook S14" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Ek9cduRDLXQXZqXE5vS2PM.jpg" alt="Asus Zenbook S14" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>Measuring in at 12.22 x 8.45 x 0.51 inches and weighing 2.65 pounds, the Zenbook is compact and light, and I rarely noticed it in my work bag. The Dell XPS 13 (9345) is thicker at 0.60 inches and has a smaller screen. The 15-inch MacBook Air is 2.7 pounds and thinner at 0.44 inches. The Asus Zenbook S16 is 3.31 pounds (but hey, it&apos;s bigger) and 0.47 inches thick.</p><h2 id="asus-zenbook-s14-specifications">Asus Zenbook S14 Specifications</h2><div ><table><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Procesor</strong></td><td  >Intel Core Ultra 7 258V</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Graphics</strong></td><td  >Intel Arc 140V</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>NPU</strong></td><td  >Intel AI Boost (47 TOPS)</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Memory</strong></td><td  >32GB LPDDR5X-8533 (on-chip)</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Storage</strong></td><td  >1TB PCIe Gen 4 SSD</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Display</strong></td><td  >14-inch, 2880 x 1800, 120 Hz, touch screen</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Networking</strong></td><td  >Intel Wi-Fi 7 BE201, Bluetooth 5.4</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Ports</strong></td><td  >2x Thunderbolt 4 over USB Type-C, USB 3.2 Gen 2 Type-A, HDMI 2.1, 3.5 mm headphone jack</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Camera</strong></td><td  >1080p, IR</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Battery</strong></td><td  >72 WHr</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Power Adapter</strong></td><td  >65W</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Operating System</strong></td><td  >Windows 11 Home</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Dimensions (WxDxH)</strong></td><td  >12.22 x 8.45 x 0.51 inches (310.3 x 214.7 x 12.9 mm)</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Weight</strong></td><td  >2.65 pounds (1.2 kg)</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Price (as configured)</strong></td><td  >$1,499.99</td></tr></tbody></table></div><h2 id="productivity-performance-on-the-asus-zenbook-s14">Productivity Performance on the Asus Zenbook S14</h2><p>The Zenbook S14 is the first laptop we&apos;re testing with Intel&apos;s new "<a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-launches-lunar-lake-claims-arm-beating-battery-life-worlds-fastest-mobile-cpu-cores">Lunar Lake</a>" architecture. It&apos;s using the Intel Core Ultra 7 258V, featuring cores (as all of the current Lunar Lake chips do). It’s a mix of four performance cores and four low-power efficient cores, with a max turbo <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/clock-speed-definition,37657.html">frequency</a> of 4.8 GHz (3.7 GHz on the LPE cores). Intel has suggested that Lunar Lake&apos;s architectural changes make it the fastest single-core performers on the market, while also pushing power efficiency. Asus runs Lunar Lake with a "standard" PL1 Max of 22W.</p><p>Here, we&apos;re comparing the Lunar Lake chip to a number of contemporaries: the Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite (X1E-80-100) in the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/ultrabooks-ultraportables/dell-xps-13-9345-review">Dell XPS 13 (9345)</a>; the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 in the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/gaming-laptops/asus-zenbook-s16-amd-ryzen-ai-9-hx-370-review">Asus Zenbook S16</a>; Apple&apos;s M3 in the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/macbook-air-15-inch-m2">15-inch MacBook Air</a>; as well as a gen-on-gen comparison with last year&apos;s <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/ultrabooks-ultraportables/asus-zenbook-14-oled-ux3405m-review">Asus Zenbook 14 OLED</a>, which used an Intel Core Ultra 7 155H "Meteor Lake" CPU.</p><p>In our testing, the Zenbook S14 was largely in line with its competitors in single-core performance, and fell behind in multi-core.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9bPfQD7VLrU2oo3EA9kHE8.png" alt="Asus Zenbook S14" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/x7AgNjv7ADCfMGzg7QuSR8.png" alt="Asus Zenbook S14" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QmboBz7cszMuX5EY536EK8.png" alt="Asus Zenbook S14" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BQFSLBjuFycsex6XqyqdW8.png" alt="Asus Zenbook S14" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>On Geekbench 6, the Zenbook S14 with Lunar Lake achieved a single-core score of 2,751 and a multi-core score of 11,157. That single-core is largely in line with the XPS 13, Zenbook S16, and a bit behind the M3 (3,093). The multi-core score was the lowest of the bunch at 11,157 (the next lowest, the M3, is also an 8-core CPU).</p><p>On our file transfer test, the Zenbook copied 25GB of files at a rate of 1,007.29 MBps. That&apos;s faster than the Zenbook S15 (908.45 MBps), but the XPS, MacBook Air, and last year&apos;s Zenbook were faster.</p><p>Where Intel&apos;s efficient chips really showed their greatest weaknesses was on Handbrake, which we use to transcode a video from <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/4k-definition,37642.html">4K</a> to <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/what-is-fhd-full-hd,5741.html">1080p</a>. It took the Zenbook S14 with the 258V 8 minutes and 28 seconds to complete the test. That&apos;s almost two minutes longer than the MacBook Air (6:30), while Meteor Lake was faster at 6:17. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite in the Dell XPS 13 (9345) led the pack at 4:47.</p><p>We also ran our typical stress test on the Zenbook S14, running Cinebench 2024 in a loop ten times. It was largely consistent, with scores in the high 460&apos;s and low 470&apos;s, with the exception of a dip to 428.19 at run 5. Intel&apos;s P cores ran at an average of 2.2 GHz, while the E cores ran higher, at 2.6 GHz during this test.</p><h2 id="npu-and-ai">NPU and AI</h2><p>The NPU on the Intel Core Ultra 7 258V is specced at 47 TOPS, just surpassing the 45 TOPS on the Snapdragon X Elite and Plus, but lower than the 50 TOPS on the AMD Ryzen 9 AI HX 370. All of these laptops have hit the target for <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/software/windows/microsoft-copilot-pcs-all-we-know">Microsoft&apos;s Copilot+ features</a> — Intel and AMD&apos;s machines are waiting on updates to add those features.</p><p>Here&apos;s the rub: While you get more and more TOPS, it&apos;s unclear when people will see tangible benefits. Sure, it&apos;s great that Windows Studio effects don&apos;t hog your CPU. But there aren&apos;t a ton of applications using the NPU that are particularly useful. We&apos;re still looking into the best way to report AI performance in laptop reviews, but for most people, a few TOPS one way or the other isn’t going to affect the way you use your machine.</p><h2 id="display-on-the-asus-zenbook-s14">Display on the Asus Zenbook S14</h2><p>Asus packed a 14-inch, 2880 x 1800 display into the Zenbook S14. While some will wonder about the point of packing so many pixels in such a dense display, it&apos;s hard to argue that this is a good-looking screen. It goes up to 120 Hz, with support for dynamic refresh rates.</p><p>When I used the laptop to watch the trailer for Venom: The Last Dance, the Zenbook showed off vivid colors particularly well, including the orange lighting on the Las Vegas Strip, stereotypical blue sci-fi lighting in a lab, and green grassy patches in a desert.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1204px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:66.78%;"><img id="4KMD9dqEGDgCHSk6AE5n88" name="image7.png" alt="Asus Zenbook S14" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4KMD9dqEGDgCHSk6AE5n88.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="1204" height="804" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4KMD9dqEGDgCHSk6AE5n88.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>The Zenbook covers 82% of the DCI-P3 gamut and 115.7% of the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reference/what-is-dci-p3-color-a-basic-definition">DCI-P3</a> color space, which is pretty close to what the Zenbook 14 OLED offered last year. Those two screens offered the best gamut coverage in our test group, but they were behind in brightness.</p><p>The new Zenbook measured 342 nits (down from 354 nits on last year&apos;s 14-inch Zenbook and 357 nits on the S16). The Snapdragon-based XPS 13, with a 1080p screen, reached 456 nits, while the MacBook Air reached 476.4 nits.</p><h2 id="keyboard-and-touchpad-on-the-asus-zenbook-s14">Keyboard and Touchpad on the Asus Zenbook S14</h2><p>Asus&apos; keyboard has just 1.1 mm of key travel. It&apos;s not the snappiest around, but it has a little bit of bounce and I was generally able to get used to it. On the monkeytype typing test, I hit 116 words per minute with a 2% error rate, which is pretty standard for me.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1920px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="RU5pYxG4jnL49ujjQGiXTL" name="keyboard.jpg" alt="Asus Zenbook S14" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RU5pYxG4jnL49ujjQGiXTL.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="1920" height="1080" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RU5pYxG4jnL49ujjQGiXTL.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>While I wish Asus went with a full suite of media keys (it could ditch, say, the dedicated emoji key), there&apos;s little else to argue with on the layout.</p><p>The touchpad takes up as much vertical space as Asus could possibly give it: it goes all the way from the edge of the palmrest to just under the space bar. I wish Asus would switch to haptics, but this click mechanism feels just fine here. <br><br>All of the typical Windows gestures work well enough, and Asus threw in some of its own. You can swipe up and down alongside the right side of the touchpad to adjust screen brightness or to the same on the left side to tweak volume. If you swipe along the top while a video plays, you can scrub the timeline in 5-second increments forward or backward. I initially worried that these gestures would get in the way of using the device, but I mostly just forgot they existed at all.</p><h2 id="audio-on-the-asus-zenbook-s14">Audio on the Asus Zenbook S14</h2><p>The speakers on the Zenbook S14 pack some surprising power considering the laptop&apos;s diminutive size, but there are still some sacrifices. As I sat in our lab space, James Bay&apos;s "Up All Night (with The Lumineers and Noah Kahan) started off with some impressive bass for such a slim notebook (the impressive bit being that I noticed the bass at all), along with loud, powerful guitars and clear singing vocals.<br><br>That being said, some other instruments, including tambourines and drums, got a bit lost in the mix, and the down-firing speakers means you’ll get much better audio when on a desk or other hard surface than, say, computing in bed or on the couch. <br><br>I was able to make adjustments using the Dolby Access app (or through duplicate functionality in the MyAsus software) and switch between music, movie and game modes. IN most instances though, I felt the music default was the best.<br></p><h2 id="upgradeability-on-the-asus-zenbook-s14">Upgradeability on the Asus Zenbook S14</h2><p>It&apos;s not too hard to get into the Asus Zenbook S14, but there&apos;s not much to repair or upgrade in there. There are 10 Torx screws on the bottom lid, in two sizes, so be sure to keep them organized. Once those are removed, you can easily get the bottom case off with a pry tool.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/D7XiRGmKzr6LS9QCx8FTEM.jpg" alt="Asus Zenbook S14" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ftPAKCrQqoZ2heERi622BL.jpg" alt="Asus Zenbook S14" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>The tiny motherboard only has room for a single m.2 2280 SSD, which you can replace if need be. The battery is also accessible. But the wireless card is soldered to the board, and the RAM is now on-chip as part of Intel&apos;s Lunar Lake architecture, so there&apos;s no way to upgrade it down the line.</p><h2 id="battery-life-on-the-asus-zenbook-s14">Battery Life on the Asus Zenbook S14</h2><p>We expected long battery life on the Asus Zenbook S14. After all, Intel is making some striking claims about Lunar Lake&apos;s efficiency. On our battery test, the Zenbook S14 for an average of 14 hours and 7 minutes.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1177px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:66.53%;"><img id="zRzZKdYVmJzh6opRzf9228" name="image6.png" alt="Asus Zenbook S14" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zRzZKdYVmJzh6opRzf9228.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="1177" height="783" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zRzZKdYVmJzh6opRzf9228.png' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>That&apos;s slightly longer than the Meteor Lake-based Asus Zenbook 14 OLED from last year which ran for 12 hours and 21 minutes. It&apos;s also longer than the Asus Zenbook S16 running the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370.<br><br>But this latest x86-based laptop didn&apos;t always beat its Arm-based competitors. In our chart, the Dell XPS 13 (9345) and a Microsoft Surface Pro each sport a Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite (X1E-80-100). That XPS 13 — which had the longest-lasting battery of the group running for 19:31 — has a smaller 55 WHr battery, but the ace in its sleeve may be the fact that it also has a 1080p, LCD screen that sips power in comparison. The Surface Pro has an OLED display like the Zenbook, with a slightly higher resolution of 2880 x 1920. That lasted for 12 hours and 17 minutes, possibly because of its diminutive 53 WHr battery.<br><br>The MacBook Air with M3 also beat the Zenbook, running just over 15 hours. That laptop also doesn&apos;t have an <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/oled-definition,5752.html"><u>OLED</u></a> screen, but has a high resolution of 2880 x 1864.</p><p><br></p><h2 id="heat-on-the-asus-zenbook-s14">Heat on the Asus Zenbook S14</h2><p>During our Cinebench 2024 stress test, the Zenbook got a bit warm, but not too toasty to use. The center of the keyboard reached 106.8 degrees Fahrenheit, while the touchpad was 92 F. (The latter is toastier than many laptops, but not obscenely so). The bottom of the notebook hit 119.6 F at its hottest point, at the exhaust vent.</p><h2 id="webcam-on-the-asus-zenbook-s14">Webcam on the Asus Zenbook S14</h2><p>The camera on the Zenbook S14 disappointed me. The 1080p lens was extremely color accurate in great conditions, with lots of natural light coming in through nearby windows. My eyes appeared the right shade of blue, and every book on a bookshelf behind me had the right color cover. But images had grainy backgrounds and overly highlighted imperfections in my skin while leaving details in my hair unfocused and blurry. It&apos;s OK in a pinch, but if you&apos;re using the Zenbook S14 with an external keyboard and monitor, you may want to consider one of the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/best-picks/best-webcams">best webcams</a>.</p><h2 id="software-and-warranty-on-the-asus-zenbook-s14">Software and Warranty on the Asus Zenbook S14</h2><p>Asus has four main pieces of software on the Zenbook S16. Some are more useful than others, but they have a troubling trend: asking for accounts. </p><p>The four big ones are MyAsus (for system settings and warranty); ScreenXpert (to manage windows across displays, including external monitors); GlideX (to use a phone or tablet as an additional screen, or to mirror your phone&apos;s screen on the laptop); and Story Cube (a media hub to collect photos and videos by category, location, and people).<br><br>MyAsus pushes for an account (though you can skip past it), and GlideX is a subscription service with a trial that has ads. Once these preinstalled apps start asking for money, they feel more like bloat.<br><br>Otherwise, there&apos;s a few Intel utilities and Microsoft&apos;s usual Windows Store apps pinned to the Start Menu. Asus also has some pre-set bookmarks in the Edge browser, including two bookmarks to Asus&apos;s software webpages and one to McAfee LiveSafe (which wasn&apos;t, thankfully, installed on our review unit). </p><p>Asus sells the Zenbook S14 with a one-year warranty.</p><h2 id="asus-zenbook-s14-configurations">Asus Zenbook S14 Configurations</h2><p>We reviewed the Asus Zenbook S14 with an Intel Core Ultra 7 258V, 32GB of RAM, and 1TB SSD. This configuration costs <a href="https://shop.asus.com/us/90nb14f4-m00620-asus-zenbook-s-14-ux5406.html"><u>$1,499.99 direct from Asus</u></a>. While our unit was gray, Asus will sell this configuration in white.<br><br>At Best Buy, there&apos;s a $1,399.99 configuration with Core Ultra 7 256V and 16GB of RAM, but is otherwise the same, except it comes with the gray chassis.</p><h2 id="bottom-line">Bottom Line</h2><p>The Asus Zenbook S14 is about as beautiful as Windows PCs get these days. It&apos;s thin with a premium build, and I&apos;m pretty into the aluminum-ceramic combo, even though it gets smudgy. Asus also managed to pack a surprising amount of ports into this thin design.<br><br>To go with that portability, Asus opted for the Intel Core Ultra 7 258V. While almost 14 hours on our battery test is nothing to shake a stick at, it&apos;s not the level of longevity we were hoping for. We saw both Apple and Qualcomm beat it in our comparison systems. That being said, one laptop doesn&apos;t define an entire chip or platform, so we’re curious to see how other Lunar Lake systems stack up.. </p><p>Single-core performance seems good enough for most tasks, and on par with the competition. But if you&apos;re considering anything that heavily uses all available cores, you may want to consider something a bit more powerful.<br><br>With a notebook this small and thin, the Zenbook S14 is best for simple, straightforward tasks. It&apos;s portable and lasts a long time on a charge, but you’ll have to keep expectations in check if you do intense work. </p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Intel Core i5-12600KF drops to an all-time low price of $124.99 ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-i5-12600kf-drops-to-an-all-time-low-price-of-dollar12499</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Amazon is currently selling the Intel Core i5-12600KF at an all-time low price. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">ouLJSY7Xae8bsqzbuC2cSk</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PgpkiTcUk4BN25DEHyZTuG-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Sat, 21 Sep 2024 17:13:34 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 10:08:31 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[CPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Roshan Ashraf Shaikh ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zdehzmQF3FFdL62x7CtdmT.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Roshan Ashraf Shaikh has been in the Indian PC hardware community since the early 2000s and has been building PCs, contributing to many Indian tech forums, &amp;amp; blogs. He operated Hardware BBQ for 11 years and wrote news for eTeknix &amp;amp; TweakTown before joining Tom&#039;s Hardware team. Besides tech, he is interested in fighting games, movies, anime, and mechanical watches.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PgpkiTcUk4BN25DEHyZTuG-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Intel]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Intel Core-i5 12600KF Alder Lake LGA 1700 CPU]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Intel Core-i5 12600KF Alder Lake LGA 1700 CPU]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Intel Core-i5 12600KF Alder Lake LGA 1700 CPU]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PgpkiTcUk4BN25DEHyZTuG-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>If you&apos;re looking for a very capable CPU for the price on a platform that offers a variety of good motherboard choices, the Intel Core i5-12600KF is currently retailing at an all-time low price of <a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B09FXFJW2F" target="_blank">$124.99</a>. The processor, sold and shipped by Amazon, usually retails for $149.97, so you&apos;re saving 17% of the regular price.</p><p>The Core i5-12600KF (Alder Lake) is still a capable CPU on the LGA1700 platform. For the price, you&apos;re getting a 10-core, 16-thread CPU with six P-cores and four E-cores with a boost clock up to 4.9 GHz. The Alder Lake chip supports DDR5-4800 RAM out of the box and provides up to 20 high-speed PCIe 5.0 lanes to take advantage of the latest graphics cards and SSDs.</p><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="cc5040f8-88dd-4cf8-90dc-1fcd59c23cea" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="Intel Core i5-14600KF:  now $124.99 at Amazon" data-dimension48="Intel Core i5-14600KF:  now $124.99 at Amazon" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B09FXFJW2F?th=1" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:900px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:55.56%;"><img id="kDz2XR4tQn9bHgEutwKuzG" name="Intel-Core-i5-12600K-3_70-GHz-CPU.jpg" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kDz2XR4tQn9bHgEutwKuzG.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="900" height="500" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a><p><strong>Intel Core i5-14600KF: </strong><a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B09FXFJW2F?th=1" target="_blank" data-dimension112="cc5040f8-88dd-4cf8-90dc-1fcd59c23cea" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="Intel Core i5-14600KF:  now $124.99 at Amazon" data-dimension48="Intel Core i5-14600KF:  now $124.99 at Amazon"><strong>now $124.99 at Amazon</strong></a> (was $149.97)<br><br>The Intel Core i5-i5-12600KF is an Alder Lake CPU compatible with LGA1700 socket motherboards. It supports DDR5-4800 RAM and provides 20 PCIe 5.0 lanes.<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B09FXFJW2F?th=1" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="cc5040f8-88dd-4cf8-90dc-1fcd59c23cea" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="Intel Core i5-14600KF:  now $124.99 at Amazon" data-dimension48="Intel Core i5-14600KF:  now $124.99 at Amazon">View Deal</a></p></div><p>The Core i5-12600KF is an unlocked processor that can be overclocked for extra performance if you have a motherboard that supports overclocking and a capable CPU cooler. The Core i5-12600KF doesn&apos;t have an iGPU, so you must pair it with a discrete graphics card. On the bright side, the lack of an iGPU makes the chip $25 cheaper than its counterpart, the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-core-i9-12900k-and-core-i5-12600k-review-retaking-the-gaming-crown">Core i5-12600K</a>.</p><p>Even though the LGA1700 platform is obsolete, there are still plenty of options to assemble a decent PC. Motherboard options start at $70, paving the way for decent budget PC gaming builds.</p><p>Visit Amazon&apos;s <a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B09FXFJW2F?th=1" target="_blank">Core i5-12600KF</a> product page for more details and purchase options.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Intel Core Ultra 200HX CPU specifications purportedly leaked — Arrow Lake-HX scales up to 24 cores and 5.5 GHz boost clock ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-ultra-200hx-cpu-specifications-purportedly-leaked-arrow-lake-hx-scales-up-to-24-cores-and-55-ghz-boost-clock</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Specs for six upcoming Arrow Lake-HX models have surfaced. They will feature core counts of up to 24 cores and peak boost frequencies of up to 5.5 GHz. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">5Z26UfBMdSF9fh9yUKG7tQ</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/y2NQJ8NUvr3wdSoVqWVpkM-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Fri, 20 Sep 2024 17:02:03 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 08:42:13 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[CPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ editors@tomshardware.com (Aaron Klotz) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Aaron Klotz ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aAk2saHqkgFuTCanz8LnmD.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Aaron began building computers back when he was 8 years old in the mid-2000s, and it’s been a hobby of his ever since then. With a focus on computer hardware, he became an avid member of the Tom’s Hardware forums several years later, helping people solve issues with their PCs. He is now a freelance writer for Tom’s Hardware, writing about computer hardware news and more. When not busy playing or writing about computer hardware, he spends his free time playing video games like Star Citizen or Apex Legends.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/y2NQJ8NUvr3wdSoVqWVpkM-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Intel]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                        <media:description><![CDATA[Lunar Lake CPU]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Lunar Lake CPU]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Lunar Lake CPU]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/y2NQJ8NUvr3wdSoVqWVpkM-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>The beans have been spilled on Intel&apos;s upcoming mobile Arrow Lake-HX series CPUs, aimed at performance-focused laptops and mobile devices. <a href="https://x.com/jaykihn0/status/1836931523246710873" target="_blank">Jaykihn on X</a> shared the specifications for six upcoming Core Ultra 200HX-series chips. The information is from a leak, so take it carefully.</p><p>The six upcoming Arrow Lake-HX SKUs are 285HX, 275HX, 265HX, 255HX, 245HX, and 235HX. The flagship 285HX and runner-up 275HX feature the most cores, featuring eight P-cores and 16 E-cores. The main difference between the two (as far as this basic spec sheet) is the clock speeds. The 285HX has a 5.5 GHz maximum turbo clock, and the 275HX has a 5.4 GHz maximum turbo frequency. Base clocks for the P-Cores also drop by 100 MHz on the 275HX (2.8 GHz vs 2.7 GHz), while the E-core clock speeds for both parts are identical.</p><p>The 265HX and 255HX drop core counts to an 8/12 configuration featuring four fewer E-cores than their higher-end counterparts. Maximum turbo frequencies for both chips are also lower at 5.3 GHz for the 265HX and 5.2 GHz for the 255HX, respectively. Base clocks for the P-cores are 2.6 GHz for the 265HX and 2.4 GHz for the 255HX. E-core clock speeds consist of a 4.6 GHz boost and 2.3 GHz base for the 265HX and a 4.5 GHz boost and 1.8GHz base for the 255HX.</p><p>The 245HX and 235HX make up the bottom end of the stack and are the only two with less than eight P-cores. The 245HX and 235HX feature six P-cores and eight E-cores, respectively, featuring a maximum turbo clock of 5.1 GHz on the P-cores and 4.5 GHz turbo on the E-cores. The two start to differentiate from each other in the integrated graphics clocks and P-core base clocks.</p><div ><table><thead><tr><th class="firstcol " >CPU</th><th  >285HX</th><th  >275HX</th><th  >265HX</th><th  >255HX</th><th  >245HX</th><th  >235HX</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " >Core Count (P Cores/E Cores)</td><td  >8 / 16</td><td  >8 / 16</td><td  >8 / 12</td><td  >8 / 12</td><td  >6 / 8</td><td  >6 / 8</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >P-Core Turbo Boost Max</td><td  >5.5GHz</td><td  >5.4GHz</td><td  >5.3GHz</td><td  >5.2GHz</td><td  >5.1GHz</td><td  >5.1GHz</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >E-Core Turbo Boost Max</td><td  >4.6GHz</td><td  >4.6GHz</td><td  >4.6GHz</td><td  >4.5GHz</td><td  >4.5GHz</td><td  >4.5GHz</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >P-Core Base Clock</td><td  >2.8GHz</td><td  >2.7GHz</td><td  >2.6GHz</td><td  >2.4GHz</td><td  >3.1GHz</td><td  >2.9GHz</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >E-Core Base Clock</td><td  >2.1GHz</td><td  >2.1GHz</td><td  >2.3GHz</td><td  >1.8GHz</td><td  >2.6GHz</td><td  >2.6GHz</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >iGPU (Cores / Clock Speed)</td><td  >64 EUs / 2GHz</td><td  >64 EUs / 1.9GHz</td><td  >64 EUs / 1.9GHz</td><td  >64 EUs / 1.9GHz</td><td  >48 EUs / 1.9GHz</td><td  >48 EUs / 1.8GHz</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Thermal Velocity Boost Support</td><td  >Yes</td><td  >Yes</td><td  >Yes</td><td  >Yes</td><td  >No</td><td  >No</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Turbo Boost Max 3.0 Support</td><td  >Yes</td><td  >Yes</td><td  >Yes</td><td  >Yes</td><td  >No</td><td  >No</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>The 245HX has a 3.1 GHz P-core base clock, and the 235HX has a 2.9 GHz P-core base clock; both share the same E-core base clock of 2.6 GHz, respectively. These chips also lack support for Thermal Velocity Boost and Turbo Boost Max 3.0, potentially limiting their peak-rated boost frequencies.