Intel's Core Ultra 7 270K Plus pushes beyond the 250K Plus with more cores and cache for $300. It costs more, but could be a strong value for high-end productivity workloads.
Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus Review: AMD Needs to Respond
- Thread starter Steve
- Start date
Great chip, great effort. These past few months, Intel has pushed aggressively in all segments. Huge performance increases where they can, huge cost cutting where they can't (as much). It feels like they are finally moving on from leaning heavily on the Intel name to push product (really, to demand absurdly high prices), which is refreshing.
Too bad this is a horrible time to build...
Too bad this is a horrible time to build...
Do they really need to though? Intel are using 2.5x the power to brute force a result. AMD with just a newer node will surpass this without effort
In Cinebench, it's 2.52x the power for 2.06x the result
In Blender, it's 2.26x the result.
So while it uses more power, it achieves a nearly commensurate result. For gaming, AMD makes more sense, but people with more balanced workloads will be better off with the 270X. Being able to finish some tasks more than 2x faster is no joke.
AMD already dominates the gaming arena and these don't really impact that. Their load limit is 280W but it's reported they are hitting 360W which is like an extra $500/year in electricity just for running your computer. They also are in a dead socket and need 7200-8000 DDR5 which you'll pay a premium for and DDR5 is already unstable but at that speed it's even more volatile. Also AMD responded, they released the 9950X3D2 and lowered prices even more and will be launching Zen 6 in the near future.
Sitting on your laurels while ahead never ends well. Ask AMD how that went with the athlon 64, or intel with skylake.
And its cheaper. Sure the 9800/9850x3d is faster in games, but its also a $500 chip now. The 270x is meeting or beating every non x3d chip AMD has in games.
If you do any sort of productivity work in addition to games Intel is looking real good right now. AMD cant just rely on x3d given how expensive that cache is, they need to make sure their normal cores dont fall any further behind.
But it’s also on a smaller node so it’s expected. When the next AMD chips come out on a smaller node they’ll perform better. If you’re really after multi core though you’d be looking at TR not Zen too. For those types of workload desktop platforms don’t have all the ancillaries HEDT platforms do
It's a terrible time to be building or buying a PC, there isn't any point in upgrading on lga1851 if you already have a 265k.
These Arrow Lake refresh cpu's would have made a lot more sense a year ago before the RAMpocalypse, but not now, also not when they're using more power.
AMD's response will be Zen 6, and it will be a drop in AM5 upgrade, which IMO will be much more appealing than having to buy a new motherboard and RAM.
These Arrow Lake refresh cpu's would have made a lot more sense a year ago before the RAMpocalypse, but not now, also not when they're using more power.
AMD's response will be Zen 6, and it will be a drop in AM5 upgrade, which IMO will be much more appealing than having to buy a new motherboard and RAM.
Most people aren't doing 3D rendering or 4k video editing. Most people use an office suite, search the Internet and play the occasional game and even if they were doing 4k editing it's not like a 9850x3D won't handle it.
Smaller nodes dont guarantee better performance. Core design does that. Smaller nodes provide better efficiency.
TR is for people who need a ton of PCIe lanes. If you just need lots of threads for high performance Intel has AMD beat right now.
So long as AMD doesnt decide to do another oopsie doopsie like they did with AM4 and supporting newer chips (300 series still havent received the final AGESA code for x3d).
Node shmode. We could do what-ifs all day. It doesn't have any bearing on the reality of this situation. And even if TR is better, it's also waaaaay expensiver, therefore, well outside of the scope of this test by a mile.
Dropping down a node is a nailed on performance gain bud. It’s not a what if.
Is it really? By the time you get a high end board which has some of the features and with RAM being what it is there’s not that much left in it. Doesn’t give you any extra PCIE lanes though
Ahh the good old "throw watts at it" game by Intel.
No thanks.
No thanks.
People with a workload like that would be fine with an old office refurb. They shouldn't be cross shopping a 270K with a 9850X3D because both are overkill.
You can dislike a product without lying about it. The review you're commenting on shows it uses ~250W in an all core workload and ~150W in gaming. Regardless, no one is running their consumer CPU at 100% load 24 hours a day, which is the only way you'd hit anywhere near $500/year in power.
It's also fine with DDR5-6000, as the review shows. You don't need 7200 or 8000 to get good performance.
Finally, AMD launching a CPU that's double the price is not a response, it's an unrelated product launch. Making the 9900X or 9950X cost $300 would be a response. Zen 6 is also not a near future launch, we don't even know if it's coming out this year.
Huh? The 270k even limited to 50w smokes it's competition, ie the 9700x.
Probably because it’s only using E cores and you’re limiting in a way that advantages that
Fine, show me where I can buy this one-node-improved AMD product today then?
My big question is that both of the previous processors from Intel were sold for considerably more money. If I'm not mistaken, part of this is still made by TSMC and that tile isn't going to be cheap either. Is the real problem for AMD that Intel has decided to dump these on the market to try to salvage some sales and market share on the LGA 1851?
Why didn't Intel drop the prices on the existing line? The 285K is $560 or so, and probably isn't worth it, the 265 is the same price at $300, and they're able to sell the 270k at $300 without the shareholders getting out the pitchforks? Are they making enough on servers to buy back the pc market?
Why didn't Intel drop the prices on the existing line? The 285K is $560 or so, and probably isn't worth it, the 265 is the same price at $300, and they're able to sell the 270k at $300 without the shareholders getting out the pitchforks? Are they making enough on servers to buy back the pc market?
Question is why would you buy the Intel chip? You’re on a dead end platform with expensive RAM for comparatively little performance gain. You could invest in AM5 with a bottom end chip and still have a couple of generations to upgrade to. You still have the RAM issue but you’re not in the position where you’ll have to swap it out in a few years
All the platforms are dead if you buy flagship cpu...whata the point of even buying new pc if u gonna go for low tier cpu? If u can buy almost flagship cpu for 300€..u gonna buy some bad one for 200 to save 100 bucks so can later buy new cpu for 400 bucks?
You can limit them to any power and the 270k will absolutely wipe the floor with the 9700x in both performance and efficiency. Amd cpus are extremely inefficient, they look efficient in graphs cause they are slow.
Similar threads
