Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus Review: AMD Needs to Respond

[Rapob]

Yes they are? All reviews show MT numbers dwarfing their amd price competitors.


A lot of people don't wanna settle with low core count low MT chips like the 9800x 3d. If 8 cores suit your needs then go for it we are all happy for you but it doesn't work for all of us, 8 cores in 2026 feel very sluggish. Enthusiasts go for higher core counts cause they - you know - want to use their computers like computers, not like consoles. Had the 9800x 3d, handed it down to a friend within 1.5 months, it was horrible.


Bad comparison, the 5090 is the fastest. In everything. It doesn't lose to a 5060 in some workloads. The 9800x 3d does lose to entry level 200$ chips in lots of workloads.

It's funny to see amd fans ignoring MT performance which is what they were glazing about for years, right?

Not an Intel fan, when AMD had the lead in MT performance I was buying Ryzen (R5 1600 --> 2700x ---> 3700x) and considered Intel's 6700k and 7700k bad jokes. Now the 9800x 3d is in the same position as the 7700k was back in the day.

99% of consumers have no need for more than 8 p-cores, and e-cores are sluggish cores.
Intel uses 6-8 p-cores as well, plus a bunch of slow e-cores. Don't compare e-cores with p-cores, thank you.

AMDs 16 core offerings have no problems competing with Intel in productivity and Threadripper literally destroys Intel in this segment. Intel has no answer.

9950X3D/9950X3D is the best all-round CPU you can buy, peak productivity performance and peak gaming performance. Intel don't come in gaming unless you look at GPU bound gaming scenarios, which is pointless when talking CPU performance. Hence why they are more expensive than Intel 200 series. They are good for every task with top tier gaming performance. Intel don't have top tier gaming performance or even close.

8 cores is sluggish? Hahaha, what a joke. Intel uses 8-cores too and sluggish is what you get from e-cores. Garbage cores really. Tons of applications and games uses the wrong cores. Intel tries to fix this with their own software, because Windows scheduler is bugged in many cases.

You did not have 9800X3D, you make me laugh. You have zero experience with AMD and it is obvious.

So you bought AMD when AMD was trash and turned to Intel when they became trash, sounds plausible. Lmao.

9800X3D have plenty good productivity performance and some workloads scale well with cache too. Stop being stupid. Look at reviews.

AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D Review - The Best Just Got Better

The AMD Ryzen 9850X3D builds on the already excellent 9800X3D without trying to shake up the market. Instead, it focuses on refining what already works. AMD delivers modest improvements with smarter tuning, and the same cache magic that gamers love. Thanks to a reasonable price increase, this...

www.techpowerup.com

AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D Review - The Best Just Got Better

The AMD Ryzen 9850X3D builds on the already excellent 9800X3D without trying to shake up the market. Instead, it focuses on refining what already works. AMD delivers modest improvements with smarter tuning, and the same cache magic that gamers love. Thanks to a reasonable price increase, this...

www.techpowerup.com

AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D Review - The Best Just Got Better

The AMD Ryzen 9850X3D builds on the already excellent 9800X3D without trying to shake up the market. Instead, it focuses on refining what already works. AMD delivers modest improvements with smarter tuning, and the same cache magic that gamers love. Thanks to a reasonable price increase, this...

www.techpowerup.com

Obviously this chip is for gaming but still hold its own in typical consumer workloads. If you prefer application performance, this chip is not for you and is not aimed for this. AMD have other solutions that suits these needs and still beats Intel in gaming.

Worlds best gaming CPU, is the conclusion. You claiming it is slow in applications just shows you have no clue, no experience and clearly is lying about having one. Thanks for a free laugh tho. Had a big smile on while writing all this.

Lets look at the conclusion:

- Fastest gaming processor in the world
- No risk of E-Cores complicating software compatibility

And this is why most gamers don't bother with Intel these days. Intels e-cores, lets call them garbage cores, g-cores, mostly complicates things and is a result of Intel being unable to compete with AMD in MT workloads over the years. G-cores was the answer, because Intels p-cores used way too much power.

AMD made Intel leave the HEDT space entirely.

Intel is cheaper than AMD now, for a reason. Intel became the value option in the last 5 years. That is reality for you.

Find me one, just one scenario where 9800X3D/9850X3D loses in performance to a entry level 200 dollars CPU. I am waiting.

 

[Strawman]

99% of consumers have no need for more than 8 p-cores, and e-cores are sluggish cores.
Intel uses 6-8 p-cores as well, plus a bunch of slow e-cores. Don't compare e-cores with p-cores, thank you.