</p><p>The integrated graphics units are split into two models for the six SKUs. The 285HX, 275HX, 265HX, and 255HX have a bigger iGPU sporting 64 EUs operating at a 1.9 GHz clock speed. The only exception is the flagship 285HX, which gets a 100MHz boost on the iGPU to 2 GHz flat.</p><p>The 245HX and 235HX come with a noticeably weaker 48 EU iGPU than their higher-tier counterparts. the 245HX inherits the same 1.9 GHz operating GPU frequency as most of the other chips, but the 235HX gets a 100 MHz clock speed reduction down to 1.8 GHz, respectively.</p><p>While Lunar Lake is tuned for efficiency, Arrow Lake-HX is tuned for performance. Lunar Lake peaked at four P-cores and four E-cores with a peak turbo clock of 5.1GHz. With Arrow Lake, we are getting more than twice the amount of cores, with core counts aligning with Intel&apos;s 13th and 14th Gen mobile HX series CPUs. That&apos;s not even mentioning the thread that will double on the P-cores, thanks to the reintroduction of HyperThreading technology to the Arrow Lake CPU architecture.</p><p>These chips will succeed Intel&apos;s 14th-generation HX chips and are Intel&apos;s latest CPUs designed for high-performance notebooks and gaming notebooks.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Leaked Intel Core Ultra 5 245K CPU sample delivers double-digit multicore performance boost — no advantage seen in single-core testing, though ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/leaked-intel-core-ultra-5-245k-cpu-sample-delivers-double-digit-multicore-performance-boost-no-advantage-seen-in-single-core-testing-though</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ The Intel Core Ultra 5 245K's benchmark numbers show it at par with the Intel Core i5-14600K/KF in single-core numbers, and racing past it in multi-core test results. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">fAuqPExgqFJWVhYGZh5j99</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ADZqJLMDEiGs4We5qeRxKE-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Sun, 15 Sep 2024 13:06:55 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 09:47:45 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[CPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ editors@tomshardware.com (Jowi Morales) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Jowi Morales ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gM7E2WSDg2wgCFoaDPz9yK.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Jowi Morales is a writer and journalist covering the tech beat since 2021. However, he’s been interested in technology far earlier than that. He started discovering desktop computers when his father brought home a Windows 95 PC, but his first real experience working under the hood of the PC was when the old computer’s hard drive was filled to the brim in the year 2000. He deleted the Windows folder to attempt to rectify the situation, which led to his dad buying a new desktop PC. Since then, he learned a lot more about computers, and he’s always been the go-to tech expert for his family and friends.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Jowi primarily uses a Windows workstation and an Android phone, but he also bought into the Apple ecosystem with the 6th-gen iPad, iPhone 14 Pro Max, and the M1 MacBook Air. Today, Jowi covers hardware and software from Redmond and Cupertino, while also looking at the tech industry in general.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Aside from covering technology, Jowi is an avid photographer and writes about automobiles, aviation, and tanks. You can find his bylines at &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.makeuseof.com/author/jowi-morales/&quot;&gt;MakeUseOf&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.slashgear.com/author/jowimorales/&quot;&gt;SlashGear&lt;/a&gt;, and, of course, &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.tomshardware.com/author/jowi-morales&quot;&gt;Tom’s Hardware&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ADZqJLMDEiGs4We5qeRxKE-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Intel]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Intel Core Ultra CPU]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Intel Core Ultra CPU]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Intel Core Ultra CPU]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ADZqJLMDEiGs4We5qeRxKE-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>CPU-Z benchmark results for the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K Arrow Lake desktop chip have leaked on X (formerly Twitter). The results show a single-core score of 850.6 points and a multi-core score of 10,907.1 points, as shared by popular Chinese hardware leaker <a href="https://x.com/ecsm_official/status/1834630852917240195">ECSM_Official</a>. The single-core number puts the upcoming 245K in between the 14600K/KF’s 852 points and 13980HX’s 842, with the Arrow Lake chip hitting 99.8% of the performance of the Raptor Lake Refresh chip.</p><p>However, the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K shows its strength in the multi-core test, where it bests the 14600K/KF’s 9,868 multi-core score by about 10.5%. This puts it at about 90% of the performance of the higher-tier Intel Core i7-14700K, which scores 12,117 points. What’s more interesting is that the 245K <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intels-next-gen-arrow-lake-cpus-might-come-without-hyperthreaded-cores-leak-points-to-24-cpu-cores-ddr5-6400-support-and-a-new-800-series-chipset">doesn’t have hyperthreading</a>, so its 6+8 cores only deliver a total of 14 threads, versus the 14600K’s 20 and the 14700K’s 28.</p><p>However, we shouldn’t fully trust these numbers as the 245K isn’t <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-ultra-200-cpu-launch-reportedly-delayed-to-october-24">expected to arrive until October 24</a>. Although the Arrow Lake chips are likely <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-ultra-200-cpu-specs-allegedly-leaked-arrow-lake-tops-out-at-24-cores-and-57-ghz-boost-clock-at-250w">already in their final form</a> and wouldn’t receive any major changes barring a massive error like the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/intel-raptor-lake-instability-troubles-everything-you-need-to-know">Raptor Lake instability issues</a>, these numbers are still subject to change until the processors are released on store shelves. There is also the fact that these leaks, if genuine, make up a tiny sample of results which may be outliers. </p><p>Intel is said to have dropped hyperthreading from its Arrow Lake chips to improve efficiency, and it seems that this move has paid dividends. Although the 245K’s CPU Base Power is 125 watts, similar to the previous generation 14600K, its maximum power is just 159 watts - versus the latter’s 181 watts. And despite that maximum power limitation, it was still able to close the gap with the 14600K in single-core performance and beat it in multi-core tests.</p><p>Furthermore, ECSM_Official noted that the 245K wasn’t fully optimized and its frequency is lower by about 100 to 200 MHz from standard spec. So, if the leaked test was done on an Intel Core Ultra 5 245K that hits Intel’s expected performance, then we’ll likely get higher numbers on these benchmarks.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Intel Core Ultra 200 CPU specs allegedly leaked — Arrow Lake tops out at 24 cores and 5.7 GHz boost clock at 250W ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-ultra-200-cpu-specs-allegedly-leaked-arrow-lake-tops-out-at-24-cores-and-57-ghz-boost-clock-at-250w</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Core Ultra 200 series CPU specifications have been purportedly finalized. Five SKUs will debut on launch day. Core counts remain the same, but clock speeds are dropping compared to Raptor Lake Refresh. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">7bWpsez4XMMVYTHR4kogw8</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KE4yHwYuDMAC8pVG7PPeCN-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Fri, 13 Sep 2024 18:22:12 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 08:42:53 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[CPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ editors@tomshardware.com (Aaron Klotz) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Aaron Klotz ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aAk2saHqkgFuTCanz8LnmD.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Aaron began building computers back when he was 8 years old in the mid-2000s, and it’s been a hobby of his ever since then. With a focus on computer hardware, he became an avid member of the Tom’s Hardware forums several years later, helping people solve issues with their PCs. He is now a freelance writer for Tom’s Hardware, writing about computer hardware news and more. When not busy playing or writing about computer hardware, he spends his free time playing video games like Star Citizen or Apex Legends.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KE4yHwYuDMAC8pVG7PPeCN-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Shutterstock]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Intel CPU stock image Rocket Lake-S]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Intel CPU stock image Rocket Lake-S]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Intel CPU stock image Rocket Lake-S]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KE4yHwYuDMAC8pVG7PPeCN-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>The specifications for Intel&apos;s upcoming Core Ultra 200 (codenamed Arrow Lake) series, which will rival the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">best CPUs</a>, have purportedly been finalized. <a href="https://benchlife.info/intel-core-ultra-2-aks-arrow-lake-s-5-cpu-spec-final/" target="_blank">Benchlife</a> has released a full table of the alleged specifications featuring all five SKUs arriving later this year. Intel&apos;s initial batch of SKUs that will come with Arrow Lake&apos;s debut will be the Core Ultra 9 285K, Core Ultra 7 265K, Core Ultra 7 265KF, Core Ultra 5 245K, and Core Ultra 5 245KF.</p><p>Core Ultra 9 285K is the flagship chip with eight P-cores, 16 E-cores, 36MB of L3 cache, and a maximum turbo frequency of 5.7 GHz courtesy of Intel&apos;s Turbo Velocity Boost technology. Base power is rated at 125W, and the maximum turbo boost power limit is set at 250W.</p><p>Unlike the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-core-i9-14900k-cpu-review" target="_blank">Core i9-14900K</a>, Intel keeps the same core count configuration, featuring a 2:1 ratio for the P and E-cores. Clock speed is taking a noticeable step down; however, with the 285K "only" achieving 5.7 GHz, there is a 300 MHz decline compared to the 14900K. This is a result of Intel switching to a new process node and architecture. L3 cache is the same between both chips, but the Core Ultra 9 chip has 8MB more L2 cache.</p><p>The Core Ultra 7 265K/KF drops the core count to 8 P-cores and 12 E-cores, featuring a maximum turbo clock of 5.5 GHz. The cache also drops to 30MB of L3 and 36MB of total L2 cache. Power metrics remain the same as the 285K at 125W and 250W, respectively. The new Ultra 7 parts feature the exact core count as their Core i7 predecessors and a similar boost clock featuring a TVB clock just 100 MHz shy of the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-core-i9-14900k-cpu-review">Core i7-14700K</a>/KF. The Ultra 7 parts also have more cache, featuring 3MB more L3 and 8MB more L2.</p><div ><table><thead><tr><th class="firstcol empty" ></th><th  >Core Ultra 9 285K</th><th  >Core Ultra 7 265K / KF</th><th  >Core Ultra 5 245K / KF</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " >Cores / Threads</td><td  >8+16 / 24</td><td  >8+12 / 24</td><td  >6+8 / 14</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >L3 Cache / Total L2 Cache</td><td  >36MB / 40MB</td><td  >30MB / 36MB</td><td  >24MB / 26MB</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Thermal Velocity Boost</td><td  >5.7 GHz</td><td  >5.5 GHz</td><td  >5.2 GHz</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Turbo Boost Max (TBMT 3.0)</td><td  >5.6 GHz</td><td  >5.5 GHz</td><td  >None</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >P-Cores Peak Boost</td><td  >5.6 GHz</td><td  >5.4 GHz</td><td  >5.2 GHz</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >E-Cores Peak Boost</td><td  >4.6 GHz</td><td  >4.6 GHz</td><td  >4.6 GHz</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >P-Cores Base Clock</td><td  >3.7 GHz</td><td  >3.9 GHz</td><td  >4.2 GHz</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >E-Cores Base Clock</td><td  >3.2 GHz</td><td  >3.3 GHz</td><td  >3.6 GHz</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >CPU Base Power</td><td  >125W</td><td  >125W</td><td  >125W</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Maximum Power</td><td  >250W</td><td  >250W</td><td  >159W</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>The Core Ultra 5 245K/KF features six P-cores and eight E-cores accompanied by 24MB of L3 cache and 26MB of L2 cache. Compared to the Ultra 7 and 9 parts, core clocks take a big hit, peaking at just 5.2 GHz for the maximum TVB turbo clock. There is also a complete lack of IBMT 3.0 support, which could affect performance in some scenarios.</p><p>Clocks are very similar, and core counts are identical compared to the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-core-i9-14900k-cpu-review">Core i5-14600K</a>/KF. The Ultra 5 parts are just 100 MHz slower than the 14600K/KF SKUs when it comes to maximum turbo boost clock speeds. The Arrow Lake parts also have improved cache, featuring the same amount of L3 cache as the Raptor Lake Refresh counterparts but six megabytes more L2 cache.</p><p>Overall, specs aren&apos;t massively changing compared to the Raptor Lake CPUs Intel has today. The significant tidbits that are changing are the process node and architecture, which are entirely new for this generation. The Core Ultra 200 series will take advantage of the Arrow Lake architecture, which features new Lion Cove P-cores that feature hyperthreading. Intel will also take advantage of third-party silicon again, ditching its homebrewed 18A process node for a competing design from TSMC.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Intel Core Ultra 7 258V beats AMD Z1 Extreme in DX12 gaming benchmark [Updated] ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-z1-extreme-beats-intel-core-ultra-7-258v-in-dx12-gaming-benchmark-zen-4-chip-offers-over-90-higher-performance</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ The Intel Core Ultra 7 258V performs much better than the AMD Z1 Extreme in the Ashes of the Singularity benchmark. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">Rb99rGJ6G8jQXRymEALzrj</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fXRWCMHQsTxu9bNTsubfRW-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Fri, 13 Sep 2024 16:54:00 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 12:41:57 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[CPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ editors@tomshardware.com (Jowi Morales) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Jowi Morales ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gM7E2WSDg2wgCFoaDPz9yK.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Jowi Morales is a writer and journalist covering the tech beat since 2021. However, he’s been interested in technology far earlier than that. He started discovering desktop computers when his father brought home a Windows 95 PC, but his first real experience working under the hood of the PC was when the old computer’s hard drive was filled to the brim in the year 2000. He deleted the Windows folder to attempt to rectify the situation, which led to his dad buying a new desktop PC. Since then, he learned a lot more about computers, and he’s always been the go-to tech expert for his family and friends.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Jowi primarily uses a Windows workstation and an Android phone, but he also bought into the Apple ecosystem with the 6th-gen iPad, iPhone 14 Pro Max, and the M1 MacBook Air. Today, Jowi covers hardware and software from Redmond and Cupertino, while also looking at the tech industry in general.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Aside from covering technology, Jowi is an avid photographer and writes about automobiles, aviation, and tanks. You can find his bylines at &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.makeuseof.com/author/jowi-morales/&quot;&gt;MakeUseOf&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.slashgear.com/author/jowimorales/&quot;&gt;SlashGear&lt;/a&gt;, and, of course, &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.tomshardware.com/author/jowi-morales&quot;&gt;Tom’s Hardware&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fXRWCMHQsTxu9bNTsubfRW-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Intel]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                        <media:description><![CDATA[Lunar Lake CPU]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Lunar Lake CPU]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Lunar Lake CPU]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fXRWCMHQsTxu9bNTsubfRW-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p><strong>Update (September 14):</strong> Corrected erroneous analysis.</p><p>The Intel Core Ultra 7 258V (via <a href="https://x.com/GawroskiT/status/1833953196114370912?t=3f9-f5RlmQ59QYXPYct9jQ&s=31" target="_blank">Tomasz Gawroński</a>) has just been tested on the <em>Ashes of the Singularity</em> benchmark. The results favor Intel’s Lunar Lake chip, which easily outperformed the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/asus-rog-ally-specs-amd-ryzen-z1-extreme">Ryzen Z1 Extreme</a>.</p><p>The Core Ultra 7 258V is one of Intel’s latest mobile processors based on the Lunar Lake platform. The processor features an octa-core design without Hyper-Threading. It has four P-cores and four E-cores. Meanwhile, AMD’s Ryzen Z1 Extreme is designed for handheld consoles and features eight Zen 4 cores with SMT and a very capable RDNA 3 iGPU.</p><p>According to Gawroński’s results, the Core Ultra 7 258V was 1.5X to 2X faster than the Ryzen Z1 Extreme. However, it’s important to note that the Lunar Lake chip was paired with 32GB of memory, whereas the Ryzen Z1 Extreme had 12GB. It’s hard to make a faithful comparison since we’re looking at chips designed for different segments. The Lunar Lake chip likely hailed from a laptop, whereas the Ryzen Z1 Extreme was like residing inside a handheld gaming device. The testing environment was different.</p><p>Nevertheless, we need more than just these frame rate numbers from a single DirectX 12 benchmark to know which chip performs better and more accurately. After all, several factors, like the power profile, cooling performance, battery levels, and more, could affect the chip’s actual performance, especially in mobile and handheld devices. That’s why you should wait for the results of trusted reviewers, like Tom’s Hardware, who have put these devices through the wringer more scientifically—that way, you know that the numbers you get are as objective as possible.</p><p>AMD’s Z1 Extreme is currently the only chip tailored toward gaming handhelds. It’s inside devices like the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/video-games/console-gaming/asus-rog-ally-x-review">ROG Ally X</a> and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/lenovo-legion-go">Legion Go</a>. Meanwhile, newer devices, such as the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/video-games/handheld-gaming/msi-lunar-lake-powered-gaming-handheld-pricing-and-availability-will-be-revealed-in-september-msi-claw-8-ai-likely-debuts-during-intels-lunar-lake-launch-event">MSI Claw 8 AI+</a>, have already jumped on the Lunar Lake train, and we expect more competition to do the same. However, AMD has confirmed that the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-z2-extreme-cpu-for-next-gen-gaming-handhelds-will-arrive-in-early-2025">Z2 Extreme</a> will be available in early 2025, so the next big fight involving Lunar Lake versus Z2 Extreme will be very interesting.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Intel Core Ultra 200 Arrow Lake desktop CPU launch reportedly delayed to October 24 ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-ultra-200-cpu-launch-reportedly-delayed-to-october-24</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Hong Kong media outlet HKEPC claims that Intel's Core Ultra 200-series desktop CPUs will be delayed until late October. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">GQ7BKNnqBpQQ6CzVziPbM3</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TAgUhJUNKiCeeN5hVZZ7ZL-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Tue, 10 Sep 2024 18:27:17 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 09:49:31 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[CPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Christopher Harper ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/qS2hbWnXwNUSmgyAHBQqKB.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Christopher Harper has been a successful freelance tech writer specializing in PC hardware and gaming since 2015, and ghostwrote&amp;nbsp;for various B2B clients in High School before that. Outside of work, Christopher is best known to friends and rivals as an active competitive player in various eSports (particularly fighting games and arena shooters) and a purveyor of music ranging from Jimi Hendrix to Killer Mike to the&amp;nbsp;Sonic Adventure 2&amp;nbsp;soundtrack.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TAgUhJUNKiCeeN5hVZZ7ZL-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Intel]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[intel Core CPU]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[intel Core CPU]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[intel Core CPU]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/TAgUhJUNKiCeeN5hVZZ7ZL-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Intel&apos;s <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-ultra-200k-cpu-pricing-exposed-by-overseas-retailer-arrow-lake-priced-up-to-8-higher-than-raptor-lake-refresh">Core Ultra 200</a> (codenamed Arrow Lake) series was previously rumored to launch on October 17. However, Hong Kong publication <a href="https://x.com/hkepcmedia/status/1833455712980406514" target="_blank">HKEPC</a> claims that Intel has reportedly pushed the launch date to October 24.</p><p>The reasons for the supposed delay remain unknown, and HKEPC hasn&apos;t provided any explanations. Multiple retailers have already started listing Arrow Lake CPUs on their websites, signaling that the official announcement should be around the corner. We&apos;ve already seen the Arrow Lake chips listed in Europe and Canada. While I don&apos;t know if the pricing is accurate, it doesn&apos;t look out of line either.</p><p>According to various retailer listings, Arrow Lake should be priced similarly to or slightly more expensive than Intel&apos;s Raptor Lake Refresh lineup. Arrow Lake requires a new platform, so many consumers will need to purchase a new motherboard. On a positive note, the previous generation of Intel chips will likely see price reductions, which could be a valid option if you don&apos;t want to hop on Intel&apos;s Arrow Lake platform.</p><p>Overall, it&apos;s unlikely that a slight delay in CPUs that don&apos;t even have an official street date yet will cause Intel a significant blow. However, it does show that its throne as market leader may not be as stable as some think, and that makes even tiny delays to Intel&apos;s flagship products more notable than they would be otherwise. </p><p>Arrow Lake will need to prove competitive with <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-announces-zen-5-ryzen-9000-processors-launches-in-july-four-new-ryzen-9-7-and-5-processors-with-a-16-ipc-improvement">Ryzen 9000</a> CPUs as the year ends and wishlists get filled out— although <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/arrow-lake-cpu-up-to-18-faster-than-core-i9-14900k-at-250w">leaked Arrow Lake benchmark results</a> don&apos;t reflect a giant Intel win around the corner. Some lost faith in Intel due to the current <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/intel-raptor-lake-instability-troubles-everything-you-need-to-know">13th and 14th Generation instability issues</a>. Although Intel has already confirmed that Arrow Lake isn&apos;t affected by the same problem thanks to a new architecture, you can&apos;t help but think that Team Blue has probably lost some followers to Team Red.</p><p>AMD also has the advantage as the Ryzen 9000 chips have been launched for a few months and are readily available. Intel, on the other hand, will unleash the Core Ultra 200K SKUs, saving the budget options for later. Consumers who have their eyes on an Arrow Lake part that isn&apos;t included in the initial trio (Core Ultra 9 285K, Core Ultra 7 265K, Core Ultra 5 245K) must wait a few more months.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Intel Core Ultra 200K CPU pricing exposed by overseas retailer — Arrow Lake priced up to 8% higher than Raptor Lake Refresh ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-ultra-200k-cpu-pricing-exposed-by-overseas-retailer-arrow-lake-priced-up-to-8-higher-than-raptor-lake-refresh</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ A UK-based online retailer posted listings of Intel's upcoming Arrow Lake desktop chips. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">ngKG86CPw5cxquM2npgN7T</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3sR8WyANsTevnA2UajXMKY-1280-80.png" type="image/png" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Sat, 07 Sep 2024 15:01:06 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 10:06:41 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[CPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ editors@tomshardware.com (Jowi Morales) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Jowi Morales ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gM7E2WSDg2wgCFoaDPz9yK.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Jowi Morales is a writer and journalist covering the tech beat since 2021. However, he’s been interested in technology far earlier than that. He started discovering desktop computers when his father brought home a Windows 95 PC, but his first real experience working under the hood of the PC was when the old computer’s hard drive was filled to the brim in the year 2000. He deleted the Windows folder to attempt to rectify the situation, which led to his dad buying a new desktop PC. Since then, he learned a lot more about computers, and he’s always been the go-to tech expert for his family and friends.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Jowi primarily uses a Windows workstation and an Android phone, but he also bought into the Apple ecosystem with the 6th-gen iPad, iPhone 14 Pro Max, and the M1 MacBook Air. Today, Jowi covers hardware and software from Redmond and Cupertino, while also looking at the tech industry in general.