Apple M1 Max vs Ultra 9 285H
Aggregate performance score
Core Ultra 9 285H outperforms Apple M1 Max by an impressive 69% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Core Ultra 9 285H and M1 Max processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 226 | 538 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Apple M-Series |
| Power efficiency | 49.45 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Arrow Lake-H | no data |
| Release date | no data | 18 October 2021 (3 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Core Ultra 9 285H and M1 Max basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.
| Physical cores | 16 (Hexadeca-Core) | 10 (Deca-Core) |
| Threads | 16 | 10 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 2.06 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 5.4 GHz | 3.22 GHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 2.9 MB |
| L2 cache | no data | 28 MB |
| L3 cache | no data | 48 MB |
| Chip lithography | no data | 5 nm |
| Number of transistors | no data | 57000 Million |
| 64 bit support | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Core Ultra 9 285H and M1 Max compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.
| Power consumption (TDP) | 45 Watt | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Apple M1 Max 32-Core GPU |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.
Passmark
Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 23.32 | 13.80 |
| Physical cores | 16 | 10 |
| Threads | 16 | 10 |
Ultra 9 285H has a 69% higher aggregate performance score, and 60% more physical cores and 60% more threads.
The Core Ultra 9 285H is our recommended choice as it beats the M1 Max in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core Ultra 9 285H and Apple M1 Max, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