Yeah, of course, 99% of consumers are casuals so of course they don't need more than 8 cores. They don't even need a modern CPU.

AMDs 16 core offerings have no problems competing with Intel in productivity and Threadripper literally destroys Intel in this segment. Intel has no answer.

Great, how is that relevant to the 270k? The 270k is 300$, the cheapest threadripper is what, 2k$?

9950X3D/9950X3D is the best all-round CPU you can buy, peak productivity performance and peak gaming performance. Intel don't come in gaming unless you look at GPU bound gaming scenarios, which is pointless when talking CPU performance. Hence why they are more expensive than Intel 200 series. They are good for every task with top tier gaming performance. Intel don't have top tier gaming performance or even close.

Great, so why are you comparing the 9800x 3d to the 270k then? I agree, the 9950x 3d is the one that we should be comparing. Of course Intel has top tier gaming performance. Entirely depends on the games you play. Im playing cities skylines - Intel is unmatched. Ryzen chips are too slow.

https://I.ibb.co/wh9mX89W/HEa-N0-H9a-MAAp42a-1.jpg

You did not have 9800X3D, you make me laugh. You have zero experience with AMD and it is obvious.

Of course I did. Here is my youtube channel where I compared my 9800x 3d to my 12900k and 14900k.

As I've said, if you are happy with 8 cores then I'm happy that you are happy, but for us enthusiasts 8 cores is just sluggish and the games that I play (cities skylines, beam ng, TTW) 8 cores are just no bueno man, they are unusable.

Find me one, just one scenario where 9800X3D/9850X3D loses in performance to a entry level 200 dollars CPU. I am waiting.

In anything MT the 250k flies past the 9800x 3d / 9850x 3d my man. Games included (like ciites skylines). What are you talking about sir?

 

[Rapob]

You compare 270K Plus to Threadripper? Lmao. Oh my god you really have no clue.

Showing random youtube videos really proves a point. Hahaha. Calling yourself entuisiast almost made me spit out my coffee.

AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D Review

AMD's Ryzen 7 9850X3D promises the fastest gaming performance yet, with higher clocks and a small price bump. But does it deliver real gains, or is it...

www.techspot.com

Go read, and you will soon see how far Intel is behind on gaming.

Yeah those e-cores really seem good.

No wonder gamers buy AMD X3D these days. Only casual gamers like yourself would consider Intel today.

 

[Strawman]

You can send a comment and I'll reply. It's my channel and my 9800x 3d.

Anyways, you sound very bitter and angry. I don't know why, the 9800x 3d is a decent casual chip, so enjoy it. But us enthusiasts don't like 8 cores is all im saying. It's like you showing up with an expensive bicycle in a ferrari meeting. Nice bicycle and all that but it's not a ferrari. Eg. cities skylines, the bicycle just can't deal with it, you need a proper enthusiasts chip.

 

[Rapob]

Your channel. Hahaha. Amateur. No wonder you have no subs. Luckily people are not morons. The clueless tech youtubers gets no attention. I linked you actual trustworthy and professionel reviews down below.


9800X3D/9850X3D is the worlds fastest gaming chips and everyone with actual experience knows this. Lmao. Every single review says that and you have to be a fool to think otherwise.

AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D Review - The Best Gaming Processor

The Ryzen 7 9800X3D establishes AMD as the leader in gaming performance. This Zen 5-based X3D chip is not only fast, it also comes with full support for overclocking. Besides gaming, application performance is considerably improved over the 7800X3D, but that comes at a price.

www.techpowerup.com

"The Best Gaming Processor"

"9800X3D has a rather easy task ahead—simply to beat the 7800X3D, and extend AMD's gaming performance leadership over Intel."

AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D Review: The New Gaming CPU King

AMD's Ryzen 7 9800X3D is here, bringing powerful upgrades with 3D V-Cache tech and enhanced thermals. Without question, this is the best CPU released since the 7800X3D,...

www.techspot.com

"The New Gaming CPU King"

I especially like this part: "Even with Intel's discounts, the 14900K cannot match the 9800X3D in terms of value or performance. No matter how skilled you are at memory tuning, the Core i9 is completely and totally annihilated. Intel's competing chips have also faced other challenges not limited to power consumption. Stability and degradation issues plagued the Core i9, though these have mostly been resolved with BIOS updates."

Arrow Lake don't fare better in gaming than 14900K. 270K Plus is on par even after optimization. Actually a 14900K/14900KS can easily be tweaked to beat Arrow Lake in gaming by 5-10% - Also, Arrow Lake is a dead-end platform that no one cares about. Sales numbers are terrible. Intel don't even care much about it and looks towards socket 1954 in less than 6 months. Here Intel will also bring a true X3D alternative with bLLC. Intel has nothing till then. Arrow Lake was just another failure generation from Intel.