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Aside from covering technology, Jowi is an avid photographer and writes about automobiles, aviation, and tanks. You can find his bylines at &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.makeuseof.com/author/jowi-morales/&quot;&gt;MakeUseOf&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.slashgear.com/author/jowimorales/&quot;&gt;SlashGear&lt;/a&gt;, and, of course, &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.tomshardware.com/author/jowi-morales&quot;&gt;Tom’s Hardware&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/png" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3sR8WyANsTevnA2UajXMKY-1280-80.png">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Intel]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Intel Core CPU]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Intel Core CPU]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Intel Core CPU]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3sR8WyANsTevnA2UajXMKY-1280-80.png" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Intel’s next-generation Core Ultra 200-series (codenamed Arrow Lake) desktop chips are rumored to <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intels-lunar-lake-and-arrow-lake-to-launch-this-fall-rumored-launch-dates-revealed">arrive in October</a> to compete with the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">best CPUs</a>. With only a few weeks until the rumored launch, many retailers are likely preparing their backend systems for the arrival of these chips in their inventories and the subsequent launch. As shared by X (formerly Twitter) user <a href="https://x.com/ghost_motley/status/1832166388632273298" target="_blank">Charlie</a>, one European retailer, LambdaTek, has added Intel’s latest desktop chips to its listings. They’re already live on their website, showing us the potential prices of these CPUs.</p><p>As is customary for Intel processor launches, the K-series SKUs will launch first. The first wave of Arrow Lake chips includes the Core Ultra 9 285K, Core Ultra 7 265K, Core Ultra 5 245K, and their KF-series counterparts, which lack the iGPU. As with all early retailer listings, we recommend cautiously approaching them. Note that these are not official Intel prices just yet. After all, these numbers might be placeholders that LambdaTek put on its website to make a valid listing.</p><p>Since LambdaTek is primarily based in Europe and we were accessing its UK website, the prices were shown in British Pounds. So, we’ve converted the pricing based on the prevailing rate of £1 to $1.31. We’re utilizing the pricing excluding VAT (value-added tax) to compare the Arrow Lake chips with the previous Raptor Lake Refresh lineup.</p><div ><table><thead><tr><th class="firstcol " >Arrow Lake</th><th  >LambdaTek Price Excluding VAT</th><th  >Raptor Lake Refresh</th><th  >MSRP</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " >Intel Core Ultra 9 285K</td><td  >GBP 471.83 (around $620)</td><td  >Intel Core i9-14900K</td><td  >$589</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Intel Core Ultra 7 265K</td><td  >GBP 327.35 (around $430)</td><td  >Intel Core i7-14700K</td><td  >$409</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF</td><td  >GBP 314.60 (around $415)</td><td  >Intel Core i7-14700KF</td><td  >$384</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Intel Core Ultra 5 245K</td><td  >GBP 250.86 (around $330)</td><td  >Intel Core i5-14600K</td><td  >$319</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF</td><td  >GBP 238.11 (around $312)</td><td  >Intel Core i5-14600KF</td><td  >$294</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>Looking at our results, the Core Ultra 9 285K is up to 5.26% more expensive than the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-core-i9-14900k-cpu-review">Core i9-14900K</a>. The most significant increase comes from the Core Ultra 7 265KF, with pricing jumping by 8.07% from the previous generation. Meanwhile, the Core Ultra 7 265 K’s price increase was 5.13%, falling in line with the Core Ultra 9 285K. On the other hand, the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K had the smallest increase, with the launch price only going up by 3.44%. However, the Core Ultra 5 245KF appears to be 6.12% more expensive than the Core i5-14600KF.</p><p>These price increases are slightly higher than the average U.S. inflation rate in 2023, which is 4.1%. Nevertheless, since the 14th Generation Raptor Lake Refresh chips had the same launch prices as their predecessors, we’re essentially getting the Arrow Lake chips at a lower price, mainly because the average U.S. inflation rate in 2022 was a whopping 8%.</p><p>Arrow Lake allegedly hits the market on October 10, and until then, we won’t know exactly how much these chips will retail for. But if these prices are accurate, Arrow Lake could be a serious competitor against AMD’s <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-announces-zen-5-ryzen-9000-processors-launches-in-july-four-new-ryzen-9-7-and-5-processors-with-a-16-ipc-improvement">Ryzen 9000</a> processors, which have been on the market for a few months now.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Next-gen Intel Core Ultra 300 CPU specs reportedly leaked — Panther Lake-H could feature up to 18 cores and 12 Xe3 Celestial GPU cores ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/next-gen-intel-core-ultra-300-cpu-specs-reportedly-leaked-panther-lake-h-could-feature-up-to-28-cores-and-12-xe3-celestial-gpu-cores</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Leaks suggest that Intel's upcoming Panther Lake-H CPUs will have five configurations, including TDPs up to 45W and some offering up to 12 Xe core integrated graphics. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">FGXd8vqAbASHMCKdcz7KoL</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UCi5VauRSMvqwDqHJG7uqL-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Thu, 05 Sep 2024 17:28:49 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 09:47:59 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[CPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ editors@tomshardware.com (Aaron Klotz) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Aaron Klotz ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aAk2saHqkgFuTCanz8LnmD.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Aaron began building computers back when he was 8 years old in the mid-2000s, and it’s been a hobby of his ever since then. With a focus on computer hardware, he became an avid member of the Tom’s Hardware forums several years later, helping people solve issues with their PCs. He is now a freelance writer for Tom’s Hardware, writing about computer hardware news and more. When not busy playing or writing about computer hardware, he spends his free time playing video games like Star Citizen or Apex Legends.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UCi5VauRSMvqwDqHJG7uqL-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Intel]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Alder Lake]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Alder Lake]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Alder Lake]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UCi5VauRSMvqwDqHJG7uqL-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Panther Lake is the codename for Intel&apos;s upcoming third generation of Core Ultra mobile processors, which will succeed Lunar Lake. Resident hardware leaker <a href="https://x.com/jaykihn0/status/1831488980979986685" target="_blank">Jaykihn on X</a> shared a list of five potential Panther Lake SKUs that Intel is purportedly producing for its next-generation mobile lineup.</p><p>Panther Lake, which will be produced on Intel&apos;s 18A process node, reportedly has Cougar Cove P-Cores, Skymont E-Cores, and Xe3 (Celestial) integrated graphics. Cougar Cove is entirely new, while Skymont is an optimization of the variant currently used inside Intel&apos;s recently announced <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-launches-lunar-lake-claims-arm-beating-battery-life-worlds-fastest-mobile-cpu-cores">Lunar Lake</a> chips. Meanwhile, Xe3 is the follow-up for Xe2 (Battlemage) in Lunar Lake. All five SKUs from Jaykihn are <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-reportedly-prepping-three-panther-lake-configurations-for-laptops-after-lunar-lake">Panther Lake-H</a> parts, representing Panther Lake&apos;s high-performance configuration. Some had <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/intel-panther-lake-processors-could-pack-up-to-16-cores-maximum-of-four-performance-cores-according-to-leak">previously surfaced</a> in Coreboot.</p><p>Two SKUs share a similar configuration: four P-cores, eight E-cores, and four LP E-cores at 25W. The difference lies in the iGPU configuration. One SKU reportedly has four Xe3 GPU cores, while the other has 12 Xe3 GPU cores. Meanwhile, the lowest-binned SKU only has four P-cores and four LP E-cores with four Xe3 GPU cores.</p><ul><li>PTL-H 4+8+4+4Xe 25W</li><li>PTL-H 4+8+4+12Xe 25W</li><li>PTL-H 4+0+4+4Xe 25W</li><li><strong>PTL-H 6+8+4+4Xe 45W</strong></li><li><strong>PTL-H 6+8+4+12Xe 28W</strong></li></ul><p>The latter two are high TDP parts, one at 28W and the other at 45W. It&apos;s important to note that Jaykihn highlighted that these two SKUs are pre-EDS. EDS stands for External Design Specification, which are broad specifications that Intel releases externally to its partners. The information includes configurations, power, performance, I/O functionality, compliance, and other aspects companies require to develop a product based on these processors.</p><p>One Panther Lake-H is a 45W-rated HX-series part featuring six P-cores, eight E-cores, four LP E-cores, and an iGPU featuring four Xe3 GPU cores. The other is a 28W part featuring the same six P-cores, eight E-cores, and four LP E-cores as the 45W part but features a much more powerful integrated graphics chip with 12 Xe3 GPU cores.</p><p>According to Jaykihn, these five SKUs represent the SKUs that will exist in the Panther Lake-H lineup. We will likely see more than five production SKUs with varying clock speeds, but these five SKUs with their five configurations are all that is purportedly expected from Intel. It does not include Panther Lake-U models, which will have their lineup of configurations operating at significantly lower TDPs.</p><p>Panther Lake is Intel&apos;s next-generation mobile architecture, succeeding Lunar Lake, which will debut in the second half of 2025. There is still a lot of time for optimizations, so the leaked specifications could vary from the retail product.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Lenovo's new AI-powered Yogas and IdeaPads use Intel Core Ultra and AMD Ryzen AI 300 ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/lenovos-new-ai-powered-yogas-and-ideapads-use-intel-core-ultra-and-amd-ryzen-ai-300</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Lenovo brought new Yogas to IFA in Berlin, powered by the latest Intel Core Ultra (Series 2) and AMD Ryzen AI 300 processors. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">JBZvq36xgYG9jLYbvNRcyL</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pK4HtGopYf493nTi3BJmEb-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Thu, 05 Sep 2024 15:00:33 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 09:51:44 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[Laptops]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Andrew E. Freedman ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MTveuGNKPqpzrLttEA9ebb.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Andrew oversees laptop and desktop coverage and keeps up with the latest news in tech and gaming. His work has been published in Kotaku, PCMag, Complex, Tom’s Guide and Laptop Mag, among others. He fondly remembers his first computer: a Gateway that still lives in a spare room in his parents&#039; home, albeit without an internet connection. When he’s not writing about tech, you can find him playing video games, checking social media and waiting for the next Marvel movie. Follow him on Threads &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.threads.net/@freedmanae&quot;&gt;@FreedmanAE&lt;/a&gt; and BlueSky &lt;a href=&quot;https://bsky.app/profile/andrewfreedman.net&quot;&gt;@andrewfreedman.net&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;a href=&quot;https://bsky.app/profile/andrewfreedman.net&quot;&gt; &lt;/a&gt;You can send him tips on Signal: andrewfreedman.01&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pK4HtGopYf493nTi3BJmEb-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Tom&#039;s Hardware]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Lenovo Yoga]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Lenovo Yoga]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Lenovo Yoga]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/pK4HtGopYf493nTi3BJmEb-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Lenovo brought new premium Yoga laptops, as well as a handful of its entry-level IdeaPads, to IFA in Berlin. Between those PCs, the company has new computers based on <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-launches-lunar-lake-claims-arm-beating-battery-life-worlds-fastest-mobile-cpu-cores"><u>Intel Core Ultra (Series 2)</u></a>, AMD Ryzen AI 300, and Qualcomm&apos;s new <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/snapdragon-x-plus-now-comes-in-an-8-core-variant"><u>8-core Snapdragon X processors</u></a>, though only a few of them are making it to the US market.</p><p>The flagship model is the Lenovo Yoga Slim 7i Aura Edition, a 15-inch ultraportable, which Lenovo collaborated on with Intel, and suggests it offers "premium build and innovative technology."</p><p>The Aura Edition a new Evo model using the latest Intel Core Ultra chips, code-named Lunar Lake, specifically listing the Core Ultra 7 258V with up to 32GB of RAM on the chip. The system also goes up to 1TB of storage and supports Wi-Fi 7 and Bluetooth 5.4. (There&apos;s also a new Aura Edition version of the ThinkPad X1 Carbon.) It&apos;s notable to see that on the lid, the Lenovo logo is far more prominent than ever before, with the Yoga brand taking a bit of a backseat by being placed exclusively on the palmrest.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:4000px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.30%;"><img id="EcEXf8Y25ByQKcwFs69cGa" name="20240904_134216.jpg" alt="Lenovo Yoga" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EcEXf8Y25ByQKcwFs69cGa.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="4000" height="2252" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EcEXf8Y25ByQKcwFs69cGa.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>Lenovo lists a catalog of "Smart Modes" that it says change "on-the-fly." They include an "Attention Mode" to "block distracting websites"; features to protect eye wellness and provide posture warnings; video call settings including low light improvements, background blur, and more; and "Shield Mode"with privacy alerts and "auto prompt VPN". There&apos;s also a "Smart Share" option for "seamless AI-driven image sharing between smartphones and laptops", (though both Microsoft and Apple have offered this without the need for AI, and other OEMs like Dell and HP have included similar software with PCs before), and "Smart Care" support from Lenovo technicians over the phone or computer.</p><div ><table><thead><tr><th class="firstcol empty" ></th><th  >Lenovo Yoga Slim 7i Aura Edition</th><th  >Lenovo IdeaPad 5x 2-in-1</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Processor</strong></td><td  >Intel Core Ultra 7 258V</td><td  >Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus 8-core</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Graphics</strong></td><td  >Intel Arc (integrated)</td><td  >Qualcomm Adreno (integrated)</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Memory</strong></td><td  >Up to 32GB 8533 MT/s</td><td  >16GB LPDDR5x</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Storage</strong></td><td  >Up to 1TB PCIe Gen 4 NVMe SSD</td><td  >Up to 1TB PCIe Gen 4 TLC 2242 SSD</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Display</strong></td><td  >15.3-inch, 2880 x 1800, LCD touch or OLED, 120 Hz</td><td  >14-inch, 120 x 1200, OLED, touch</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Battery</strong></td><td  >70 WHr</td><td  >57 WHr</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Connectivity</strong></td><td  >Wi-Fi 7, Bluetooth 5.4</td><td  >Wi-Fi 7, Bluetooth 5.3</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Starting Price</strong></td><td  >$1,299</td><td  >$849</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Release Date</strong></td><td  >September 2024</td><td  >October 2024</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>On the ground at IFA, <em>Tom&apos;s Hardware </em>managing editor Matt Safford found Smart Share a bit awkward, reporting that you have to physically bump your iPhone or Android device against the display. He also said that he only saw it work when trained Lenovo demonstrators did it, and that members of the press seemed to struggle with it. <br><br>Matt pointed out that you have to pair your phone with the laptop, and that attendees at Lenovo&apos;s demo used pre-paired phones. Lenovo reps said it only shows the last 45 images you&apos;ve taken.</p><p>The only other model coming to the US (IFA is a European trade show, after all), is the IdeaPad 5x 2-in-1. That system is using the new 8-core Snapdragon X Plus, which Qualcomm announced ahead of the show. This 2-in-1 is a Copilot+ PC starting at $849, as prices drop with the cheaper processor.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ceeaadvqKTqdakbJFgdkEc.jpg" alt="Lenovo Yoga" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WTLvVkU3NweMm9g5KivyJZ.jpg" alt="Lenovo Yoga" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Lenovo</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>Other specs include 16GB of RAM, up to 1TB of PCIe Gen 4 storage (specifically on an M.2 2242 TLC drive), as well as Wi-Fi 7, Bluetooth 5.3, and two USB Type-C and USB Type-A ports each.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:4000px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.30%;"><img id="NfyMitAN4nMe3tmSSBegFd" name="20240904_134632.jpg" alt="Lenovo Yoga" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NfyMitAN4nMe3tmSSBegFd.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="4000" height="2252" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NfyMitAN4nMe3tmSSBegFd.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>There is an AMD flagship, but it&apos;s not coming to the US. The Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 is a 14-inch notebook with AMD&apos;s Ryzen AI 9 365 CPU and Radeon 880M graphics, as well as 32GB of RAM and 1TB of storage.</p><div ><table><thead><tr><th class="firstcol empty" ></th><th  >Lenovo Yoga Pro 7</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Processor</strong></td><td  >AMD Ryzen AI 9 365</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Graphics</strong></td><td  >AMD Radeon 880M (integrated)</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Memory</strong></td><td  >32GB LPDDR5x-6400</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Storage</strong></td><td  >1TB PCIe Gen 4 2242 SSD</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Display</strong></td><td  >14.5-inch, 2880 x 1800, OLED, 120 Hz</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Battery</strong></td><td  >73 WHr</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Connectivity</strong></td><td  >Wi-Fi 6E, Bluetooth 5.3</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Starting Price</strong></td><td  >€1,699</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Release Date</strong></td><td  >September 2024 (EMEA)</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>That notebook has a 2880 x 1800 display with 120 Hz refresh rate, with options for both OLED or LCD. It will start at €1,699 in September 2024.</p><p>Other notebooks Lenovo announced today include the IdeaPad Slim 5 series, using older Ryzen 7000 processors, as well as a clamshell IdeaPad Slim 5x using the 8-core Qualcomm Snapdragon X Plus.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Samsung updates its laptop lineup with the Galaxy Book5 Pro 360 — an ultra-lightweight laptop powered by the latest Intel Core Ultra 200V CPUs ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/samsung-updates-its-laptop-lineup-with-the-galaxy-book5-pro-360-an-ultra-lightweight-laptop-powered-by-the-latest-intel-core-ultra-200v-cpus</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Samsung's latest Galaxy Book laptop lineup includes an Intel Lunar Lake chip with AI capabilities. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">Z5WkcnSuhvuFjohKqqn9gj</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XbnbPkr99nUjt6avq8B5Ra-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Wed, 04 Sep 2024 17:41:29 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 12:56:19 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[Laptops]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ editors@tomshardware.com (Jowi Morales) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Jowi Morales ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gM7E2WSDg2wgCFoaDPz9yK.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Jowi Morales is a writer and journalist covering the tech beat since 2021. However, he’s been interested in technology far earlier than that. He started discovering desktop computers when his father brought home a Windows 95 PC, but his first real experience working under the hood of the PC was when the old computer’s hard drive was filled to the brim in the year 2000. He deleted the Windows folder to attempt to rectify the situation, which led to his dad buying a new desktop PC. Since then, he learned a lot more about computers, and he’s always been the go-to tech expert for his family and friends.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Jowi primarily uses a Windows workstation and an Android phone, but he also bought into the Apple ecosystem with the 6th-gen iPad, iPhone 14 Pro Max, and the M1 MacBook Air. Today, Jowi covers hardware and software from Redmond and Cupertino, while also looking at the tech industry in general.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Aside from covering technology, Jowi is an avid photographer and writes about automobiles, aviation, and tanks. You can find his bylines at &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.makeuseof.com/author/jowi-morales/&quot;&gt;MakeUseOf&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.slashgear.com/author/jowimorales/&quot;&gt;SlashGear&lt;/a&gt;, and, of course, &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.tomshardware.com/author/jowi-morales&quot;&gt;Tom’s Hardware&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XbnbPkr99nUjt6avq8B5Ra-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Samsung]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Samsung Galaxy Book5 Pro 360]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Samsung Galaxy Book5 Pro 360]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Samsung Galaxy Book5 Pro 360]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/XbnbPkr99nUjt6avq8B5Ra-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Samsung just launched the latest iteration of its Galaxy Book laptop lineup with the Galaxy Book5 Pro 360. This 2-in-1 laptop features an Intel Core Ultra 200V chip with an NPU that can deliver up to 47 TOPS and an Intel Arc GPU paired with a 120 Hz 16-inch 16:10 2880x1800 AMOLED display. While this laptop won’t have the touted Copilot+ PC features at launch, Samsung expects it to receive a free Windows update, slated to release in November, that will deliver these AI features.</p><p>Aside from the upcoming Copilot+ AI features like Live Captions with translation, Windows Studio Effects, and Cocreator in Paint, the Galaxy Book5 Pro 360 will also get Galaxy AI features by connecting your Samsung Galaxy smartphone through Microsoft Phone Link. You could also get Circle to Search with Google, Chat Assist, and Transcript Assist on this laptop through your Samsung Galaxy phone.</p><p>The Galaxy Book5 Pro 360 is one of Samsung’s flagship laptops with an ultra-portable design. It’s about 12.8mm thick, a few millimeters thicker than an iPhone 14 Pro Max, and weighs about 1.69kg. However, you’re only limited to two color options: gray and silver.</p><div ><table><caption>Samsung Galaxy Book5 Pro 360 Specifications</caption><thead><tr><th class="firstcol " >Specifications</th><th  ></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " >Processor</td><td  >Intel Core Ultra 7 / 5 200V Series</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >NPU</td><td  ><div class="softmerge-inner" style="width:298px;left:-1px">Intel AI Boost (up to 47 TOPS)</div></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Memory</td><td  >16 / 32GB</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Storage</td><td  >512GB / 1TB</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Graphics</td><td  ><div class="softmerge-inner" style="width:198px;left:-1px">Intel Arc Graphics</div></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Display</td><td  ><div class="softmerge-inner" style="width:898px;left:-1px">16-inch 120Hz (VRR) 16:10 10-point Multitouch AMOLED 2880x1800, up to 500 nits brightness with 120% DCI-P3 Color Volume</div></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Camera</td><td  ><div class="softmerge-inner" style="width:198px;left:-1px">2MP (1080p HD)</div></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Network</td><td  ><div class="softmerge-inner" style="width:198px;left:-1px">Bluetooth 5.4 / Wi-Fi 7</div></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><div class="softmerge-inner" style="width:97px;left:-1px">Microphone / Speaker</div></td><td  ><div class="softmerge-inner" style="width:298px;left:-1px">Dual Microphone / Quad Speakers</div></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Pen</td><td  ><div class="softmerge-inner" style="width:198px;left:-1px">S Pen (included)</div></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Battery</td><td  >76 Wh</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Charging</td><td  ><div class="softmerge-inner" style="width:198px;left:-1px">65W USB Type-C Adapter</div></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Ports</td><td  ><div class="softmerge-inner" style="width:498px;left:-1px">USB-A 3.2, HDMI 2.1, 2x Thunderbolt 4, microSD, 3.5mm combo jack</div></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Keyboard</td><td  ><div class="softmerge-inner" style="width:298px;left:-1px">Backlit Pro keyboard with Num pad</div></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><div class="softmerge-inner" style="width:97px;left:-1px">Operating System</div></td><td  ><div class="softmerge-inner" style="width:198px;left:-1px">Windows 11 Home</div></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Dimensions</td><td  ><div class="softmerge-inner" style="width:198px;left:-1px">355.4 x 252.2 x 12.8mm</div></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Weight</td><td  >1.69kg</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>This new Galaxy Book5 model comes just three months after Samsung launched the Galaxy Book4 Edge, its first Copilot+ PC powered by a Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite chip. Nevertheless, the South Korean giant likely wants to tap into the Copilot+ PC trend without alienating the x86 crowd, so it launched the Book5 series with an Intel CPU.</p><p>After all, while Qualcomm Snapdragon X CPUs are known for their extreme battery life, they still have issues with software compatibility, especially if you work with some specialist software or games. We’re also excited to know more about the Intel Core Ultra 200V, especially as the chipmaker claims these chips could beat the new battery life of <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-launches-lunar-lake-claims-arm-beating-battery-life-worlds-fastest-mobile-cpu-cores">Snapdragon X-powered laptops by two hours</a>. While we often take claims like these with a grain of salt, we’re still interested in seeing what these new chips can do.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Microsoft adds Copilot+ support for new CPUs — AMD Ryzen AI 300 and Intel Core Ultra 200V chips receive new AI experiences ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/microsoft-adds-copilot-support-for-new-cpus-amd-ryzen-ai-300-and-intel-core-ultra-200v-chips-receive-new-ai-experiences</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Select new AMD and Intel laptops will receive the Copilot+ PC moniker in November through a free Windows update. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">HhFmAMDQsdkzhozRB7dwiP</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/v2uUzE5t6r2NM3ndNX2jdU-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Wed, 04 Sep 2024 15:55:12 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 09:50:21 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[CPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ editors@tomshardware.com (Jowi Morales) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Jowi Morales ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gM7E2WSDg2wgCFoaDPz9yK.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Jowi Morales is a writer and journalist covering the tech beat since 2021. However, he’s been interested in technology far earlier than that. He started discovering desktop computers when his father brought home a Windows 95 PC, but his first real experience working under the hood of the PC was when the old computer’s hard drive was filled to the brim in the year 2000. He deleted the Windows folder to attempt to rectify the situation, which led to his dad buying a new desktop PC. Since then, he learned a lot more about computers, and he’s always been the go-to tech expert for his family and friends.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Jowi primarily uses a Windows workstation and an Android phone, but he also bought into the Apple ecosystem with the 6th-gen iPad, iPhone 14 Pro Max, and the M1 MacBook Air. Today, Jowi covers hardware and software from Redmond and Cupertino, while also looking at the tech industry in general.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Aside from covering technology, Jowi is an avid photographer and writes about automobiles, aviation, and tanks. You can find his bylines at &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.makeuseof.com/author/jowi-morales/&quot;&gt;MakeUseOf&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.slashgear.com/author/jowimorales/&quot;&gt;SlashGear&lt;/a&gt;, and, of course, &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.tomshardware.com/author/jowi-morales&quot;&gt;Tom’s Hardware&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/v2uUzE5t6r2NM3ndNX2jdU-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Microsoft]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Microsoft branding for Copilot+ PC]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Microsoft branding for Copilot+ PC]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Microsoft branding for Copilot+ PC]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/v2uUzE5t6r2NM3ndNX2jdU-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Microsoft’s Copilot+ PCs will soon become available to laptops running AMD Ryzen AI 300 and Intel Core Ultra 200V processors. Microsoft has just confirmed this via the <a href="https://blogs.windows.com/windowsexperience/2024/09/03/copilot-pcs-expand-availability-with-new-amd-and-intel-silicon/" target="_blank">Windows Experience Blog</a>, saying that the Copilot+ PC portfolio will expand with AMD and Intel’s latest laptop chips. The company said, “Eligible AMD- and Intel-powered devices will begin to see new AI experiences starting in November through free Windows updates.”</p><p>The company launched the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/microsoft-copilot-pcs-available-now-here-are-all-the-snapdragon-elite-x-laptops-you-can-buy-today">Copilot+ PC</a> in June 2024 with the Qualcomm Snapdragon X, which focused on AI features like Live Captions, Windows Studio Effects, and Cocreator in Paint. Despite that, the Snapdragon X’s impressive efficiency, which finally allowed Windows laptops to gain parity with Apple-silicon-powered MacBook in battery life, is what’s driving the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/qualcomm-spends-millions-on-marketing-as-it-is-found-better-battery-life-not-ai-features-is-driving-copilot-pc-sales">sales of Copilot+ PCs</a>.</p><p>Although the features of Copilot+ PCs were initially reserved for Windows 11 on Arm devices, AMD said that <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/software/windows/amd-confirms-ryzen-ai-300-pcs-wont-feature-copilot-features-at-launch-will-arrive-via-windows-update-later-this-year">they would eventually arrive</a> on its new x86 processors—namely, the AMD Ryzen AI 300 series—via a Windows update.</p><p>That means users who recently bought a laptop powered by an AMD Ryzen AI 300 processor don’t immediately have the AI features in Copilot+ PCs available. It’s a similar story for those who buy laptops that use the Intel Core Ultra 200V chips, which are expected to ship to consumers <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-launches-lunar-lake-claims-arm-beating-battery-life-worlds-fastest-mobile-cpu-cores">on September 24</a>. Only those who bought Snapdragon X-powered devices will have AI features on Copilot+ PCs.</p><p>Furthermore, Microsoft says that the timing and availability of the update that will give users advanced AI features will vary by device and region. So, it’s not a 100% guarantee that you will get the Copilot+ PC update on your laptop, even if you have AMD’s or Intel’s latest chips.</p><p>But if you’re interested in exploring the capabilities of Copilot+ PCs before its general release on AMD and Intel systems, we recommend joining the Windows Insider Community. This small pool of testers is often among the first to test new features that Microsoft rolls out to operating systems, so you’ll have a taste of the Windows 11 AI features before everyone else gets them.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Intel Core Ultra Series 2 comes to the Dell XPS 13 ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/intel-core-ultra-series-2-comes-to-the-dell-xps-13</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ The Dell XPS 13 9350 uses Intel's Core Ultra Series 2 processor for up to 28W of performance and longer battery life, but the chassis is unchanged. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">kGC7nhMNAo6e882QYfwUQV</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/nx4CYfonbmx2DCi3KgxVjm-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Tue, 03 Sep 2024 16:00:40 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 09:52:56 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[Laptops]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Andrew E. Freedman ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MTveuGNKPqpzrLttEA9ebb.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Andrew oversees laptop and desktop coverage and keeps up with the latest news in tech and gaming. His work has been published in Kotaku, PCMag, Complex, Tom’s Guide and Laptop Mag, among others. He fondly remembers his first computer: a Gateway that still lives in a spare room in his parents&#039; home, albeit without an internet connection. When he’s not writing about tech, you can find him playing video games, checking social media and waiting for the next Marvel movie. Follow him on Threads &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.threads.net/@freedmanae&quot;&gt;@FreedmanAE&lt;/a&gt; and BlueSky &lt;a href=&quot;https://bsky.app/profile/andrewfreedman.net&quot;&gt;@andrewfreedman.net&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;a href=&quot;https://bsky.app/profile/andrewfreedman.net&quot;&gt; &lt;/a&gt;You can send him tips on Signal: andrewfreedman.01&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/nx4CYfonbmx2DCi3KgxVjm-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Dell]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Dell XPS]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Dell XPS]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Dell XPS]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/nx4CYfonbmx2DCi3KgxVjm-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>At IFA in Berlin, Intel is announcing its second generation of Intel Core Ultra processors. Ahead of the show, Dell is getting in on the action by updating the XPS 13.<br><br>The new model, the 9350, shares the same chassis design as the last few years of Intel models and the more recent Dell XPS 13 (9345), which houses a Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite. So most of the upgrades in the new model are courtesy of Intel&apos;s new chips.</p><div ><table><thead><tr><th class="firstcol empty" ></th><th  >Dell XPS 13 (9350)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Processor</strong></td><td  >Up to Intel Core Ultra 9 288V</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Graphics</strong></td><td  >Intel Arc (integrated)</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>NPU</strong></td><td  >Intel AI Boost</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Memory</strong></td><td  >Up to 32GB LPDDR5x-8533</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Storage</strong></td><td  >Up to 2TB PCIe Gen 4 SSD, 4TB option coming later</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Display</strong></td><td  >13.4-inch, 1920 x 1200 non-touch, 2560 x 1600 touch, or 2880 x 1800 OLED touch</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Battery</strong></td><td  >55 WHr</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Networking</strong></td><td  >Intel Killer Wi-Fi 7 1750i (BE201), Bluetooth 5.4</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Starting Price</strong></td><td  >$1,399.99</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>The XPS 13 will start at $1,399.99 with an Intel Core Ultra 5 226V and go up to a Core Ultra 9 288V.  These chips have an NPU with up to 48 TOPS, just edging past the 45 TOPS in Qualcomm&apos;s chips, but behind the 50 TOPS in AMD&apos;s latest processors.<br><br>Beyond the 28W mobile chips, the laptops will use either 16GB or 32GB of RAM, go up to 2TB of storage (with a 4TB option coming later). And boast Intel Wi-Fi 7. </p><p>The 13.4-inch screen starts at 1920 x 1200, going up to a 2880 x 1800 OLED touchscreen. If our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/ultrabooks-ultraportables/dell-xps-13-9345-review"><u>review of the XPS 13 (9345)</u></a> shows anything, it&apos;s that the low-end screens allow for some serious battery life. Dell tested internally using that base display, and suggests that with a Core Ultra 7 256V, you can get 26 hours of battery life while  Netflix streaming at 150 nits. We&apos;ll have to do our own testing to see how it stands up.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1920px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.30%;"><img id="ntpKzM924sXpdYWvqEfVYm" name="xps-13-2.jpg" alt="Dell XPS" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ntpKzM924sXpdYWvqEfVYm.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="1920" height="1081" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ntpKzM924sXpdYWvqEfVYm.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Dell)</span></figcaption></figure><p>Much of this XPS is the same as the last few designs, including the thin chassis. It&apos;s attractive, but it lacks function keys, instead relying on a touch function row that has driven several <em>Tom&apos;s Hardware </em>staffers up the wall for the past few years. There&apos;s also no visible touchpad and a gapless keyboard.<br><br>Will Lunar Lake be enough to restore the XPS 13 to glory? We&apos;ll compare it to the Snapdragon version when we get our hands on it. It&apos;s up for pre-order today and should be released soon. </p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Intel vs AMD: Which CPUs Are Better in 2026? ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/features/amd-vs-intel-cpus</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ We wade into the endless debate: Who makes the best CPU, AMD or Intel? Here's the blow-by-blow in ten categories. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">WSVN7w3b5hcJks92sJbzPg</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZT89RwnfySndiR8Favks9k-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Sat, 03 Aug 2024 12:37:35 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Tue, 23 Jun 2026 13:51:19 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[CPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Jake Roach ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/h6PRM8bTimCTnNfoAYfjAi.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Jake Roach has been bending pins and busting solder joints since the mid-2000s. From trying to run scratched CDs of &lt;em&gt;Delta Force &lt;/em&gt;and &lt;em&gt;Unreal Tournament &lt;/em&gt;to spitting out virtual machines on a Threadripper, Jake has been on the hunt for the latest hardware and highest performance for decades. That eventually spun up a career, with Jake serving as Lead Reporter at Digital Trends, as well as contributing to outlets like XDA, PC Invasion, Business Insider, and WIRED. At Tom’s Hardware, Jake is focused on consumer and workstation CPUs. Outside working hours, you’ll find him knee-deep in the latest roguelite taking over Steam, spending way too much money on &lt;em&gt;Magic: The Gathering, &lt;/em&gt;or forcing his lazy corgi onto walks.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                        <dc:contributor><![CDATA[ Paul Alcorn ]]></dc:contributor>
                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZT89RwnfySndiR8Favks9k-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Tom&#039;s Hardware]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                        <media:description><![CDATA[Intel vs AMD]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Intel vs AMD]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Intel vs AMD]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZT89RwnfySndiR8Favks9k-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:959px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:49.64%;"><img id="" name="intelvsamd.JPG" alt="Intel vs AMD" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZT89RwnfySndiR8Favks9k.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="959" height="476" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ZT89RwnfySndiR8Favks9k.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)</span></figcaption></figure><p>If you're looking for the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html">best CPUs for gaming</a> or one of the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cheap-cpus,5668.html">best budget CPUs</a>, there are only two choices: AMD and Intel. That fact has spawned an almost religious following for both camps, and the resulting AMD vs Intel flamewars make it tricky to get unbiased advice about the best choice for your next processor. But in many cases, the answer is actually very clear: AMD's X3D chips dominate gaming performance, from the Ryzen 5 7600X3D up to the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-ryzen-9-9950x3d2-review">Ryzen 9 9950X3D2</a>. For application performance, AMD still tops the charts with flagships, but Intel's recent Arrow Lake Refresh chips provide nearly the same level of performance under $300 based on the data in our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">CPU benchmark hierarchy</a>. <br><br>This article covers the never-ending argument of AMD vs Intel desktop CPUs (we're not covering laptop or server chips). We judge the chips on nine criteria based on what you plan to do with your PC: pricing, specifications and features, gaming performance, productivity performance, driver support, power consumption, overclocking, chipset and socket support, and security, giving us a clear view of the state of the competition. Throughout each section, we'll also discuss the process nodes and architectures influencing the moving goalposts. However, each brand has its strengths and weaknesses, so which CPU brand you should buy depends mostly on what blend of features, price, and performance is important to you.</p><p>The latest <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-ultra-9-285k-cpu-review" target="_blank">'Arrow Lake Core Ultra 200S series</a> builds on Intel's hybrid architecture formula but leverages a new design philosophy that constrains gaming performance. However, the chips do provide strong performance in single- and multi-thread productivity workloads, along with improved energy efficiency. New refreshed chips like the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-ultra-7-270k-plus-review">Core Ultra 7 270K Plus</a> shore up the gaming front and provide a big boost in productivity performance, as well. <br><br>AMD's answer is its Zen 5 Ryzen 9000 series. These chips debuted with a fizzle on the gaming front, but subsequent firmware and operating system updates have improved the overall performance significantly, making these chips the bang-for-the-buck leader for most users looking for a balanced system.<br><br>AMD's powerful gaming-optimized Ryzen 9000 "X3D" models utilize a breakthrough 3D chip-stacking tech to take the lead in gaming performance, as you can see in our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-ryzen-7-9850x3d-review">Ryzen 9 9850X3D review</a> that finds the 9850X3D to be the fastest gaming CPU on the planet, bar none. AMD has also leveraged this X3D tech with its older architectures to make incredibly value-centric gaming chips, like the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-5-5600x3d-cpu-review">Ryzen 5 5600X3D</a>. The gains in gaming performance are phenomenal, so much so that the competition against Intel chips isn't even close, giving AMD a walk-in touchdown for gaming PCs.</p><h2 id="prime-day-exceptional-cpu-deals-2">Prime Day Exceptional CPU deals</h2><div class="product"><a data-dimension112="50afc231-bda1-4b12-8276-c5e7424e4d81" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="Get Intel's latest and greatest processor, the 270K Plus, at an all-time low price. The 8p/16e core processor has plenty of oomph to plow through any workflow and games well, too." data-dimension48="Get Intel's latest and greatest processor, the 270K Plus, at an all-time low price. The 8p/16e core processor has plenty of oomph to plow through any workflow and games well, too." data-dimension25="$264.99" href="https://www.amazon.com/Intel%C2%AE-CoreTM-Processor-270K-P-cores/dp/B0GMLJCBBM" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:870px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:120.34%;"><img id="cTPqnNuqwVfNUqrjjFwpWX" name="270K Plus" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/cTPqnNuqwVfNUqrjjFwpWX.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="870" height="1047" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a><p>Get Intel's latest and greatest processor, the 270K Plus, at an all-time low price. The 8p/16e core processor has plenty of oomph to plow through any workflow and games well, too.<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.amazon.com/Intel%C2%AE-CoreTM-Processor-270K-P-cores/dp/B0GMLJCBBM" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="50afc231-bda1-4b12-8276-c5e7424e4d81" data-action="Deal Block" data-label="Get Intel's latest and greatest processor, the 270K Plus, at an all-time low price. The 8p/16e core processor has plenty of oomph to plow through any workflow and games well, too." data-dimension48="Get Intel's latest and greatest processor, the 270K Plus, at an all-time low price. The 8p/16e core processor has plenty of oomph to plow through any workflow and games well, too." data-dimension25="$264.99">View Deal</a></p></div><div class="product star-deal"><a data-dimension112="2e3442de-1ac6-4055-bcdf-f8962f25f150" data-action="Star Deal Block" data-label="If you're after the ultimate in gaming performance, there's no better option than the Ryzen 7 9800X3D. Thanks to its 93MB of L3 cache, this 8-core/16-thread processor can push out class-leading frame rates in every game out there. With only a 120W TDP, it even stays cooler than the competition, saving you a few extra bucks on that expensive AIO purchase.Click the coupon box for the $20 discount." data-dimension48="If you're after the ultimate in gaming performance, there's no better option than the Ryzen 7 9800X3D. Thanks to its 93MB of L3 cache, this 8-core/16-thread processor can push out class-leading frame rates in every game out there. With only a 120W TDP, it even stays cooler than the competition, saving you a few extra bucks on that expensive AIO purchase.Click the coupon box for the $20 discount." data-dimension25="$433" href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-9800X3D-16-Thread-Desktop-Processor/dp/B0DKFMSMYK" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><figure class="van-image-figure "  ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:735px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:109.39%;"><img id="4rZqRFXXvpj73XFyQVmZmg" name="AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D.PNG" caption="" alt="" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/4rZqRFXXvpj73XFyQVmZmg.png" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="735" height="804" attribution="" endorsement="" credit="" class=""></p></div></div></figure></a><div><span class="product__star-deal-label">the best</span><p>If you're after the ultimate in gaming performance, there's no better option than the Ryzen 7 9800X3D. Thanks to its 93MB of L3 cache, this 8-core/16-thread processor can push out class-leading frame rates in every game out there. With only a 120W TDP, it even stays cooler than the competition, saving you a few extra bucks on that expensive AIO purchase.</p><p>Click the coupon box for the $20 discount.<a class="view-deal button" href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-9800X3D-16-Thread-Desktop-Processor/dp/B0DKFMSMYK" target="_blank" rel="nofollow" data-dimension112="2e3442de-1ac6-4055-bcdf-f8962f25f150" data-action="Star Deal Block" data-label="If you're after the ultimate in gaming performance, there's no better option than the Ryzen 7 9800X3D. Thanks to its 93MB of L3 cache, this 8-core/16-thread processor can push out class-leading frame rates in every game out there. With only a 120W TDP, it even stays cooler than the competition, saving you a few extra bucks on that expensive AIO purchase.Click the coupon box for the $20 discount." data-dimension48="If you're after the ultimate in gaming performance, there's no better option than the Ryzen 7 9800X3D. Thanks to its 93MB of L3 cache, this 8-core/16-thread processor can push out class-leading frame rates in every game out there. With only a 120W TDP, it even stays cooler than the competition, saving you a few extra bucks on that expensive AIO purchase.Click the coupon box for the $20 discount." data-dimension25="$433">View Deal</a></p></div></div><p><em>Here are standout deals for Intel and AMD CPUs from the Prime Day event. Our comparison continues below. </em></p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-amd-vs-intel-which-cpu-is-best"><span>AMD vs Intel: Which CPU is Best?</span></h3><div ><table><caption>AMD vs Intel CPUs 2025</caption><thead><tr><th class="firstcol empty" ></th><th  ><p>Intel</p></th><th  ><p>AMD</p></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Pricing and Value</p></td><td  ><p>X</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Gaming Performance</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p>X</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Productivity and Content Creation Performance</p></td><td  ><p>X</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Specifications and Features</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p>X</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>CPU Power Consumption and Heat</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p>X</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Overclocking</p></td><td  ><p>X</p></td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>CPU Drivers, Software, and Firmware</p></td><td  ><p>X</p></td><td  ><p>X</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Chipset and Socket Support</p></td><td  ></td><td  ><p>X</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Security</p></td><td  ><p>X</p></td><td  ><p>X</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Total</p></td><td  ><p>5</p></td><td  ><p>6</p></td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>Comparing Intel vs AMD in 9 categories in 2026, AMD and Intel are in lockstep with a win in three categories each, with the brands coming in tied in two categories. Despite long-standing as the value alternative, AMD’s original Zen microarchitecture has kicked off a slow rise to the top. The <a href="https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/Steam-Hardware-Software-Survey-Welcome-to-Steam">Steam hardware survey</a> now shows AMD only slightly behind Intel in market share, and from the <a href="https://www.cpubenchmark.net/market_share.html">Passmark database</a>, AMD outpaced Intel in desktop market share for the first time last year. </p><p>Although the earlier years of Zen were met with an audacious Intel, that story quickly changed as AMD started to gain ground, particularly around the release of Zen 3. Intel was finally able to move onto its 10nm node after years of manufacturing challenges, as well as introduce a hybrid architecture in a desktop x86 CPU. Alder Lake, Raptor Lake, and Raptor Lake Refresh all maintain competitive positions against their Zen 3, Zen 4, and even Zen 5 counterparts, but Intel’s market dominance – and the price it demanded from it – has disappeared in desktops. </p><p>Fierce competition is good for everyone, but Intel didn’t maintain its trajectory, instead opting for a radically different architecture with Arrow Lake that ditched Hyper-Threading. In AMD’s camp, it doubled-down on the wildly successful 3D V-Cache, introducing a second generation of the technology that places additional cache below the compute die for more thermal headroom, and as a result, higher clock speeds. </p><p>Although Arrow Lake brings much-needed efficiency improvements to Intel’s desktop line-up, as well as great overclocking headroom on CPU cores and the memory subsystem, AMD dominates gaming performance with its X3D lineup, sometimes by as much as 30%. At the same time, AMD is able to match or exceed Intel’s productivity performance, despite how impressive the Arrow Lake architecture is from a technical perspective. </p><p>Broadly, AMD earns our recommendation for most people. It clearly leads in gaming performance with X3D CPUs, and despite stagnant specifications, AMD has continued to show architectural advantage in comparative performance scenarios. Intel has gained by some ground with the 270K Plus and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-ultra-5-250k-plus-review/">Core Ultra 5 250K Plus</a>, which are both excellent processors are affordable prices. For now, however, AMD remains our go-to recommendation.</p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-amd-vs-intel-cpu-pricing-and-value-2025"><span>AMD vs Intel CPU Pricing and Value 2025</span></h3><p>AMD has long stood as the value king, and although you can get a lot for your money with chips like the Ryzen 7 9800X3D, Intel has slid into the value position as AMD continues to rise in market share. Looking at like-for-like CPUs in the AMD vs Intel battle, the two are in lockstep on pricing within a margin of $20 to $30 in most cases, outside of sales. </p><p>For the current generation lineup, Intel’s Arrow Lake chips are slightly cheaper at the Core Ultra 9 and Core Ultra 7 levels, though only by $20. Factoring in sales, Arrow Lake ends up much cheaper. At the time of writing, for instance, the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-ultra-9-285k-cpu-review">Core Ultra 9 285K</a> is available for $500 while the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-ryzen-9-9950x-cpu-review">Ryzen 9 9950X</a> will run you $570. </p><div ><table><caption>AMD Zen 5 'Granite Ridge' Ryzen 9000 vs Intel 'Arrow Lake' Core 200S Ultra series</caption><thead><tr><th class="firstcol " ><p>CPU</p></th><th  ><p>AMD</p></th><th  ><p>Intel</p></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-RyzenTM-9950X-32-Thread-Processor/dp/B0D6NNRBGP/">Ryzen 9 9950X</a> / <a href="https://www.newegg.com/intel-core-ultra-9-285k-arrow-lake-lga-1851-desktop-cpu-processor/p/N82E16819118505">Core Ultra 9 285K</a></p></td><td  ><p>~$600</p></td><td  ><p>~$580</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-RyzenTM-9900X-24-Thread-Processor/dp/B0D6NN87T8/">Ryzen 9 9900X</a></p></td><td  ><p>~$450</p></td><td  ><p>N/A</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-9700X-16-Thread-Unlocked-Processor/dp/B0D6NMDNNX/">Ryzen 7 9700X</a> / <a href="https://www.newegg.com/intel-core-ultra-7-265k-arrow-lake-lga-1851-desktop-cpu-processor/p/N82E16819118506">Core Ultra 7 265K   </a>(<a href="https://www.amazon.com/Intel%C2%AE-CoreTM-Processor-270K-P-cores/dp/B0GMLJCBBM/">Core Ultra 7 270K Plus</a>)</p></td><td  ><p>~$330</p></td><td  ><p>~$310 (~$350)</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-RyzenTM-9600X-12-Thread-Processor/dp/B0D6NN6TM7/">Ryzen 5 9600X</a> / <a href="https://www.newegg.com/intel-core-ultra-5-245k-arrow-lake-lga-1851-desktop-cpu-processor/p/N82E16819118508">Core Ultra 5 245K </a>(<a href="https://www.amazon.com/Intel%C2%AE-CoreTM-Processor-P-cores-cores/dp/B0GMLFFHS1/">Core Ultra 5 250K Plus</a>)</p></td><td  ><p>~$210</p></td><td  ><p>~$230 (~$220)</p></td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>The prices above are based on the average selling price of the main lineups from AMD and Intel over the past 60 days. Notably, these aren’t list prices, which aren’t reflective of what you can expect to spend, especially this late into a generation. As an example, the Core Ultra 7 265K launched at $395 while the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-ryzen-5-9600x-cpu-review">Ryzen 7 9700X</a> launched for $359. Now, however, Intel comes out slightly cheaper.