 

[Strawman]

I don't know, when I tried playing my games on the gaming king it fared like a peasant.

 

[Rapob]

Here's an updated guide if you insist on playing one of the worst optimized games in history:

Top Processors for Massive Cities

Hunting for the best CPU for Cities Skylines 2 to handle massive populations? 🏙️ We compare top processors to eliminate simulation lag and boost game s...

evezone.evetech.co.za

"Currently, the AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D is widely considered the best CPU for Cities Skylines 2 due to its massive L3 cache which significantly aids simulation calculations."

"For modern city builders like CS2, 8 cores and 16 threads are the sweet spot. However, single-core performance and cache size often matter more than core count alone."

"AMD's X3D chips generally outperform Intel in simulation games because the extra 3D V-Cache accelerates the complex math required for agent pathfinding."

FYI Intel don't have more than 8 p-cores in their mainstream lineups. Garbage e-cores are useless for gaming and Intel chips lacks proper cache.

No matter what specs you have, Skylines 2 runs like crap due to being crapcode. Mods can help fix this mess slightly. One of the worst optimized games in history, coded by amateurs. Runs worse and worse as population grows. No matter if you have 4 cores or 64 cores.

270K Plus is an 8 core CPU with a bunch of garbage cores on the side. Which are 100% useless for gaming but adds to MT perf in applications that scales with cores, and water is wet.

Does not change the fact that 9800X3D and 9850X3D is the gaming kings and that Intel is not even close. They can't even beat 7800X3D from last gen. They don't even come close. You can ramble all you want about stupid e-cores, garbage cores won't help in gaming, hence you have 8 cores too.

270K Plus = 24 cores, yet only 8 of these cors are actually good.
If you settle with 250K Plus, you get just 6. What a time to be alive.

No wonder Arrow Lake sales numbers are miserable and Intel moves to a new socket soon.
Another failure generation from Intel. They are trying hard to sell the remaining inventory by lowering prices. Raptor Lake still outsells Arrow Lake by a huge margin. Everything is discounted due to AMD being in the lead. AMD made Intel HEDT die off. Nuff said.

 

[Strawman]

Skylines 2 runs great on enthusiast chips (16 cores or higher). It runs like crap on casual 8 and 6 core chips. How many times do I need to post the benchmark my man, 45 fps isn't it.

 

[Rapob]

Skylines 2 runs great on enthusiast chips (16 cores or higher). It runs like crap on casual 8 and 6 core chips. How many times do I need to post the benchmark my man, 45 fps isn't it.

Intel only have up to 8 p-cores on mainstream, so they don't apply anyway. E-cores are junk, useless for gaming.

Skylines 2 don't run great on any system. Junkcode. One of the worst optimized game of all time with little improvement after 3+ years.

Anything below 200 fps is unplayable in my eyes, and I am talking about 1% lows here. You are nothing but a casual gamer, no entuisiast whatsoever.

Still waiting for proof that 9800X3D loses to entry level 200 dollars CPUs in productivity, having problems finding any? Haha. Sigh.

Go read the guide on how to make Skylines 2 run the best, with recent patches, X3D is the way, like in 99% of games today. Junkcores don't matter.

2 lines was all you had, ran out of ammo. Repeating the same thing in the last 4 posts, with only useless evidence as proof. Too easy my man. Go read Techspots 9800X3D or 9850X3D review and you will see that Intel is dead and buried in terms of gaming performance.

Lets hope socket 1954 won't be another failure.

 

[Strawman]

Intel only have up to 8 p-cores on mainstream, so they don't apply anyway. E-cores are junk, useless for gaming.

Of course it does, here you go.

45 fps is still okay with the 9800x 3d, it's still better than console I guess, but us enthusiasts want more than that. If you are a casual 45 fps is playable, so enjoy what you have man. It's not a bad CPU, it's high entry level. Sometimes I game on my switch and I like it, so 45 fps on your 9800x 3d should be a similar experience to gaming on switch, so it's not that bad. Be happy.

 

[Rapob]

Of course it does, here you go.

45 fps is still okay with the 9800x 3d, it's still better than console I guess, but us enthusiasts want more than that. If you are a casual 45 fps is playable, so enjoy what you have man. It's not a bad CPU, it's high entry level.

Repeating the same thing won't make a difference.

Proof, where is it? Did your e-cores max out trying to find any?

 

[Strawman]

Also 8th place in star citizen for the 9800x 3d, not too bad.