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/S5p9FDhxSiTDiTr2A2NmeN.png" alt="270K Plus benchmarks" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Future</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FXz2R8WVcaZE4MgC3n5TxH.png" alt="Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>AMD leads in overall value for lower-end offerings like the Ryzen 5 9600X, but Intel isn't far behind with the recent Core Ultra 5 250K Plus. In gaming performance, you can see Intel is delivering better average frame rates, as well, though only with its newer Arrow Lake Refresh chips.  </p><div ><table><thead><tr><th class="firstcol " ><p>CPU</p></th><th  ><p>AMD</p></th><th  ><p>Intel</p></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-7950X-32-Thread-Unlocked-Processor/dp/B0BBHD5D8Y/">Ryzen 9 7950X</a> / <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Intel-i9-14900K-Raptor-LGA1700-Processor/dp/B0CHBJGFBC/">Core i9-14900K</a></p></td><td  ><p>~$510 (low stock)</p></td><td  ><p>~$470</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-7900X-24-Thread-Unlocked-Processor/dp/B0BBJ59WJ4/">Ryzen 9 7900X</a></p></td><td  ><p>~$320</p></td><td  ><p>N/A</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-7700X-16-Thread-Unlocked-Processor/dp/B0BBHHT8LY/">Ryzen 7 7700X</a> / <a href="https://www.newegg.com/intel-core-i7-14th-gen-core-i7-14700k-raptor-lake-lga-1700-desktop-cpu-processor/p/N82E16819118466">Core i7-14700K</a></p></td><td  ><p>~$280</p></td><td  ><p>~$320</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-7600X-12-Thread-Unlocked-Processor/dp/B0BBJDS62N/">Ryzen 5 7600X</a> / Core i5-14600K</p></td><td  ><p>~$180</p></td><td  ><p>~$210 (low stock)</p></td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>AMD and Intel flip positions when looking at last-gen options, with only the Core i9-14900K coming in slightly less than the Ryzen 9 7950X. Intel has clearly recognized the value proposition of the Core i5-14600K and Core i7-14700K, with both now selling for around the same price as their Arrow Lake counterparts. </p><p><strong>Winner: Intel.</strong> Intel and AMD are more competitive on pricing than they’ve been in years. Intel comes out slightly ahead on value with lower-end SKUs, but value demands context. The Ryzen 7 9800X3D might be a worse value than the Core i5-14600K, but if you have $480 to spend on a CPU and want the best gaming performance, AMD’s X3D chip is right for you. </p><p>However, Intel shook things up massively with the 270K Plus and 250K Plus. Now, Intel is offering competitive gaming performance around $200 to $300 while pushing flagship-level application performance. For now, at least, Intel is in the driver's seat when it comes to overall value through Arrow Lake Refresh. </p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-amd-vs-intel-cpu-gaming-performance-2025"><span>AMD vs Intel CPU Gaming Performance 2025</span></h3><p>In the AMD vs Intel CPU gaming performance battle, AMD's X3D processors hold the lead in all critical price bands. Below, we have a wide selection of collective gaming performance measurements for the existing chips in the different price bands. You can see a much more holistic view in our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html">CPU Benchmarks</a> Hierarchy.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jBp8pv3MTsgV9U2yXWjp9f.png" alt="CPU Benchmark Rankings" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/inLKtbMy7MiHA6ZRPj8nAf.png" alt="CPU Benchmark Rankings" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ck86DgAJZmSd2VC8TuvXJJ.png" alt="Best CPUs for Gaming" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HzakxstHL5pFCDqjVnTs4W.png" alt="CPU benchmark hierarchy" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/X7m4xTnr8p4E2qf8xx5Y3V.png" alt="CPU Hierarchy" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tsqVwJetsB7L9BazpFkheZ.png" alt="CPU Benchmarks" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dXQmGZbdFLC5izEoqZVB8Z.png" alt="CPU Benchmarks" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>As you can see, AMD's standard 'Granite Ridge' Ryzen 9000 models take the lead over Intel's current-gen Core Ultra 200S 'Arrow Lake' processors, and the gaming optimized Ryzen 9000X3D chips, which cost more than the standard models, take an overwhelming lead, often by 30% or more. </p><p>Intel's current-gen <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-ultra-9-285k-cpu-review">Core Ultra 9 285K</a> is the new flagship, but its unique tile-based (chiplet) design has a negative impact on gaming performance, so it isn't as fast as the prior-gen models in gaming. That leaves the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-core-i9-14900k-cpu-review">Core i9-14900K</a> as the fastest Intel gaming chip, and it often sells at a steep discount. The recent Core Ultra 7 270K Plus, however, is just marginally behind the Core i9-14900K, and it's available for around $350. </p><p>AMD's standard Ryzen 9000 models, like the flagship <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-ryzen-9-9950x-cpu-review">Ryzen 9 9950X</a>, are faster in gaming than Intel's Core Ultra 200S series, but Intel's previous-gen 14900K holds the edge. However, AMD's X3D models, like the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-ryzen-7-9800x3d-review-devastating-gaming-performance">Ryzen 7 9800X3D</a> and the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-ryzen-9-9950x3d-review">Ryzen 9 9950X3D</a>, are the fastest gaming chips on the planet, beating Intel's current-gen chips by 30+%. These chips also deliver the full performance of the standard models in productivity workloads, eliminating the tradeoffs associated with the X3D models that we've seen in the past. The X3D models do come at a premium, but they justify their price tag with the fastest gaming performance money can buy. </p><p>Older X3D chips leverage AMD’s first-gen 3D V-Cache, which stacks the cache on top of the compute die rather than below, which is the case with the latest Zen 5 X3D offerings. That design limits thermal headroom, and in turn, clock speeds, so expect a dip in productivity performance if you aren’t using one of AMD’s latest X3D offerings. </p><p>Kicking your resolution up to 1440p and beyond typically pushes the bottleneck back to the GPU, so you won't gain as much from your CPU's gaming prowess. However, a bit of extra CPU gaming performance could pay off if you plan on updating your graphics card (see our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gpus,4380.html">best graphics cards</a>) with a newer generation while keeping the rest of your system intact. We expect most builds in the mid-range to come with lesser GPUs, which generally serve as an equalizer in terms of CPU performance.<br><br>In terms of integrated graphics performance, there's no beating AMD. The company's current-gen Phoenix Point APUs offer the best performance with the 8700G and 8600G. We’ve seen even more capable APUs out of AMD with its mobile Strix Point offerings like the Ryzen AI Max 395, but Strix Point hasn’t made its way to desktop yet.<br><br><strong>Winner: AMD</strong>. AMD's standard Ryzen 9000 models deliver solid performance in gaming, beating Intel's current-gen models, but they trail the previous-gen Intel chips. However, the Ryzen 9000X3D models take the unequivocal lead in gaming by massive margins, giving AMD an easy win in the gaming department. The previous-gen Raptor Lake Refresh models are a distant second in gaming performance, and they aren't as performant as the Ryzen 9000 models in productivity applications, making them a tough choice as an alternative.</p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-amd-vs-intel-productivity-and-content-creation-performance-2025"><span>AMD vs Intel Productivity and Content Creation Performance 2025</span></h3><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/DDw3RLrourqMvUZa2Ugp9f.png" alt="CPU Benchmark Rankings" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SmDdzbKGWsiS2fFtifxNCf.png" alt="CPU Benchmark Rankings" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VuBvEjzMNKLtxMNcgFhiKD.png" alt="Best CPU for Gaming" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Ji7YTauVU7NRDubw38HbPD.png" alt="Best CPU for Gaming" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NmQ9vd4L2xwGmbWp55UYiH.png" alt="CPU Benchmarks" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/K9qmnd9wJvvBVi53KQLLdH.png" alt="CPU Benchmarks" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/bMp3CkuZdToqCCuZEuaGSV.png" alt="CPU Hierarchy" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tsqVwJetsB7L9BazpFkheZ.png" alt="CPU Benchmarks" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dXQmGZbdFLC5izEoqZVB8Z.png" alt="CPU Benchmarks" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>In the non-gaming performance battle of AMD vs Intel CPUs, Intel's Arrow Lake chips have made great strides against AMD's finest, but they fail to deliver a tangible enough lead over AMD's core-heavy models to make productivity performance a make-or-break buying decision. AMD leads in overall multi-threaded performance with its Ryzen 9 9950X3D and 9950X by a slim margin, but Intel keeps a solid grip on the lead in single-threaded applications. The new Arrow Lake Refresh CPUs don't radically change the performance picture overall, but they come in much less than AMD's Zen 5 competition. </p><p>Arrow Lake marks Intel's continuation of using a mixture of two types of cores for the mainstream desktop PC. The big performance cores (P-cores) are best for latency-sensitive work, giving Intel the uncontested lead in single-threaded applications. The efficiency cores (E-cores) step in to add some additional heft in threaded and background applications, which pays big dividends in heavily-threaded content creation and productivity applications. </p><p>In contrast, AMD continues to leverage its tried-and-true P-core only design, which also supports AVX-512, a big consideration for those who leverage powerful productivity applications that employ the high-performance instructions. Zen 5 brought a 512-bit data path for AVX instructions – Zen 4 used two 256-bit paths – which provides a massive performance advantage in applications that leverage AVX-512, even compared to Zen 4. Intel’s latest CPUs don’t support AVX-512 instructions. <br><br>Solid performance in single-threaded work equates to faster performance in all manner of workloads, particularly day-to-day applications that rely on snappy responsiveness from the processor. The Core 7 270K Plus has taken the uncontested lead in single-threaded performance across the full suite of our benchmarks, and it comes in at a mid-range price point. And on the multithreaded front, Intel is able to match the Ryzen 9 9950X despite the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus coming in at half the price. </p><p><strong>Winner: Intel. </strong>Although AMD offers compelling productivity performance with its most expensive offerings, the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus and Core Ultra 5 250K Plus punch far above their weight class in productivity performance, easily delivering flagship performance at entry-level prices. </p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-amd-vs-intel-processor-specifications-and-features-2025"><span>AMD vs Intel Processor Specifications and Features 2025</span></h3><p>Modern Intel and AMD CPUs sport much different architectures, so comparing specifications directly is a fool’s errand in most cases. AMD has a traditional approach with a homogeneous core architecture that sports simultaneous multi-threading. Intel moved onto a heterogeneous architecture with Alder Lake, which it has maintained since, and it removed Hyper-Threading with Arrow Lake. </p><p>This departure in architecture means you can draw inaccurate conclusions from specs alone. For instance, Intel’s flagship Core Ultra 9 285K only has 24 threads compared to AMD’s 32 on the Ryzen 9 9950X. Despite that, the two chips offer competitive multi-threaded performance, as you can see in our performance results in the above section. </p><div ><table><caption>AMD vs Intel Pricing and Specifications 2025 </caption><thead><tr><th class="firstcol " ><p>CPU</p></th><th  ><p>Street (MSRP)</p></th><th  ><p>Arch</p></th><th  ><p>Cores / Threads (P+E)</p></th><th  ><p>P-Core Base / Boost Clock (GHz)</p></th><th  ><p>E-Core Base / Boost Clock (GHz)</p></th><th  ><p>Cache (L2/L3)</p></th><th  ><p>TDP / PBP or MTP</p></th><th  ><p>Memory</p></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/amd-ryzen-9-9000-series-ryzen-9-9950x3d-granite-ridge-socket-am5-desktop-cpu-processor/p/N82E16819113884">Ryzen 9 9950X3D</a></p></td><td  ><p>$699</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 5 X3D</p></td><td  ><p>16 / 32</p></td><td  ><p>4.3 / 5.7</p></td><td  ><p>—</p></td><td  ><p>144 MB (16+128)</p></td><td  ><p>170W / 230W</p></td><td  ><p>DDR5-5600</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Ryzen+9+7950X3D&rh=n%3A229189">Ryzen 9 7950X3D</a></p></td><td  ><p>$669 ($699)</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 4 X3D</p></td><td  ><p>16 / 32</p></td><td  ><p>4.2 / 5.7</p></td><td  ><p>—</p></td><td  ><p>144MB (16+128)</p></td><td  ><p>120W / 162W</p></td><td  ><p>DDR5-5200</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Ryzen+9+9950X&rh=n%3A229189">Ryzen 9 9950X</a></p></td><td  ><p>$599</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 5</p></td><td  ><p>16 / 32</p></td><td  ><p>4.3 / 5.7</p></td><td  ><p>—</p></td><td  ><p>80MB (16+64)</p></td><td  ><p>170W / 230W</p></td><td  ><p>DDR5-5600</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Core+Ultra+9+285K&rh=n%3A229189">Core Ultra 9 285K</a></p></td><td  ><p>$579 ($589)</p></td><td  ><p>Arrow Lake</p></td><td  ><p>24 / 24 (8+16)</p></td><td  ><p>3.7 / 5.7</p></td><td  ><p>3.2 / 4.6</p></td><td  ><p>76MB (40+36)</p></td><td  ><p>125W / 250W</p></td><td  ><p>CUDIMM DDR5-6400 / DDR5-5600</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-Ryzen-9900X3D-12-Core-Processor/dp/B0DWGWN8GY/">Ryzen 9 9900X3D</a></p></td><td  ><p>$529 ($599)</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 5 X3D</p></td><td  ><p>12 / 24</p></td><td  ><p>4.4 / 5.5</p></td><td  ><p>—</p></td><td  ><p>140MB  (12+128)</p></td><td  ><p>120W / 162W</p></td><td  ><p>DDR5-5600</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Ryzen 9 7900X3D</p></td><td  ><p>$599</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 4 X3D</p></td><td  ><p>12 / 24</p></td><td  ><p>4.4 / 5.6</p></td><td  ><p>—</p></td><td  ><p>140MB (12+128)</p></td><td  ><p>120W / 162W</p></td><td  ><p>DDR5-5200</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/AMD-9800X3D-16-Thread-Desktop-Processor/dp/B0DKFMSMYK/">Ryzen 7 9800X3D</a></p></td><td  ><p>$480</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 5 X3D</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>4.7 / 5.2</p></td><td  ><p>—</p></td><td  ><p>104MB (8+96)</p></td><td  ><p>120W / 162W</p></td><td  ><p>DDR5-5600</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Ryzen+7+7800X3D&rh=n%3A229189">Ryzen 7 7800X3D</a></p></td><td  ><p>$365 ($449)</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 4 X3D</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>4.2 / 5.0</p></td><td  ><p>—</p></td><td  ><p>104MB (8+96)</p></td><td  ><p>120W / 162W</p></td><td  ><p>DDR5-5200</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Ryzen+9+9900X&rh=n%3A229189">Ryzen 9 9900X</a></p></td><td  ><p>$380 ($469)</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 5</p></td><td  ><p>12 / 24</p></td><td  ><p>4.4 / 5.6</p></td><td  ><p>—</p></td><td  ><p>76MB (12+64)</p></td><td  ><p>120W / 162W</p></td><td  ><p>DDR5-5600</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Core+Ultra+7+265K&rh=n%3A229189">Core Ultra 7 265K</a> / <a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Core+Ultra+7+265KF&rh=n%3A229189">KF</a></p></td><td  ><p>$329 ($394) / $309 ($379)</p></td><td  ><p>Arrow Lake</p></td><td  ><p>20 / 20 (8+12</p></td><td  ><p>3.9 / 5.5</p></td><td  ><p>3.3 / 4.6</p></td><td  ><p>66MB (36+30)</p></td><td  ><p>125W / 250W</p></td><td  ><p>CUDIMM DDR5-6400 / DDR5-5600</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.amazon.com/s?k=Ryzen+7+9700X&rh=n%3A229189">Ryzen 7 9700X</a></p></td><td  ><p>$298 ($349)</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 5</p></td><td  ><p>8 / 16</p></td><td  ><p>3.8 / 5.5</p></td><td  ><p>—</p></td><td  ><p>40MB (8+32)</p></td><td  ><p>65W / 88W / 105W</p></td><td  ><p>DDR5-5600</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p><a href="https://www.newegg.com/amd-ryzen-5-9000-series-ryzen-5-9600x-granite-ridge-socket-am5-desktop-cpu-processor/p/N82E16819113844">AMD Ryzen 5 9600X</a></p></td><td  ><p>$210 ($279)</p></td><td  ><p>Zen 5</p></td><td  ><p>6 / 12</p></td><td  ><p>3.9 / 5.4</p></td><td  ><p>—</p></td><td  ><p>38MB (6+32)</p></td><td  ><p>65W / 88W</p></td><td  ><p>DDR5-5600</p></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><p>Core Ultra 5 245K / KF</p></td><td  ><p>$245 ($309) / $219 ($294)</p></td><td  ><p>Arrow Lake</p></td><td  ><p>14 / 14 (6+8)</p></td><td  ><p>4.2 / 5.2</p></td><td  ><p>3.6 / 4.6</p></td><td  ><p>50MB (26+24)</p></td><td  ><p>125W / 250W</p></td><td  ><p>CUDIMM DDR5-6400 / DDR5-5600</p></td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>The cores and clocks aren’t as important as they once were, at least when comparing a Ryzen 9 to a Core Ultra 9, or a Ryzen 5 to a Core Ultra 5. Instead, there’s been a stark shift in focus toward cache in the face of 3D V-Cache. That’s the marquee feature AMD has been running on for the past few years, offering chart-dominating performance in games that Intel has yet to answer. Previously, 3D V-Cache came with a slight compromise to productivity performance due to clock speeds on eight-core parts and CCX-to-CCX latency on 12- and 16-core parts. AMD has rectified that issue with second-gen 3D V-Cache, however. </p><p>Apples-to-apples, Intel and AMD offer similar cache amounts when excluding X3D parts, though Intel more evenly distributes the cache between L2 and L3, while AMD focuses the lion’s share of cache in the last level. Intel is rumored to <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intels-next-gen-nova-lake-will-finally-tackle-amds-ryzen-x3d-but-only-with-pricey-k-models-144mb-big-last-level-cache-response-to-3d-v-cache-will-only-come-on-unlocked-desktop-parts">pack bLLC into its upcoming Nova Lake generation</a> to answer 3D V-Cache. Intel currently deploys this style of cache packaging in its Clearwater Forest server chips, but it has yet to show up in a consumer CPU. </p><p><strong>Winner: AMD.</strong> Intel has highlighted several features over the past several generations, from Thread Director to Intel APO and even <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intels-binary-optimization-tool-tested-and-explained-how-the-ibot-translation-delivers-up-to-18-percent-faster-gaming-performance-8-percent-on-average">the new iBOT feature</a>, but these features have mainly served to bring Intel’s unique architectural design up to par. Meanwhile, AMD has pushed ahead with a big win in gaming due to 3D V-Cache, which only improved in its second generation. Add on top of that AVX-512 support, as well as a true 512-bit data path in Zen 5, and Team Red easily wins this category. </p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-amd-vs-intel-cpu-power-consumption-and-heat-2025"><span>AMD vs Intel CPU Power Consumption and Heat 2025</span></h3><p>When comparing AMD vs Intel CPU power and heat, the former's 4nm TSMC process node makes a big difference. Power consumption comes as a byproduct of design choices, like lithography and architecture. However, higher power consumption often correlates to more heat generation, so you'll need beefier coolers to offset the heat output of greedier chips.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8utqGSZ7TPWExrrw3rjwLg.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9900X3D Review" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ajYwLcbEeTL6vVaGhMU5Rg.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9900X3D Review" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BoFVmPSWz7C9WFi729AwUg.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9900X3D Review" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/erooN3b7seFMc2ok4YFeYg.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9900X3D Review" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Lb5gz7AH2dUB5Mb6Thhfeg.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9900X3D Review" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xZ94ZznD6ei7PodJzF2Mig.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9900X3D Review" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/kDjxfJfWuUNkTYMByAs3ng.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9900X3D Review" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/KWyUNu9zXnhCEcKkA4Mfqg.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9900X3D Review" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tiLYraCWEYpPkBCgTEjJug.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9900X3D Review" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/uw74vWoNhnrcTmLWCSdQzg.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9900X3D Review" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/vsw9zxDKCpbXM5YKyJxz4h.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9900X3D Review" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/sCCnedr3Zvvugkbkw3Gi8h.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9900X3D Review" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mAZAu2pgm8ubS9kaF22SDh.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9900X3D Review" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>Overall, Intel has reduced its power consumption from meme-worthy to an acceptable level, but it still consumes more power than Ryzen. Still, in aggregate, AMD's 4nm chips either consume less power or provide much better power-to-performance efficiency.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WnmenQLUwGLypUJGJFy6Q5.png" alt="asdf" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/BFGZhh7k8cDn8iN6cThVT5.png" alt="asdf" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/r4yKgNidSFqmq8zRUW9rZ5.png" alt="asdf" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eoSJg2yTghESiUUpKx9s5H.png" alt="asdf" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/VTbLQDHYz5pBPknisJqyDf.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9900X3D Review" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jZ5nsi7UsMGkXoMejZLmHf.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9900X3D Review" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/oJscwSHhNDcBunXxnyCeMf.png" alt="Ryzen 9 9900X3D Review" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>As you can see above, you'll get more work done per watt of energy consumed, which is a win-win, and AMD's cooling requirements aren't nearly as overbearing. Arrow Lake brings Intel more in-line with AMD, both when looking at peak power consumption and productivity efficiency. Even then, however, Intel’s latest offerings end up slightly ahead of AMD in overall power consumption, and slightly behind in over efficiency. </p><p><strong>Winner: AMD.</strong> In judging AMD vs Intel CPU performance per watt, it's impossible to overstate the importance of having the densest process node paired with an efficient microarchitecture, and TSMC's 4nm and AMD's Zen 5 are the winning combination. The latest Ryzen processors consume less power than Intel on a power-vs-performance basis, even in the face of Arrow Lake.</p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-intel-vs-amd-cpu-overclocking-2025"><span>Intel vs AMD CPU Overclocking 2025</span></h3><p>There's no debate when you compare Intel vs AMD CPU overclocking. Intel offers the most overclocking headroom, meaning you can gain more performance over the baseline speed with Intel chips than you can with AMD's Ryzen processors. To learn more about overclocking, head to our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/how-to/how-to-overclock-a-cpu">How to Overclock a CPU</a> guide.</p><p>Dynamic boosting algorithms and increasingly multi-threaded applications have offset some of the previous benefits of overclocking, at least for core clock speeds. With AMD’s current CPUs, and up to Raptor Lake Refresh for Intel, a modest all-core overclock generally won’t provide a performance benefit, and it could even reduce your performance, though only in lightly-threaded applications. The boosting algorithms can usually achieve higher speeds for these applications, with all-core overclocks running into a thermal wall before providing much of a boost. </p><p>However, for Intel, that changed with Arrow Lake. It ships with much higher thermal headroom than the last several Intel generations, shortening the gap between single-core boosts and all-core speeds. Intel now also provides more fine-grain control over clock speeds, with increments as low as 16MHz. Arrow Lake scales particularly well with high DDR5 speeds, offering a small performance edge if you’re able to secure a fast kit of memory. </p><p>AMD has taken a different approach. Rather than offering more granular control over overclocking, it has continued to invest in Precision Boost Overdrive (PBO) as a one-click overclocking solution. In addition, AMD offers Curve Optimizer and Shaper, which allow you to easily undervolt your chip with a voltage offset across the frequency range. </p><p>Intel has an edge in overclocking, but it comes with a caveat. In order to overclock an Intel chip, you need to purchase an unlocked K-series processor as well as a Z-series motherboard. H- and B-series motherboards only support memory overclocking. Meanwhile, AMD supports overclocking on all of its modern CPUs, short of the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-7-5800x3d-review">Ryzen 7 5800X3D</a> and other Zen 3 chips sporting 3D V-Cache. AMD also supports CPU overclocking on B- and X-series chipsets, saving you some money. </p><p><strong>Winner: Intel.</strong> Although CPU overclocking isn’t as prominent as it used to be, Team Blue holds the edge in this AMD vs Intel battle. You have more granular control over core overclocking, as well as additional fabric and memory overclocking features that can net higher performance on Arrow Lake. AMD has focused on making overclocking more accessible, but that also leaves enthusiasts with less room to play. </p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-amd-vs-intel-cpu-drivers-software-and-firmware-2025"><span>AMD vs Intel CPU Drivers, Software, and Firmware 2025</span></h3><p>Over the past couple of years, both AMD and Intel have seen catastrophic firmware issues, which caused CPUs to fail, or in the worst cases, literally burn themselves up. In the most recent generation, we also saw hamstrung performance due to software issues from both AMD and Intel, though both have also released a string of microcode and driver updates to address these problems. </p><p>On the driver front, Intel and AMD are both stable. In the early days of Zen, we saw lopsided support for Intel’s latest architecture, and AMD’s smaller position in the market meant issues were more common and fixes took longer to arrive. That isn’t the case today. Broadly, Intel and AMD’s chipset drivers are stable, and issues that do arise are usually resolved through an update within a few days. </p><p>Firmware is a different story, and that’s been an unfortunate area of focus for AMD and Intel over the last couple of years. Intel was at the center of a years-long issue with instability on Raptor Lake and Raptor Lake Refresh chips, and in particular, the Core i9-13900K and Core i9-14900K. Reports of instability in games on these CPUs date back at least as far as early 2023, but <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-finds-root-cause-of-cpu-crashing-and-instability-errors-prepares-new-and-final-microcode-update">Intel didn’t acknowledge them until mid-2024</a>. </p><p>Intel released a microcode update in late 2024 that solved most instability problems, but as recently as September 2025, it’s continued to work on the issue. </p><p>In AMD’s camp, high-end Ryzen CPUs have burned themselves up in the socket, ruining both the chip and motherboard – twice, though for different reasons. In the first go, the<a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-ryzen-7000x3d-burnout-reports"> Ryzen 7 7800X3D was operating at elevated voltages</a>. An AGESA update shortly after reports started circulating capped the voltage at 1.3V, and there haven’t been any reports since. </p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:7111px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="eR85J43828g2yayrR3nfSi" name="mmc8y44fbjie1" alt="Ryzen 7 9800X3D" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eR85J43828g2yayrR3nfSi.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="" width="7111" height="4000" attribution="" endorsement="" class="inline"></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Reddit/t0pli)</span></figcaption></figure><p>With the release of the Ryzen 7 9800X3D, a far larger number of <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/third-ryzen-7-9800x3d-burnout-case-appears-kills-the-cpu-and-damages-the-motherboard-socket">reports started circulating</a>, once again showing the burning on the CPU’s contact pads and in the motherboard socket. This issue was much messier than the original Ryzen 7 7800X3D, though the vast majority of reports came from the Ryzen 7 9800X3D paired with an ASRock motherboard. In this case, AMD shifted blame to ASRock. ASRock has <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/motherboards/asrock-releases-new-firmware-for-amd-800-series-motherboards-to-enhance-cpu-operating-stability-update-may-address-the-am5-burning-socket-crisis">reportedly solved the problem</a> through BIOS updates, but new reports are still trickling out at a reduced cadence.  </p><p><strong>Winner: Tie.</strong> It’s hard to declare a winner in this category given the two major controversies Intel and AMD have faced over the past few years, both of which resulted in CPUs being ruined while supposedly operating within warrantied specifications. </p><p>Although it’s important to highlight these problems and the responses to them from AMD and Intel, they aren’t widespread issues. Neither triggered a proper recall. </p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-amd-vs-intel-chipset-and-socket-support-2025"><span>AMD vs Intel Chipset and Socket Support 2025</span></h3><p>An increasingly important aspect of choosing between Intel and AMD is the longevity of the chipset and socket of your motherboard. Although new generations bring new chipsets, AMD has set a new standard for socket support with AM4, which it appears to be carrying forward with AM5. Intel has responded in kind, supporting 12th-, 13th-, and 14th-gen chips on the same LGA1700 socket. However, it moved to the LGA1851 socket with the release of Arrow Lake, and it will <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intels-next-gen-nova-lake-cpus-may-be-backwards-compatible-with-arrow-lake-coolers-lga1954-and-lga1851-sockets-share-the-same-dimensions">move to the LGA1954 socket</a> with the release of Nova Lake CPUs in late 2026. </p><p>AMD’s current commitment is to support the AM5 socket through 2027, but that timeframe could extend. With the release of Zen 4 and introduction of AM5, AMD originally only committed to support through 2025 before extending the timeframe with the release of Zen 5. With AMD’s current release cadence, that means we should see at least three generations, and possibly four, on the AM5 socket. If AMD once again extends the window, we’re likely looking at five generations of support. </p><p>It’s certainly possible that AMD will extend the timeframe. The AM4 socket set a precedent of longevity. It was originally introduced in 2016, and AMD has released new AM4 chips as recently as 2025; though, these chips are mostly rebranded versions of old silicon, or specific variants for different international markets. </p><p>For chipsets, AMD currently supports Zen 4 and Zen 5 CPUs across all chipsets with the AM5 socket. With AM4, AMD eventually brought support for Zen, Zen+, Zen 2, and Zen 3, though support varies based on manufacturer for older chipsets.</p><p>Intel has a more confusing lineup of chipsets and support, which alone spoils the reasoning for AMD winning this section. After three generations on the same socket, Intel moved to a new socket with the release of Arrow Lake. That socket (LGA1851) has seen Arrow Lake Refresh chips, and we don't expect it to see any more releases. </p><p>Intel also forces customers to its flagship Z-series chipset for CPU overclocking support; a line in the sand that it’s continued to maintain despite the fact that AMD supports CPU and memory overclocking on both B-series and X-series chipsets. Thankfully, the last several generations of Intel chipsets have opened up memory overclocking on B-series chipsets. </p><p><strong>Winner: AMD.</strong> The AM4 socket brought about a new standard for drop-in CPU replacements, which AMD is bringing forward with AM5. Intel has made strides to support multiple generations on the same socket, but it has yet to demonstrate the ability to deliver support over several years like AMD has. Additionally, Intel continues to charge a premium for CPU overclocking by restricting the feature to flagship Z-series chipsets. </p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-amd-vs-intel-cpu-security-2025"><span>AMD vs Intel CPU Security 2025</span></h3><p>The last few years have found security researchers poking and prodding at the speculative execution engine that's one of the key performance-boosting features behind all modern chips. The resulting research has spawned an almost never-ending onslaught of new vulnerabilities that threaten the safety of your system and private data. Unfortunately, these types of vulnerabilities are incredibly dangerous because they are undetectable—these tactics steal data by using the processor exactly as it was designed; thus, they are undetectable by any known anti-virus program.</p><p>The rash of fixes required to plug these holes also continues to grow, and many of them resulted in reduced performance initially. AMD and Intel have recognized the cost of such updates during the Spectre and Meltdown era, and more recent patches come with little to no impact on performance. It’s possible that could change with a future vulnerability, but we haven’t seen chart-breaking changes in performance from security updates in the past couple of generations. </p><p>Intel still has more known vulnerabilities, but in the years following Spectre, it’s become clear that both AMD and Intel are vulnerable to this family of attacks. At the time of writing, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/software/intel-software-fixes-stamp-down-privilege-escalation-vulnerabilities-while-microcode-updates-clean-up-cpu-messes-chipmaker-has-its-own-patch-tuesday-as-it-stomps-down-30-bugs"><u>Intel recently patched</u></a> over 30 security bugs, and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/amd-confirms-security-vulnerability-on-zen-5-based-cpus-that-generates-potentially-predictable-keys-rdseed-fix-coming-through-an-agesa-firmware-update-for-desktop-chips"><u>AMD confirmed a critical security vulnerability</u></a> in its random number generator on Zen 5 CPUs, which it plans to address with an AGESA update. </p><p><strong>Winner: Tie.</strong> Similar to firmware, it’s hard to say anyone is a winner here. Intel claims it surfaces and addresses vulnerabilities more proactively than AMD does, but both brands chase the constantly evolving world of threats and offer driver and/or firmware updates in response. In addition, both maintain a bug bounty program to incentivize security researchers to find and surface exploits. </p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-faq-frequently-asked-questions"><span>FAQ: Frequently Asked Questions</span></h3><section class="article__schema-question"><h3>◼ Is AMD or Intel better for gaming?</h3><article class="article__schema-answer"><p>As we outlined in our AMD vs Intel gaming section above, AMD's Ryzen 9000 X3D processors, namely the Ryzen 7 9800X3D, Ryzen 9 9900X3D, and the Ryzen 9 9950X3D, are currently the fastest gaming chips on the market.</p></article></section><section class="article__schema-question"><h3>◼ What is the latest Intel processor?</h3><article class="article__schema-answer"><p>The latest Intel processors for desktop PCs are named the Core Ultra 200 series. The newer Arrow Lake Refresh chips are noted as the Core Ultra 200S Plus series. </p></article></section><section class="article__schema-question"><h3>◼ What is the latest AMD processor?</h3><article class="article__schema-answer"><p>The latest AMD processors for desktop PCs are named the Ryzen 9000 series.</p></article></section><ul><li><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpus,3986.html"><strong>Best CPUs for Gaming</strong></a></li><li><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/cpu-hierarchy,4312.html"><strong>CPU Benchmark</strong></a><strong> Hierarchy</strong></li><li><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-zen-4-ryzen-7000-release-date-specifications-pricing-benchmarks-all-we-know-specs"><strong>Zen 4 Ryzen 7000</strong></a><strong> All We Know</strong></li><li><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/how-to/how-to-overclock-a-cpu"><strong>How to Overclock a CPU</strong></a></li><li><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/how-to/how-to-check-cpu-temp-temperature"><strong>How to check CPU Temperature</strong></a></li><li><strong>MORE: </strong><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/topics/cpus"><strong>All CPUs Content</strong></a></li></ul><iframe src="https://content.jwplatform.com/players/zYBgfFoA.html" id="zYBgfFoA" title="Buy the Right CPU" width="1920" height="1080" frameborder="0" scrolling="auto" allowfullscreen></iframe>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Beefy Meteor Lake CPU powers new mini-PC — OneXPlayer M1 features Intel Core Ultra 9 185H, up to 32GB RAM, and OCuLink ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/desktops/mini-pcs/beefy-meteor-lake-cpu-powers-new-mini-pc</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Handheld console, eGPU, and laptop maker One-Netbook is venturing into the mini-PC space with the OneXPlayer M1. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">Vp4DwPepNRAuASNtmaXoMG</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Ss2eVZGtTT6wVC5yg84z3Y-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Mon, 22 Jul 2024 15:28:57 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 12:52:18 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[Mini PCs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[Desktops]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ editors@tomshardware.com (Jowi Morales) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Jowi Morales ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gM7E2WSDg2wgCFoaDPz9yK.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Jowi Morales is a writer and journalist covering the tech beat since 2021. However, he’s been interested in technology far earlier than that. He started discovering desktop computers when his father brought home a Windows 95 PC, but his first real experience working under the hood of the PC was when the old computer’s hard drive was filled to the brim in the year 2000. He deleted the Windows folder to attempt to rectify the situation, which led to his dad buying a new desktop PC. Since then, he learned a lot more about computers, and he’s always been the go-to tech expert for his family and friends.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Jowi primarily uses a Windows workstation and an Android phone, but he also bought into the Apple ecosystem with the 6th-gen iPad, iPhone 14 Pro Max, and the M1 MacBook Air. Today, Jowi covers hardware and software from Redmond and Cupertino, while also looking at the tech industry in general.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Aside from covering technology, Jowi is an avid photographer and writes about automobiles, aviation, and tanks. You can find his bylines at &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.makeuseof.com/author/jowi-morales/&quot;&gt;MakeUseOf&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.slashgear.com/author/jowimorales/&quot;&gt;SlashGear&lt;/a&gt;, and, of course, &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.tomshardware.com/author/jowi-morales&quot;&gt;Tom’s Hardware&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Ss2eVZGtTT6wVC5yg84z3Y-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[One-Netbook]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[OneXPlayer M1 mini-PC]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[OneXPlayer M1 mini-PC]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[OneXPlayer M1 mini-PC]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Ss2eVZGtTT6wVC5yg84z3Y-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>One-Netbook, the team behind the OneXPlayer handheld console and the OneXGPU GPU enclosure, just introduced its first mini-PC on Indiegogo—the OneXPlayer M1. This tiny device (via <a href="https://liliputing.com/onexplayer-m1-is-a-mini-pc-with-intel-core-ultra-9-185h-oculink-and-usb4/" target="_blank">Liliputing</a>) has the Intel Core Ultra 9 185H and up to 32 GB of RAM. It also has an RJ45 port, Wi-Fi 6E, and Bluetooth 5.2, meaning you have three different connectivity options.</p><p>This tiny device has a 200 mm x 120 mm footprint, making it highly portable—it’s so small that you can fit it inside a relatively loose pocket. It also weighs 600 grams, so you don’t have to worry about hurting your back if you want to move your mini-PC.</p><p>However, this small size means that the mini-PC has only limited slots. It can only accommodate a single M.2 2280 SSD and one SODIMM slot so you can say goodbye to the advantages of dual-channel memory.</p><p>Nevertheless, the OneXPlayer M1 does not lack physical ports to connect your devices. It has two USB4 Type-C ports, one USB 3.2 and one USB 2.0 Type-A port, two HDMI ports, one DisplayPort, an RJ45 ethernet jack, a 3.5 mm audio outlet, and a microSD card reader. More importantly, it also comes with an OCuLink port to give you the option to provide it with the graphical oomph of the OneXGPU eGPU.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YyBwte9UReLADL27w7CXqk.jpg" alt="OneXPlayer M1 product images" /><figcaption><small role="credit">One-Netbook</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/3Y6428Fw3JvDKev2fRopAo.jpg" alt="OneXPlayer M1 product images" /><figcaption><small role="credit">One-Netbook</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wGw6Vtf8HixDWsU9wtjvC4.jpg" alt="OneXPlayer M1 product images" /><figcaption><small role="credit">One-Netbook</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/2ANtdyH9DQxE6fDejs9BL7.jpg" alt="OneXPlayer M1 product images" /><figcaption><small role="credit">One-Netbook</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/85a857gamJntRkLeSmYDFB.jpg" alt="OneXPlayer M1 product images" /><figcaption><small role="credit">One-Netbook</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>Aside from the Power button, One-Netbook also gave its mini-PC an RGB button to adjust the RGB lights on the case. But what’s interesting is that the Turbo button from PCs in the 1980s and 1990s is returning on the OneXPlayer M1. The Turbo button will push the 185H’s power draw from the base 45 to 60 watts — just five watts short of its maximum configurable TDP. A 100-watt USB-C power supply also powers the mini-PC, so you’ll have ample power, even pushing the processor to its limit.</p><p>The OneXPlayer M1 has almost the same shape and size as the OneXGPU, with the external GPU weighing about 250 grams heavier. The latter also features several ports, including two HDMI ports, two DisplayPort outlets, two USB 3.2 Type-A ports, a USB4 Type-C port with 100 watts reverse power delivery, and a gigabit RJ45 port. This makes both devices perfect for each other, allowing you to get a fully featured computer you could put in two pockets.</p><p>Pre-orders for a 32 GB RAM / 1 TB SSD OneXPlayer M1 are already in Japan at JPY142,310 (or around $900). But if you bundle it with the OneXGPU, you get a 10% discount on the eGPU. So, if you’re looking for a small PC you can quickly move around but don’t sacrifice performance and graphical power, you should watch out for the OneXPlayer M1 mini-PC.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Intel Core Ultra 7 258V mobile processor matches top Ryzen 'Phoenix' chips in BAPCO performance charts ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/intel-core-ultra-7-258v-mobile-processor-matches-top-ryzen-7-phoenix-in-bapco-performance-charts</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ The Intel Core Ultra 7 258V performs better than the previous-generation Intel Core Ultra 5 125H, despite having a lower TDP. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">bd8oorJec4CfXDq8AtFHyL</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7oDUnn676Uj6LsGsWnQ7hT-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Thu, 27 Jun 2024 13:13:58 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 08:54:34 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[Laptops]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ editors@tomshardware.com (Jowi Morales) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Jowi Morales ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gM7E2WSDg2wgCFoaDPz9yK.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Jowi Morales is a writer and journalist covering the tech beat since 2021. However, he’s been interested in technology far earlier than that. He started discovering desktop computers when his father brought home a Windows 95 PC, but his first real experience working under the hood of the PC was when the old computer’s hard drive was filled to the brim in the year 2000. He deleted the Windows folder to attempt to rectify the situation, which led to his dad buying a new desktop PC. Since then, he learned a lot more about computers, and he’s always been the go-to tech expert for his family and friends.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Jowi primarily uses a Windows workstation and an Android phone, but he also bought into the Apple ecosystem with the 6th-gen iPad, iPhone 14 Pro Max, and the M1 MacBook Air. Today, Jowi covers hardware and software from Redmond and Cupertino, while also looking at the tech industry in general.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Aside from covering technology, Jowi is an avid photographer and writes about automobiles, aviation, and tanks. You can find his bylines at &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.makeuseof.com/author/jowi-morales/&quot;&gt;MakeUseOf&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.slashgear.com/author/jowimorales/&quot;&gt;SlashGear&lt;/a&gt;, and, of course, &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.tomshardware.com/author/jowi-morales&quot;&gt;Tom’s Hardware&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7oDUnn676Uj6LsGsWnQ7hT-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Intel]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Lunar Lake CPU]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Lunar Lake CPU]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Lunar Lake CPU]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/7oDUnn676Uj6LsGsWnQ7hT-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Benchmarks for Intel’s next-generation Lunar Lake chips surfaced on <a href="https://results.bapco.com/charts/facet/CrossMark/cpu/all/notebook">BAPCo’s laptop CPU charts</a>, with the results for the &apos;Core Ultra 7 258V 2.20 GHz&apos; besting the Meteor Lake Core Ultra 5 125H and getting similar performance to AMD’s Ryzen 9 and Ryzen 7 7040 &apos;Phonenix&apos; chips. The Intel Core Ultra 200V processors are <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intels-lunar-lake-and-arrow-lake-to-launch-this-fall-rumored-launch-dates-revealed">expected to arrive in September</a> this year, so many laptop makers are testing and finalizing their products. This process includes benchmark testing, and we’ve also seen some <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/leaked-lunar-lakes-ultra-7-chip-debuts-in-geekbench-database">results for the same chip appear on the more popular Geekbench benchmark</a>.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1600px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="notkUfwEHJepszv5i3FkjS" name="Intel Core Ultra 7 258V BAPCo CrossMark benchmarks.jpg" alt="BAPCo CrossMark laptop benchmarks" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/notkUfwEHJepszv5i3FkjS.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="1600" height="900" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/notkUfwEHJepszv5i3FkjS.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: BAPCo)</span></figcaption></figure><p>The BAPCo test was run using its CrossMark benchmark, a multi-platform testing app that looks at overall system performance based on real-world usage patterns similar to how actual users drive their PCs on a day-to-day basis. <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-ultra-200v-specs-leak-points-to-nine-lunar-lake-skus-and-a-single-ultra-9-variant">Leaked specs</a> show a P-Core Boost Clock of 4.8 GHz and Base Clock of 2.2 GHz, while its E-Core Boost Clock speed is 3.7 GHz.</p><p>However, we should note that the 258V is rated for a base TDP of 17W and a max turbo power of 30W. This is comparable to the ultra-low power <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/tag/meteor-lake">Meteor Lake chips</a>, like the Core Ultra 7 164U and Core Ultra 5 134U. So, it makes sense for the chip to be outperformed by its older but higher-powered cousins like the Intel Core Ultra 7 155H and up. Nevertheless, it outperforms the Core Ultra 5 125H, despite the latter being rated for 28 to 115W TDP.</p><figure class="van-image-figure  inline-layout" data-bordeaux-image-check ><div class='image-full-width-wrapper'><div class='image-widthsetter' style="max-width:1600px;"><p class="vanilla-image-block" style="padding-top:56.25%;"><img id="yfJJBFvmtRUhCF4enyS83f" name="Intel Core Ultra 7 258V BAPCo CrossMark benchmark result.jpg" alt="Intel Core Ultra 7 258V detailed CrossMark Benchmark results" src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yfJJBFvmtRUhCF4enyS83f.jpg" mos="" align="middle" fullscreen="1" width="1600" height="900" attribution="" endorsement="" class="expandable"><a href='https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/yfJJBFvmtRUhCF4enyS83f.jpg' target='_blank' class='expand-button icon-expand-image icon' ></a></p></div></div><figcaption itemprop="caption description" class=" inline-layout"><span class="credit" itemprop="copyrightHolder">(Image credit: Intel)</span></figcaption></figure><p>We should also reiterate the known fact that Lunar Lake chips will ditch Hyper-Threading technology to make its chips more power-efficient for thin-and-light laptops. Rumors indicate that the Core Ultra 7 258V will only have four P-Cores and four E-Cores, for a total of eight cores and eight threads. That means it will have fewer cores and threads than the Core Ultra 5 125H, which has four P-Cores (eight threads) and eight E-Cores.</p><p>Remember, these are benchmark results of laptops that are still under engineering development. While these numbers are indicative of how the chip could perform, note that actual performance is subject to change, depending on how well the manufacturer optimizes hardware/software for the final product. Furthermore, different laptop models will likely have some minor differences. </p><p>If you’re raring to get Intel’s latest and take advantage of <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-unwraps-lunar-lake-architecture-up-to-68-ipc-gain-for-e-cores-16-ipc-gain-for-p-cores">Lunar Lake’s IPC gains</a>, you should at least wait for laptop reviews to come out, like our <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/live/copilot-pc-launch-2024">Copilot+ PC launch testing live blog</a>. That way, you know what you’re diving into and can avoid nasty surprises when you boot up your new computer.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Intel Core Ultra 200V specs leak points to nine Lunar Lake SKUs and a single Ultra 9 variant ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-ultra-200v-specs-leak-points-to-nine-lunar-lake-skus-and-a-single-ultra-9-variant</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Intel's latest-generation mobile CPUs are expected to launch in September, with leaked specifications suggesting just how powerful and capable they might be. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">AfxU5qkJGUbpX9VvMEbf5Q</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zV3ABgipcXE6GkJvoxUqUJ-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Tue, 25 Jun 2024 13:39:27 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 08:44:56 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[CPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Jeff Butts ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mu8yfvXw9Ut4an84MVDhs9.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Jeff Butts began tinkering with computers in the early 1980s and worked as an IT and networking consultant for 15 years before engaging in any “formal” training. Throughout his career, he worked with and supported nearly every commonly used operating system, including Windows, OS/2, Linux, and macOS. He eventually earned a Master of Information and Computing Systems and taught university English and computer science for several years before pivoting to professional writing. He’s written and edited for such outlets as The Mac Observer, How-To Geek, Hot Hardware, groovyPost, and geekRumor. When not writing, he bounces between 3D printing projects, fiddling with Raspberry Pi and the like, and Microsoft Flight Simulator.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zV3ABgipcXE6GkJvoxUqUJ-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Intel]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Intel CPU with Core branding]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Intel CPU with Core branding]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Intel CPU with Core branding]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zV3ABgipcXE6GkJvoxUqUJ-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Intel’s <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-unwraps-lunar-lake-architecture-up-to-68-ipc-gain-for-e-cores-16-ipc-gain-for-p-cores/5">announcements at Computex 2024</a> focused heavily on the Core Ultra 200V series, codenamed Lunar Lake. A <a href="https://videocardz.com/newz/intel-core-ultra-200v-lunar-lake-lineup-allegedly-leaks-out-features-one-core-ultra-9-sku">recent leak suggests</a> that Intel will release Lunar Lake in nine variants, including Core Ultra 7 and Core Ultra 5 SKUs. There will also be a single Core Ultra 9 variant, according to the leak source. </p><p>The new mobile processor is expected to ship sometime in September 2024, but details of the exact specifications have been hard to nail down. We know Intel aims to get into the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-confirms-microsoft-copilot-will-soon-run-locally-on-pcs-next-gen-ai-pcs-require-40-tops-of-npu-performance">Microsoft Copilot+ lineup</a>, so it is integrating its fourth-gen <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/intel-core-ultra-meteor-lake-u-h-series-specs-skus">Neural Processing Unit (NPU)</a>. The latest NPU will provide 48 TOPS of performance. Microsoft requires an NPU offering at least 40 TOPS of performance for a device to earn the Copilot+ badge.