 

[Rapob]

Also 8th place in star citizen for the 9800x 3d, not too bad.

285K which is pretty much a 270K Plus, only 42% slower than 9850X3D across 14 popular games that is actively being played, not too bad, even tho Intel did not win a single one of them.

Go read all about it: https://www.techspot.com/review/3082-amd-ryzen-9850x3d/

"There are no real surprises here. AMD has taken the world's fastest gaming processor and made it slightly faster. For those who demand the absolute best gaming performance, the 9850X3D will be appealing. For everyone else, it's largely unnecessary."

Casual gamers like you won't need one tho. Top tier gaming chips like this is for non-casuals targetting 200+ fps using 240+ Hz

 

[Strawman]

240 hz? You have an old monitor man? It's still okay but schedule an update soon, I can't play with less than 400 fps (and that's 1% lows of course). Get an Intel and 480hz and youll be golden.

 

[Rapob]

Did you find the proof yet?

Did you notice the plus symbol after 240? Or is your PPI too low to see it?

You know nothing about high fps gaming. It is too obvious. Intel is dead and buried here.

Keep linking proof from badly optimized games that no-one cares about. Besides the non-tuned 285K matches a stock 9800X3D in Crap Citizen - You need 1000 dollar memory for the tuned 285K, thats good value!

The AMD systems are even gimped from not running 6000-6400 MT/s - Good find - Fun part here is that tuned AMD systems will take the lead easily.

 

[Strawman]

Don't be mad man, 240 is still okay for casual gaming. Roblox and minecraft run fine on 240hz.

Us enthusiasts playing advanced games like skylines, TTW, and star citizen need high end enthusiast CPUs and monitors, but that's an expensive hobby that you can safely ignore. 8 cores and 240hz is still okayish if you are just playing games on your computer, just make sure that you don't run background stuff cause it will get sluggish.

I tried unpacking a huge 120gb file while playing cyberpunk on my 9800x 3d, it was a sluggish stutterfest but hey, you can still use your pc like a console, shut down background tasks and enjoy games at casual 240hz.

The AMD systems are even gimped from not running 6000-6400 MT/s - Good find - Fun part here is that tuned AMD systems will take the lead easily.

6000-6400 is decent for casual PCs. Was running 6600c26 1:1 on mine. Still terrible though, handled background tasks like a wet noodle. Tuning ram doesn't make it grow more cores sadly, it was still an entry level 8 core chip

 

[Rapob]

Don't be mad man, 240 is still okay for casual gaming. Roblox and minecraft run fine on 240hz.

Us enthusiasts playing advanced games like skylines, TTW, and star citizen need high end enthusiast CPUs and monitors, but that's an expensive hobby that you can safely ignore. 8 cores and 240hz is still okayish if you are just playing games on your computer, just make sure that you don't run background stuff cause it will get sluggish.

I tried unpacking a huge 120gb file while playing cyberpunk on my 9800x 3d, it was a sluggish stutterfest but hey, you can still use your pc like a console, shut down background tasks and enjoy games at casual 240hz.

So glad I am getting paid for this, but I would do it for free too

Yeah you play these kind of games on a 27" 1440p for max immersion right? Calling 27" entuisiast level?

You keep mentioning 8 cores, that is what Intel have on mainstream, up to that is. Garbage cores are useless.

Unpacking big files while playing, yeah that is what most gamers do all the time, that is the way to get peak performance for sure.

 

[Strawman]

So glad I am getting paid for this, but I would do it for free too

Yeah you play these kind of games on a 27" 1440p for max immersion right?

27 1440p 240hz, what year is this, 2015? Got a 42", a 32" 4k and a 27".

But you need high end chips to run multi monitor setups, you can't do that with entry level 8 core chips. It's an enthusiast thing running multiple monitors, don't bother.

 

[Rapob]

27 1440p 240hz, what year is this, 2015? Got a 42", a 32" 4k and a 27".

But you need high end chips to run multi monitor setups, you can't do that with entry level 8 core chips. It's an enthusiast thing running multiple monitors, don't bother.

I don't use a silly 27" and I don't use LCD either.
3 garbage monitors don't make 1 good monitor.

Lets see how many subs you have on your youtube channel, your mom and your moms new friend? Does it pay the rent? Basement aint free

Still waiting for that proof, trouble finding? You can ramble but never have proof? Hahah

Did you try disabling your garbage cores and re-test game performance? In many games you get improved performance, wonder why...

This has been fun tho

 

[Strawman]

That's too harsh, your 240hz isn't trash. It's very good for casual gaming - roblox, minecraft etc.