</p><p>According to the leaked information, every Lunar Lake variant will feature four Lion Cove performance cores, and four Skymont efficiency cores. Lunar Lake will focus on low-power mobile devices, while Arrow Lake is geared toward mainstream mobile and desktop computers. <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intels-lunar-lake-and-arrow-lake-to-launch-this-fall-rumored-launch-dates-revealed">Arrow Lake processors are expected to ship</a> in October 2024.</p><p>For integrated graphics, Intel has the next generation of its Arc graphics, the Battlemage GPU, which uses the Xe2-LPG architecture. The known Lunar Lake variants are expected to feature seven or eight Xe2 GPU cores. The SKUs will include either 16GB or 32GB LPDDR5-8533 memory, which will not be user-upgradable.</p><div ><table><caption>Intel Lunar Lake Expected Variants</caption><thead><tr><th class="firstcol empty" ></th><th  >PL1: Processor Base Power</th><th  >PL2: Maximum Turbo Power</th><th  >Low-Latency Cache</th><th  >LPDDR5X-8533 Memory</th><th  >P-Core Boost Clock</th><th  >E-Core Boost Clock</th><th  >GPU</th><th  >GPU Clock</th><th  >NPU TOPS</th><th  >XMX (GPU) TOPS</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol " >Core Ultra 9 288V</td><td  >30W</td><td  >30W</td><td  >12MB</td><td  >32GB(2R)</td><td  >5.1 GHZ</td><td  >3.7 GHz</td><td  >Arc 140V</td><td  >2.05 GHZ</td><td  >48</td><td  >67</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Core Ultra 7 268V</td><td  >17W</td><td  >30W</td><td  >12MB</td><td  >32GB(2R)</td><td  >5.0 GHz</td><td  >3.7 GHz</td><td  >Arc 140V</td><td  >2.00 GHz</td><td  >48</td><td  >66</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Core Ultra 7 266V</td><td  >17W</td><td  >30W</td><td  >12MB</td><td  >16GB(1R)</td><td  >5.0 GHz</td><td  >3.7 GHz</td><td  >Arc 140V</td><td  >2.00 GHz</td><td  >48</td><td  >66</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Core Ultra 7 258V</td><td  >17W</td><td  >30W</td><td  >12MB</td><td  >32GB(2R)</td><td  >4.8 GHz</td><td  >3.7 GHz</td><td  >Arc 140V</td><td  >1.95 GHZ</td><td  >47</td><td  >64</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Core Ultra 7 256V</td><td  >17W</td><td  >30W</td><td  >12MB</td><td  >16GB(1R)</td><td  >4.8 GHz</td><td  >3.7 GHz</td><td  >Arc 140V</td><td  >1.95 GHz</td><td  >47</td><td  >64</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Core Ultra 5 238V</td><td  >17W</td><td  >30W</td><td  >8MB</td><td  >32GB(2R)</td><td  >4.7 GHz</td><td  >3.5 GHz</td><td  >Arc 130V</td><td  >1.85 GHz</td><td  >40</td><td  >53</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Core Ultra 5 236V</td><td  >17W</td><td  >30W</td><td  >8MB</td><td  >16GB(1R)</td><td  >4.7 GHz</td><td  >3.5 GHz</td><td  >Arc 130V</td><td  >1.85 GHz</td><td  >40</td><td  >53</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Core Ultra 5 228V</td><td  >17W</td><td  >30W</td><td  >8MB</td><td  >32GB(2R)</td><td  >4.5 GHz</td><td  >3.5 GHz</td><td  >Arc 130V</td><td  >1.85 GHz</td><td  >40</td><td  >53</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Core Ultra 5 226V</td><td  >17W</td><td  >30W</td><td  >8MB</td><td  >16GB(1R)</td><td  >4.5 GHz</td><td  >3.5 GHz</td><td  >Arc 130V</td><td  >1.85 GHz</td><td  >40</td><td  >53</td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>At the bottom of the performance table, the Core Ultra 5 226V will feature 17W PL1 (processor base power) and 30W PL2 (maximum turbo power). This SKU will feature performance cores running at 4.5 GHz and 3.5 GHz for the efficiency cores. Its Arc 130V graphics will have a GPU clock of 1.85 GHz, and the NPU will run at 40 TOPS. </p><p>Jumping to the beefiest Lunar Lake SKU, the Core Ultra 9 288V is expected to have a 30W PL1 and 30W PL2 power delivery system. This will be the only Lunar Lake SKU to include 30W processor base power. Its performance cores will boost to 5.1 GHz, while the efficiency cores top out at 3.7 GHz. The integrated Arc 140V will run at 2.05 GHz while the NPU cranks out 48 TOPS of AI processing power.</p><p>Remember, this is a leaked set of details, so please add a pinch of salt to the data and your expectations.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff: AMD Delivers a Value Beatdown ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-i5-14400-vs-amd-ryzen-5-7600x-faceoff</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ We put Intel's Raptor Lake Refresh Core i5-14400 up against AMD's Ryzen 5 7600X in a six-round fight. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">M572yjb7zmQUswSPTpHZzM</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MicpKwkwF55PtNgxvTtPCa-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Thu, 13 Jun 2024 14:28:38 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 10:04:16 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[CPUs]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[PC Components]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ editors@tomshardware.com (Hassam Nasir) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Hassam Nasir ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SxxNFHt95eGK37mKPhJpdZ.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Hassam is a lifelong PC gamer and tech enthusiast with over five years of experience in PC hardware journalism. His passion began in childhood when he rescued a discarded Pentium 4 processor, straightening its pins with a kitchen knife to revive a Dell Dimension 2400 at the age of seven. Since then, he has followed the advancements in technology, witnessing the evolution of hardware from the era of AMD&#039;s Opteron architecture to Intel&#039;s Smithfield (Pentium D), and the rise of Voodoo GPUs alongside Nvidia&#039;s FX GPUs taking the market by storm to the latest innovations today. As a seasoned writer, Hassam loves to get into the nitty-gritty details of hardware, providing insights on everything from CPUs, Motherboards and RAM to GPUs. When he’s not writing, you’ll find him building custom water-cooled PCs for himself and his friends, attending drag racing events, or collecting niche fragrances.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                        <dc:contributor><![CDATA[ Paul Alcorn ]]></dc:contributor>
                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MicpKwkwF55PtNgxvTtPCa-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Intel, AMD]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[AMD vs Intel CPU Faceoff]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[AMD vs Intel CPU Faceoff]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[AMD vs Intel CPU Faceoff]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/MicpKwkwF55PtNgxvTtPCa-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>At first glance, the Intel <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-i5-14400-cpu-review"><u>Core i5-14400</u></a> versus the AMD <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-9-7950x-ryzen-5-7600x-cpu-review"><u>Ryzen 5 7600X</u></a> seems to be a bit of a mismatch. Going by MSRP pricing, the Ryzen 5 7600X is nearly $100 more expensive than the Intel CPU, which is a substantial difference in this price band. However, recent price cuts to the AMD Ryzen 5 7600X have brought it closer to the Intel Core i5-14400&apos;s price point, making this a heated duel for mid-range CPUs.</p><p>At $225, The Core i5-14400 is one of the more affordable offerings in <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-launches-18-new-14th-gen-raptor-lake-refresh-processors-new-locked-65w-and-t-series-35w-chips-are-available-now"><u>Intel’s Raptor Lake Refresh</u></a> lineup of 14th-generation desktop CPUs. It slots in just beneath the Core i5-14600K, which seems to be the logical competitor to the AMD Ryzen 5 7600X based on MSRP pricing. However, don’t underestimate the Core i5-14400, as our in-depth review shows that it is still a compelling CPU for gamers on a modest budget.</p><p>Its competitor, the AMD Ryzen 5 7600X, is AMD’s entry-level CPU for the Ryzen 7000 series based on the new <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-zen-4-ryzen-7000-release-date-specifications-pricing-benchmarks-all-we-know-specs"><u>Zen 4 architecture</u></a>. Initially priced at $299, AMD had set a very steep bar for entry into its new AM5 lineup as it seems to have abolished the entry-level Zen 4 Ryzen 3 SKUs, at least for now. Nonetheless, the Ryzen 5 7600X has seen recent price cuts and is now priced at a very reasonable $210, spelling danger for the Core i5-14400.</p><p>The comparison between these two CPUs is not restricted only to their head-to-head performance, even though that is a big part of our face-off. AMD has taken the leap to a completely new AM5 platform, which requires <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/ram/dram/ddr5"><u>DDR5</u></a> memory, so the ecosystem around the Ryzen 5 7600X remains more expensive even though the discounted chip helps offset the pricing challenges.</p><p>On the other hand, the Intel Core i5-14400 is a refinement of the existing Raptor Lake i5-13400, which, in turn, was an incremental upgrade over the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-alder-lake-specifications-price-benchmarks-release-date"><u>Alder Lake</u></a> <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-core-i5-12400-review"><u>Core i5-12400</u></a>. This means that Intel has an established motherboard ecosystem and support for both <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/ram/dram/ddr4"><u>DDR4</u></a> and DDR5 memory, which may tip the scales back in favor of the Core i5-14400 in terms of value.</p><p>Let’s put these two CPUs through our six-round gauntlet covering gaming, productivity performance, pricing, and more to see how they stack up.</p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-features-and-specifications-intel-core-i5-14400-vs-amd-ryzen-5-7600x"><span>Features and Specifications: Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X</span></h3><p>The Intel Core i5-14400 has ten cores and 16 threads, six of which are performance-oriented P-Cores, while the other four E-Cores are meant for background and heavily threaded tasks. The P-Cores can boost up to 4.7 GHz, while the E-Core boost clock is 3.5 GHz. The Core i5-14400 features 20MB of L2 cache and 9.5MB of L3 cache, a respectable distribution. The chip comes with 65W PBP (base power) and 148W MTP (peak) power ratings.</p><p>Intel uses its “Intel 7” process node for all the Raptor Lake Refresh chips, including the Core i5-14400. This CPU is a refresh of the Core i5-13400 from the previous generation of Raptor Lake CPUs. The Core i5-14400 has a surprisingly respectable feature set, as it supports up to 192GB of memory with maximum speeds of DDR5-4800 and DDR4-3200. The chip also supports PCIe 5.0 and has decent connectivity options such as USB 3.2 support with up to 20 Gbps transfer rates.</p><p>The Core i5-14400 also comes with a bundled Laminar RM1 cooler, which is serviceable for day-to-day operation provided you have good case airflow and are not too worried about its noise levels. A cheap air tower cooler will help address any thermal or noise issues. The standard Core i5-14400 chip also offers the 24-EU integrated UHD Graphics 730 Engine, but you can also opt for the Core i5-14400F for a $15 saving if you don’t really need integrated graphics.</p><p>Of course, not being a K-series SKU, the Core i5-14400 does not allow CPU overclocking. However, Intel does allow memory overclocking on supported chipsets such as Z790, B760, and H770 motherboards. With this class of chip, however, the B-series and H-series motherboards from the 600 and 700 series make more sense.</p><p>In the Red corner, the AMD Ryzen 5 7600X is a mid-range offering from AMD based on the Zen 4 architecture. Built on the N5 TSMC 5nm process, the Ryzen 5 7600X features six performance cores and 12 threads in a more traditional layout, with no efficiency cores to speak of. Perhaps that is for the better since all six of Ryzen’s cores can be considered P-Cores, reflected in their boost clock of 5.3 GHz with a base clock of 4.7 GHz.</p><p>AMD has equipped the Ryzen 5 7600X with 6MB of L2 Cache, double that of its predecessor, and 32MB of L3 Cache. The TDP rating is 125W, while the peak power draw is 181W, which is quite high for a Ryzen 5 part. Moreover, AMD doesn’t include a stock cooler with the Ryzen 5 7600X and instead recommends a mid-frame tower cooler for this CPU.</p><p>The Ryzen 5 7600X does include a Radeon RDNA 2 iGPU for display output, a nice bonus over the previous generation. Of course, the AMD AM5 platform exclusively supports DDR5 memory, with the Ryzen 5 7600X being officially rated for DDR5-5200 speeds. Note that DDR5-5200 is only possible with 1 DIMM per channel, and the support drops to DDR5-3600 for 2 DIMMs per channel. AMD also supports ECC memory with the Ryzen 7000 series CPUs.</p><p>Moreover, PCIe 5.0 is a highlighting feature of the new AM5 platform, and up to 24 lanes of PCIe 5.0 can be made available to the user with AM5 motherboards. The Ryzen 5 7600X is also overclockable with both B650/E and X670/E motherboards, although the B-series chipset makes a lot of sense for this CPU from a value perspective.</p><p><strong>✅ </strong><em><strong>Winner: AMD</strong></em></p><p>Although the Intel option has a slight advantage in chip pricing and supports more affordable DDR4 memory and motherboards, it falls behind the AMD Ryzen 5 7600X when you compare the numbers side by side. The Ryzen 5 7600X is overclockable, and although CPU overclocking is not what it used to be, it is still a major advantage over its Intel counterpart.</p><p>Moreover, the Ryzen boasts higher boost clocks and more cache, while Intel has more cores. AMD strikes back again with faster DDR5 speeds, but Intel also makes a strong case with its bundled stock cooler. However, the AMD AM5 platform will support more generations of CPUs in the future, which isn’t the case for the Intel platform.</p><p>While it is certainly close, the AMD Ryzen 5 7600t edges out the Core i5-14400 in terms of specifications and features.</p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-gaming-benchmarks-and-performance-intel-core-i5-14400-vs-amd-ryzen-5-7600x"><span>Gaming Benchmarks and Performance: Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X</span></h3><p>This article provides an overview of the performance metrics in our in-depth <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-core-i5-14400-cpu-review">Core i5-14400</a> review. Below are the geometric mean of our gaming tests with the Core i5-14400 and the AMD Ryzen 5 7600X at 1080p and 1440p, along with more detailed breakouts. </p><p>The 1080p resolution results emphasize CPU performance more, and the differences tend to shrink with higher resolutions. We tested with an NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 graphics card to minimize the bottlenecks as much as possible. Since the Core i5-14400 supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory, we tested it with both configurations to highlight the best- and worst-case scenarios.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/h2Gr8YMSGva6uiTe3TsJnk.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/W7k4ez75y7Qr4vzLhPiEtk.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GG7DoCsAvcgQYVTXUotmyk.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HRJ3LBi4h2mArhWR5bQ49m.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RsQfwUFAwcRRd36HQ6KPFm.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/K6KiLSJ8oWkJZw8QaSGEMm.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ax5vsVMTch6R2JYMTHeKTm.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mzKd5Pnyo93enRFR3CLNZm.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HTwTyq7Kteq66afUFAJwfm.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dAEsLsHeQYgutuZgWoezmm.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/M6W5jtbHE5nFZMWsH4PUsm.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tEAMUqqWtZFxTLoGCptdym.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xedjvSu6zM3H37aNwGYp8n.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/etjyP7u3HDYK7pR7CFmUFn.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/LDB7z8gE45ZVpw4RbH2GPn.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/SSn4VNoG2TYjFwe93ZSqUn.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/AyXxSYGvAZMJQnxeNvRZbn.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/GM6DGcM7h2WWxz2o3AxJin.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>At 1080p, the AMD Ryzen 5 7600X and the Core i5-14400 offer virtually the same result in our average fps graph when the Core i5 is equipped with pricey DDR5-6800 memory. However, the performance delta increases noticeably when we switch to DDR4-3600 memory, with the Core i5-14400 being around 8.4% slower than the Ryzen 5 7600X. </p><p>The Core i5-14400 drops even more if you use standard DDR5 and DDR4 memory instead of the most optimized configuration. Once you turn on Precision Boost Overdrive (PBO) and pair the Ryzen 5 7600X with some fast <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/ram/gskill-trident-z5-rgb-ddr5-6400-c32-2x32gb-review"><u>DDR5-6400 memory</u></a>, the performance delta increases even more, with the Ryzen 5 7600X gaining a substantial 7.8% lead over the fastest Core i5-14400 configuration. Safe to say that the Ryzen 5 7600X has a strong lead over the Core i5-14400 in 1080p gaming.</p><p>The hierarchy remains pretty much the same in our 99th percentile results at 1080p, with the Ryzen 5 7600X providing by far the most consistent framerates in our test suite. The Core i5-14400 with DDR5 memory does fall slightly behind the same CPU with DDR4 memory in this test, but that is within the margin of error. Here, you can also see the dominance of the AMD Ryzen 7 5700X3D in gaming applications, thanks to its unique 3D V-Cache design.</p><p>Moving on to 1440p results, we start to see the games get a bit more GPU-bound as the various CPUs start to group together in our results. Nevertheless, we still have a clear winner in the AMD Ryzen 5 7600X, as it holds a 6.5% lead over the Core i5-14400, even when the latter is paired with fast DDR5-6800 memory. The performance gap only grows when PBO is enabled, as the Ryzen can stretch the lead to a significant 11.3% over the fastest Core i5-14400 configuration.</p><p>If we just take the two CPUs in their stock state and pair them with standard DDR5 memory, the AMD Ryzen 5 7600X holds a 15.9% lead at 1440p and a 14.6% lead at 1080p. The performance delta remains pretty much the same when optimal DDR5 speeds are paired with both CPUs. </p><p>One interesting thing to note about the Core i5-14400 is its performance in relation to its predecessor, the Core i5-13400. As we can see in our test results, the two CPUs are almost neck and neck in our Average FPS tests at 1080p and 1440p and our 99th percentile tests. This really highlights the lack of tangible performance improvement in the Raptor Lake Refresh CPU over its predecessor, which is a big letdown.</p><p><strong>✅ </strong><em><strong>Winner: AMD</strong></em></p><p>The Core i5-14400 really does not stand a chance against the Ryzen 5 7600X in this round. The AMD CPU dominates the Intel chip in all gaming benchmarks at 1080p and 1440p resolutions, even when the latter is paired with fast DDR5 memory. This is bad news for the Intel CPU, as recent Ryzen 5 7600X price cuts have actually made it cheaper than the Core i5-14400, significantly improving its performance per dollar.</p><p>It is also interesting to note that the Core i5-14400 does not offer a significant performance uplift over its predecessor, the Core i5-13400. Moreover, we also got some interesting results with the Ryzen 5 7600X, which beat the more expensive AMD Ryzen 7 5700X3D in some games when PBO was turned on. This showcases the immense gaming prowess of the Ryzen 5 7600X at its reasonable price point.</p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-productivity-performance-intel-core-i5-14400-vs-amd-ryzen-5-7600x"><span>Productivity Performance: Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X</span></h3><p>Productivity performance can be broadly divided into two categories: single-threaded and multi-threaded performance. Productivity applications generally lean towards a multi-threaded division of workloads, but that is not always the case. In our graphs, you can see the geometric mean of performance in our productivity test suite which includes several of the most important productivity applications currently available.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PWcTL9QPqcgwiPUdTGT3m9.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/6eKEwPddTZeDVSQk9L2bq9.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/PYDRVu2kWsTCnwoHomcQv9.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/q6AZreYNcaPnWaWPHvdR2A.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/dHdzcTkWfo9EQ6ra463C7A.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/RSi26paAvW6uQ66SY8dyBA.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/8ggNAt2WnGaVwhzYzyggGA.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/h95LcM66GGnqX4FiMmiMMA.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/AJCxPtUztJAp28a2cGCMSA.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/xWBEBjiwwAiQSkKZ2fAPXA.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fWha5j9ixqbUD5Y8gZ4AcA.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/y6YzUL6gcmyBtBmaKNqngA.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wn7NaDMdGFzPnbW4nv3nmA.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wWyMf6Y9745kSRiKFMFNrA.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/B4ixtixqKCGvjvTrTYNyvA.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Xjge529LuzLUZjJ7cpHP3B.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/tNfeBCbiefrmk7j3TM7s7B.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FnTppMYZrWNHLm4ngAzuCB.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/hHYbyvQkoDo7wVKZXZVuHB.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/YXdxWDeJZTg9o9geu3mMPB.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>On paper, the Core i5-14400 <em>should </em>have the upper hand over the Ryzen 5 7600X due to its superior core count, but as we have already established, not all cores are created equal. Intel’s distribution of cores into P-Cores and E-Cores means that the number of cores does not translate linearly into performance. Performance cores are more heavily targeted during a multi-core workload, such as our productivity applications.</p><p>As you can see from our Geomean multi-threaded performance graph, the AMD Ryzen 5 7600X just about beats out the Core i5-14400 when the latter uses DDR5-6800 memory. The regular performance gap between the two CPUs using standard DDR5 memory is around 2.6%, which is outside the margin of error. Using DDR4 memory does not seem to change the results much when it comes to the Core i5-14400, as it retains roughly the same performance as the standard DDR5 configuration.</p><p>However, the AMD Ryzen 5 7600X extends its lead even more when PBO is enabled and the chip is paired with optimized DDR5-6400 memory. On average, in our productivity tests in Windows 11, the Ryzen 5 7600X with PBO enabled gained a 2.5% lead over the standard Ryzen 5 7600X and a 5.9% lead over the Core i5-14400 with the standard DDR5 configuration.</p><p>Of course, productivity performance can vary wildly depending on your particular workload. The Intel chip does lead in the Cinebench 2024 Multi-Core test simply because it has more cores to work with. The Ryzen CPU, on the other hand, leads significantly in the Y-Cruncher AVX-512 workload. It is important to research the optimization of your particular workload and see which CPU it favors more before making the purchase decision.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/UeMFir437YZ9jSQkEwek8K.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eLRKXkffQawkokx9N9VvDK.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/v5MafQPWJKszwjiRhTU8KK.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/toXc6TrRDo9p2fBw2revPK.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ePsVKyBZRryVkMiW4ADVUK.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/HD7SCAER9sL7AdsZn9kMZK.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Q2Dh228yNdmRPgYnkHkAeK.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/NiAe9cEuBAscRjDhqqWyiK.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/eiBSVHz43cDHvpzavy7noK.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/s78xGa9kvLW4eCvjfVDJtK.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>On the single-threaded side of things, the AMD Ryzen 5 7600X still holds a comfortable 6.4% lead over the Core i5-14400 in our Geomean rankings when the latter is paired with standard DDR5 memory. There is no noticeable difference between DDR4 and DDR5 memory in single-threaded performance with the Core i5-14400, nor is there any noticeable spread with optimized memory.</p><p>Turning on PBO and pairing the Ryzen 5 7600X with DDR5-6400 memory improves single-threaded performance just a bit more. This configuration is 2.53% faster than the standard Ryzen 5 7600X and 8.6% faster than the Core i5-14400 when paired with DDR5-6800 memory. </p><p><strong>✅ </strong><em><strong>Winner: AMD</strong></em></p><p>Although neither of these CPUs can be considered productivity monsters, they still offer decent performance in various single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads. Depending on your productivity application of choice, you may want to tailor your purchase decision based on the optimization of that particular workload for a particular CPU.</p><p>Nevertheless, the AMD Ryzen 5 7600X comes out as the leader in most of our productivity tests. While it has fewer cores than the Intel Core i5-14400, all six can be labeled as P-Cores, but that isn&apos;t the case with the Intel chip. The Ryzen CPU leads Intel in both our single-threaded and multi-threaded Geomean rankings, and barring a few odd results here and there, it does so in most productivity applications as well.</p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-overclocking-intel-core-i5-14400-vs-amd-ryzen-5-7600x"><span>Overclocking: Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X</span></h3><p>Intel does not allow CPU overclocking on its non-K SKUs, which prevents us from changing the multiplier on the Core i5-14400 to increase its clock speeds. Intel also restricts CPU overclocking on its B and H-series chipsets, although memory overclocking is still possible.</p><p>On the other hand, the AMD Ryzen 5 7600X follows AMD’s tradition and has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking. Although you can try your hand at a manual all-core overclock, we would generally not recommend it for AMD chips. Instead, it would be best to opt for the Precision Boost Overdrive 2 (PBO 2) auto-overclocking feature, boosting multi-threaded performance. You can also leverage the Curve Optimization features that undervolt the cores to free up additional thermal and power headroom, thus improving the boosting behavior.</p><p>Of course, overclocking results are heavily variable and depend on your particular chip&apos;s silicon quality. Other factors are involved as well, such as the quality of your cooling solution, the power delivery of your motherboard, and the general lifespan of the silicon itself. Overclocking gains have generally been on a downward slope over the past few CPU generations for both Intel and AMD as CPU manufacturers continue to push the boost clocks as far as they safely can.</p><p>AMD allows overclocking on almost all AM5 chipsets, except A-series motherboards such as A620. Rather than going for an all-core overclock, we enabled PBO2 on our Ryzen 5 7600X sample and paired it with fast DDR5-6400 memory. In our gaming tests at 1080p, the tuned Ryzen 5 7600X showed a 7% improvement in performance over the standard Ryzen 5 7600X. The performance gain falls to 4.5% at 1440p due to the games becoming increasingly GPU-bound.</p><p>Moving onto productivity workloads, the difference shrinks quite a bit, as we can see in our graphs. The PBO-enabled Ryzen 5 7600X shows a 2.53% performance gain in single-threaded workloads and a 2.56% performance improvement in multi-threaded workloads. It is safe to say that you should not overclock the Ryzen 5 7600X if your main focus is productivity.</p><p><strong>✅</strong><em><strong> Winner: AMD</strong></em></p><p>AMD takes this round by default since the Intel Core i5-14400 is a locked chip that cannot be overclocked using traditional methods. While memory overclocking is supported on mid-range chipsets and makes a noticeable difference in most workloads, it is still not as powerful as CPU overclocking. AMD’s PBO overclocking is also super simple and can yield significant performance gains, especially in gaming. </p><p>AMD also provides unlocked multipliers on pretty much all of its consumer desktop CPUs (other than the 3D V-Cache ones), and its choice of motherboard options is also more diverse. All in all, AMD is just the undisputed winner of the overclocking round.</p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-power-consumption-efficiency-and-cooling-intel-core-i5-14400-vs-amd-ryzen-5-7600x"><span>Power Consumption, Efficiency, and Cooling: Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X</span></h3><p>With the introduction of Intel’s 12th-Gen Alder Lake CPUs, Intel shifted to a new “Intel 7” manufacturing process that vastly improved power consumption and efficiency across the board. The process got more refined in subsequent <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-13th-gen-raptor-lake-release-date-specifications-pricing-benchmarks-all-we-know-specs"><u>Raptor Lake</u></a> and Raptor Lake Refresh generations, making Intel’s 14th-Gen CPUs quite respectable in terms of overall efficiency, even though they still consume a lot of power.</p><p>As a mid-range (some may even say entry-level) CPU in Intel’s lineup, the Core i5-14400 is on the lower end of the spectrum when it comes to power consumption. Moreover, Intel’s implementation of the hybrid core architecture in this CPU allows it to improve its efficiency by delegating background tasks to E-Cores, which consume only a fraction of the power compared to the regular P-Cores. </p><p>AMD’s new Ryzen 7000 series processors have taken their power consumption to a whole new level compared to previous generations. AMD has cranked the power numbers up almost all across the board to make the CPUs competitive with newer Intel competitors, and that comes at the expense of higher thermals and power draw. Although the TSMC 5nm production process is more efficient than Intel 7, the power consumption of AMD’s new processors is quite a bit more than their Ryzen 5000 series.</p><p>Still, AMD holds the advantage in performance-per-watt numbers over Intel’s Raptor Lake Refresh. Not only do the AMD CPUs consume less peak power, but they also accomplish more work per unit of power consumed, which makes them superior to the Intel competition in terms of efficiency. This is reflected in the base 105W TDP rating and 142W peak power consumption rating of the Ryzen 5 7600X as compared to the base 65W TDP rating and peak 148W MTP rating of the Core i5-14400. </p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Je5P4ZqujCxwHSFNbdWYqV.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/wcGkb3vFSeRk64zTSnMbwV.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QEGd8DwncDmEoz2vzS4v3W.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/CnqgthGpdTrgWVXigC6G9W.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/9EyDrbwakj8kgsXQvT7gEW.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Mf9BJExdrJd5y9ZHUeRPKW.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/ayveahWP36B7CA7TvcxYQW.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/jZnzr8zDbCo8y3qZYYSnVW.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/fDUiEgsWDcuxrn7khNYKbW.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/EbKYqAZfQDHukebJMhK6gW.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zSewvKAM4UcMCx4KBCTBmW.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/QtDPuWuQVEfAMTRpF9H8tW.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/L7SBgCU6kvAAm9i4b2XWzW.png" alt="Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X Faceoff" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Tom's Hardware</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>Going through our power consumption test results, the Core i5-14400 and the AMD Ryzen 5 7600X start pretty equal in our multi-threaded AVX workloads, but the Ryzen 5 7600X consumes around 40% more power in our single-threaded AVX workload. The Ryzen 5 7600X starts to sip more power in our HandBrake Power test, consuming 14% more power on average than the Core i5-14400.</p><p>Our Prime95 and Blender tests show a similar trend, with the Blender Monster benchmark standing out from the rest. The Ryzen 5 7600X consumes a whopping 69.3% more power in that particular benchmark than its Intel counterpart. Our final image takes a different approach as we look at the cumulative energy required to execute an x264 and x265 HandBrake workload. In this chart, the processors that fall closer to the lower left corner are the most efficient.</p><p>We can see that although the Core i5-14400 consumes more power than its predecessor, it is still a bit more efficient than the Ryzen 5 7600X. The AMD Ryzen chip is still faster in most productivity tasks and thus takes fewer seconds to perform the test, but it generally consumes more power and expends more energy in the process.</p><p><strong>✅</strong><em><strong> Winner: Intel</strong></em></p><p>Although the Ryzen 5 7600X is quite efficient and has a very manageable power consumption, the Core i5-14400 consumes less power on average, as validated by our tests.</p><p>The AMD Ryzen 7000 series CPUs have a recognizable pattern when it comes to thermals. Regardless of the cooling element applied, the CPUs immediately climb to a temperature above 90C. This is completely within the CPUs&apos; working limits and is expected behavior. The CPUs try to leverage all of the available power and thermal budgets to sustain their maximum performance according to the task at hand, so the Ryzen CPUs naturally tend to run hotter. </p><p>Regardless, even though the Ryzen 5 7600X is quite efficient in its own right, the Core i5-14400 takes this round due to its lower average power consumption and lower thermals.</p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-pricing-intel-core-i5-14400-vs-amd-ryzen-5-7600x"><span>Pricing: Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X</span></h3><p>If we take both these CPUs at their launch and compare their MSRP pricing, it is a very competitive duel. The Ryzen 5 7600X, while offering higher performance, launched at a price of $299, which is not exactly cheap when you consider that there are no mainstream AMD Ryzen 7000 series CPUs below this price point. </p><p>On the other Intel&apos;s lineup is a bit more diverse and has more options at different price points. The Core i5-14400 has an MSRP of $225, but you can also ditch the integrated graphics and save a few bucks by going with the $210 Core i5-14400F variant. The MSRP of the standard Core i5-14400 is slightly lower than its predecessor, the Core i5-13400, which launched at $230.</p><p>Nevertheless, that comparison is no longer relevant since AMD has heavily discounted the Ryzen 5 7600X, bringing its price down to $210 at the time of writing. This changes the conversation entirely and heavily favors AMD&apos;s value proposition. The decision seems simple: buy the AMD Ryzen 5 7600X. But is it really that simple?</p><p>Here, we must consider the other expenses accompanying these CPUs. The Core i5-14400 is compatible with the LGA1700 socket and works with Intel’s 600-series and 700-series motherboards. Moreover, it supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, which is a big advantage over AMD in terms of setup cost. The Core i5-14400 also comes with a basic stock cooler, which, although nothing fancy, at least allows you to get up and running.</p><p>The Ryzen 5 7600X uses a brand new AMD AM5 socket and is compatible with 600-series B-series and X-series motherboards. It also has the basic A-series, but it&apos;s best to avoid that since it does not allow CPU overclocking. Unlike its Intel counterpart, the AMD Ryzen 5 7600X only supports DDR5 memory, which does increase the initial cost even though DDR5 prices have been falling gradually. The Ryzen also does not include a stock cooler, meaning you will have to invest in an aftermarket CPU cooler for this processor.</p><p>If you pick up the Core i5-14400F for $210, you can pair it with a basic B-series or H-series motherboard (since it already does not support overclocking), add some affordable DDR4 memory, and use the stock cooler to get up and running. On the contrary, you will need an aftermarket CPU cooler, a mid-range B650 motherboard (at least), and more expensive DDR5 memory to pair with your $210 Ryzen 5 7600X.</p><p><strong>✅ </strong><em><strong>Winner: AMD</strong></em></p><p>Although the price cuts have definitely tipped the scales heavily in favor of the AMD Ryzen 5 7600X, it still does not run away with this round simply because its ecosystem is a bit more expensive than the Intel CPU. However, if you fully equip the Core i5-14400 with a respectable motherboard, an aftermarket CPU cooler, and DDR5 memory to unleash its full potential, its setup cost is quite comparable to the Ryzen 5 7600X.</p><p>This is why the AMD Ryzen 5 7600X convincingly wins this round, even though the Core i5-14400 can adapt to your budget range.</p><h3 class="article-body__section" id="section-bottom-line-intel-core-i5-14400-vs-amd-ryzen-5-7600x"><span>Bottom Line: Intel Core i5-14400 vs AMD Ryzen 5 7600X</span></h3><div ><table><tbody><tr><td class="firstcol empty" ></td><td  ><strong>Intel Core i5-14400</strong></td><td  ><strong>AMD Ryzen 5 7600X</strong></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Features and Specifications</td><td  ></td><td  >❌</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Gaming</td><td  ></td><td  >❌</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Productivity Applications</td><td  ></td><td  >❌</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Overclocking</td><td  ></td><td  >❌</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Power Consumption, Efficiency, and Cooling</td><td  >❌</td><td  ></td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " >Pricing</td><td  ></td><td  >❌</td></tr><tr><td class="firstcol " ><strong>Total</strong></td><td  ><strong>1</strong></td><td  ><strong>5</strong></td></tr></tbody></table></div><p>Both the Intel Core i5-14400 and the AMD Ryzen 5 7600X represent the mid-range offerings from Intel and AMD’s latest generations. For AMD, the Ryzen 5 7600X&apos;s MSRP pricing is more in line with the mid-range label. The Core i5-14400, on the other hand, slots right under Intel’s main Core i5, offering a more affordable alternative for people on a modest budget.</p><p>The AMD Ryzen 5 7600X beats the Core i5-14400 almost across the board in our gaming tests at 1080p and 1440p, thanks to its improved IPC and higher boost clocks. When both CPUs are configured with standard DDR5 memory, the Ryzen chip has a 14% lead in gaming applications at 1080p. Moreover, the Ryzen 5 7600X is a more dominant productivity CPU, even though it has fewer total cores than the Core i5-14400. This leaves the Intel CPU in a precarious position, but it has some distinct advantages.</p><p>Going by MSRP pricing, the Core i5-14400 is much cheaper at $225 than the $299 for the Ryzen 5 7600X. However, recent price cuts have thrown that advantage out the window, as the AMD Ryzen 5 7600X is now available for a competitive price of $210. The Intel CPU claws back some of its value advantages by supporting more affordable DDR4 memory and cheaper entry-level motherboards, but that is not enough to justify its outright victory in this faceoff.</p><p>Intel’s chip is solid in power consumption and efficiency metrics. It consumes less average power than the Ryzen 5 7600X and displays excellent efficiency, which translates into lower thermals as well. It is also bundled with a useable stock cooler that can be helpful if you are on a tight budget. The Ryzen chip, on the other hand, tends to run a bit hotter and needs an aftermarket cooling solution to be fully functional.</p><p>The AMD Ryzen 5 7600X has another major advantage of overclocking since the Core i5-14400 has a locked multiplier and cannot be overclocked using traditional means. Turning on Precision Boost Overdrive 2 on our Ryzen 5 7600X and pairing it with fast DDR5 memory gave us a 7% gain in gaming applications at 1080p. This further increases the delta between the two CPUs in terms of performance and leaves the Intel CPU with little to cling to.</p><p><strong>✅</strong><em><strong> Winner: AMD</strong></em></p><p>Even though the Core i5-14400 offers some distinct advantages in efficiency and platform costs, it simply cannot overcome the substantial performance lead of the AMD Ryzen 5 7600X, especially after the significant price cuts. While the Core i5-14400 would have certainly been competitive with the Ryzen 5 7600X at MSRP pricing, the new $210 Ryzen 5 7600X holds a significant value advantage that blows the Core i5-14400 out of the water.</p><p>Perhaps the Core i5-14400&apos;s versatility can still make it a useful buy for budget PC builders. It can work with affordable B-series and H-series motherboards and does not need an aftermarket cooler. Perhaps more importantly, you can use your old DDR4 memory kits with this CPU without having to upgrade to a whole new platform, thus reducing your setup costs significantly.</p><p>Still, the 6-to-1 lead of the Ryzen 5 7600X in our faceoff suggests that the Core i5-14400 needs serious price cuts to remain competitive in the current market. Intel would be well-advised to place the Core i5-14600K as a direct competitor to the AMD Ryzen 5 7600X and move the Core i5-14400 further down the pricing spectrum as an entry-level alternative to older Zen 4 CPUs.</p><h2 id="more-cpu-faceoffs-2">More CPU Faceoffs</h2><ul><li><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-ryzen-7-7800x3d-vs-intel-core-i9-13900k-vs-intel-core-7-13700K">AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D vs Intel Core i9-13900K vs Core i7-13700K</a></li><li><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-ryzen-9-7950x3d-vs-intel-core-i9-13900k-faceoff">AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D vs Intel Core i9-13900K Faceoff</a></li><li><a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/features/amd-vs-intel-cpus">AMD vs Intel: Which CPUs Are Better in 2023?</a></li></ul>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Framework updates Laptop 13 family with Intel Core Ultra, AMD Ryzen 7040, new display options ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/framework-updates-laptop-13-family-with-intel-core-ultra-amd-ryzen-7040-new-display-options</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Framework offers its fourth Intel upgrade to the Laptop 13, highlighting its commitment to keeping laptops up to date and out of landfills. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">J5Ho5jVXW6BzpfxifBCUm5</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zoyCDQFCbZmWLA8MBJWzaa-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Thu, 30 May 2024 13:41:28 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 09:51:37 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[Laptops]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ editors@tomshardware.com (Jowi Morales) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Jowi Morales ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/gM7E2WSDg2wgCFoaDPz9yK.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Jowi Morales is a writer and journalist covering the tech beat since 2021. However, he’s been interested in technology far earlier than that. He started discovering desktop computers when his father brought home a Windows 95 PC, but his first real experience working under the hood of the PC was when the old computer’s hard drive was filled to the brim in the year 2000. He deleted the Windows folder to attempt to rectify the situation, which led to his dad buying a new desktop PC. Since then, he learned a lot more about computers, and he’s always been the go-to tech expert for his family and friends.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Jowi primarily uses a Windows workstation and an Android phone, but he also bought into the Apple ecosystem with the 6th-gen iPad, iPhone 14 Pro Max, and the M1 MacBook Air. Today, Jowi covers hardware and software from Redmond and Cupertino, while also looking at the tech industry in general.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Aside from covering technology, Jowi is an avid photographer and writes about automobiles, aviation, and tanks. You can find his bylines at &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.makeuseof.com/author/jowi-morales/&quot;&gt;MakeUseOf&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.slashgear.com/author/jowimorales/&quot;&gt;SlashGear&lt;/a&gt;, and, of course, &lt;a href=&quot;https://www.tomshardware.com/author/jowi-morales&quot;&gt;Tom’s Hardware&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zoyCDQFCbZmWLA8MBJWzaa-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Framework]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Framework Laptop 13]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Framework Laptop 13]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Framework Laptop 13]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/zoyCDQFCbZmWLA8MBJWzaa-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Framework, currently the only manufacturer offering widely upgradeable laptops, has started pre-orders for systems with Intel’s Ultra Series 1 chips in either DIY or Pre-built forms. If you already own an <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/framework-laptop-13-intel-2023">existing Framework Laptop 13</a>, you can purchase an Intel Core Ultra Series 1 mainboard from the Framework Marketplace and <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-7040-framework-laptop-mainboard-transfer-performance-test-review#xenforo-comments-3821767">upgrade your current laptop in less than 30 minutes</a>.</p><p>Unfortunately, you can’t get Intel’s latest processors in the larger <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/framework-laptop-16-review">Framework Laptop 16</a> yet. Instead, larger screen lovers will have to opt for one of <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/framework-laptop-16-amd-upgradeable-preorders-live">AMD&apos;s Ryzen 7040 chips</a>. However, Framework does give a treat for AMD fans who prefer a 13-inch portable — it has permanently slashed the prices of 13-inch with Ryzen 7040 models, saving buyers $50 over the original prices.</p><p>Besides the new Intel processor, Framework introduced a new higher-resolution 13-inch screen. You can now pick between a 2,256 x 1,504 pixels 60 Hz matte display or the newer 2,880 x 1,920 pixels screen that can hit <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-4k-gaming-monitors-pc-144hz,6023.html">up to 120 Hz</a>. It also released a second-generation webcam module that comes with a new microphone. This module offers better image quality, even in low-light conditions, compared to the original version by combining four subpixels into one larger pixel, similar to the technology found in cameras used in many smartphones.</p><p>Aside from these functional upgrades, Framework will also release USB-C expansion cards in four new colors: green, lavender, orange, and red. These colored expansion cards will handsomely match the colored bezels Framework currently offers. However, it’s quite unfortunate that the company didn’t offer the color options first to its 1TB and 250GB expansion cards, as unique exterior colors could help users determine the correct storage expansion, especially if they use multiple cards for different uses. It would’ve also been nicer if Framework introduced colored input and top covers, as these would have the most visual impact, instead of just colored <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/usb-31-usb-type-c-refresher,29933.html">USB-C ports</a>.</p><p>Despite missing the mark with its color options, Framework still stands true to its mission of making laptops last longer by offering upgradeable parts. The original Framework Laptop 13 launched with an 11th-gen Intel processor, and the company has delivered upgrades for users through Intel’s 12th, 13th, and 14th generations. It’s also easy to upgrade other internal components like <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-ram,4057.html">RAM</a>, <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-ssds,3891.html">SSD</a>, Wi-Fi, and even the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gpu-hierarchy,4388.html">GPU</a> (on the 16-inch model), allowing you to change the configuration of your laptop (up to its ports) even if it is already several years old.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
                                <item>
                                                            <title><![CDATA[ Linux 6.9 arrives with Intel Core Ultra Meteor Lake performance improvements ]]></title>
                                                                                                                                                                                                <link>https://www.tomshardware.com/software/linux/linux-69-arrives-with-intel-core-ultra-meteor-lake-performance-improvements</link>
                                                                            <description>
                            <![CDATA[ Linux 6.9 brings with it some performance tuning for Core Ultra Meteor Lake processors, improving performance by up to 10% in some applications. ]]>
                                                                                                            </description>
                                                                                                                                <guid isPermaLink="false">8xLvLghCZaTrkV9XmR5FkG</guid>
                                                                                                <enclosure url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mZMTEJaHAJTZne3jgQ2LN6-1280-80.jpg" type="image/jpeg" length="0"></enclosure>
                                                                        <pubDate>Tue, 14 May 2024 11:24:51 +0000</pubDate>                                                                                                                                <updated>Thu, 21 Aug 2025 08:43:53 +0000</updated>
                                                                                                                                            <category><![CDATA[Linux]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[Software]]></category>
                                                    <category><![CDATA[Operating Systems]]></category>
                                                                                                <author><![CDATA[ editors@tomshardware.com (Aaron Klotz) ]]></author>                    <dc:creator><![CDATA[ Aaron Klotz ]]></dc:creator>                                                                                    <dc:source><![CDATA[ https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/aAk2saHqkgFuTCanz8LnmD.jpg ]]></dc:source>
                                                                <dc:description><![CDATA[ &lt;p&gt;Aaron began building computers back when he was 8 years old in the mid-2000s, and it’s been a hobby of his ever since then. With a focus on computer hardware, he became an avid member of the Tom’s Hardware forums several years later, helping people solve issues with their PCs. He is now a freelance writer for Tom’s Hardware, writing about computer hardware news and more. When not busy playing or writing about computer hardware, he spends his free time playing video games like Star Citizen or Apex Legends.&lt;/p&gt; ]]></dc:description>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <media:content type="image/jpeg" url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mZMTEJaHAJTZne3jgQ2LN6-1280-80.jpg">
                                                            <media:credit><![CDATA[Intel]]></media:credit>
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    <media:description><![CDATA[Intel Meteor Lake]]></media:description>                                                            <media:text><![CDATA[Intel Meteor Lake]]></media:text>
                                <media:title type="plain"><![CDATA[Intel Meteor Lake]]></media:title>
                                                    </media:content>
                                                    <media:thumbnail url="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/mZMTEJaHAJTZne3jgQ2LN6-1280-80.jpg" />
                                                                                                                                                                    <content:encoded >
                            <![CDATA[
                            <article>
                                <p>Linux 6.9 is now live, bringing with it a number of improvements including performance enhancements for Intel Core Ultra <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-details-core-ultra-meteor-lake-architecture-launches-december-14">Meteor Lake</a> processors and AMD Ryzen CPUs (as reported by <a href="https://www.phoronix.com/news/Linux-6.9-Released">Phoronix</a>). Regarding the <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intels-new-core-ultra-branding-drops-the-i-looks-like-amds-ryzen">Core Ultra</a> optimizations, Linux 6.9 includes a tuning adjustment to Intel&apos;s P-State driver which is claimed to boost performance. <a href="https://www.phoronix.com/review/intel-core-ultra-linux-69">Phoronix tested</a> this new tuning adjustment and found it improved performance by 2.6% on average.</p><p>The new adjustment applies specifically to Intel&apos;s Energy Performance Preference (EPP) system for its Meteor Lake parts. EPP dictates the performance behavior of the CPU and tells it to run in a more power-optimized state, more performance-oriented state, or a balanced state depending on how it is configured. In Linux 6.9, <a href="https://www.phoronix.com/news/Meteor-Lake-EPP-Linux-Tuning">EPP has been updated</a> to feature a balanced performance profile of 115 and a performance EPP of 16, which reportedly improves the chip&apos;s performance per watt.</p><figure role="gallery"><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/Zu38C5zWE97JVFHU7BPv9Q.png" alt="Phoronix EPP Benchmarks" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Phoronix</small></figcaption></figure><figure><img src="https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FRweD4sfXdTLEh4Rs9dXEQ.png" alt="Phoronix EPP Benchmarks" /><figcaption><small role="credit">Phoronix</small></figcaption></figure></figure><p>2.6% isn&apos;t a huge improvement, but there were a few applications Phoronix discovered that benefit more than others from the EPP changes. In the AV1 encoding tests specifically, Phoronix found that performance improved by nearly 10% with the Linux 6.9 EPP changes compared to Linux 6.8 without the changes. Another set of applications that saw a decent improvement included various code compilation benchmarks, Unvanquished, Xonotic, and FFmpeg which were roughly 6% faster in Linux 6.9.</p><p>Phoronix also showed power consumption tests, thermals, and clock speed changes with the new EPP changes. On average, the Linux 6.9 version consumed one additional watt compared to Linux 6.8. Ironically the peak turbo clock went down slightly from 4.885 GHz down to 4.872 GHz, however, the average clock speed went up by a few MHz (from 3.127 GHz to 3.129 GHz). <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-cpu-coolers,4181.html">Thermals</a> were virtually identical staying within 87 degrees Celsius average. Testing was done on an Acer laptop sporting a Core Ultra 7 155H 16-core processor.</p><p>Linux 6.9 won&apos;t make your <a href="https://www.tomshardware.com/laptops/asus-new-zenbook-14-oled-embraces-intel-core-ultra-and-promises-over-15-hours-of-battery-life">Core Ultra laptop</a> lightyears faster, but it will provide noticeable performance improvements in some workloads. In fact, we are surprised that some benchmarks improved by up to 10%, given how minor the power and clock speed differences are between Linux 6.9 and 6.8.</p>
                                                            </article>
                            ]]>
                        </content:encoded>
                                                </item>
            </channel>
</rss>