Ultra 9 285K vs Xeon W-3275M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon W-3275M
2019
28 cores / 56 threads, 205 Watt
25.35
Core Ultra 9 285K
2024
24 cores / 24 threads, 125 Watt
43.04
+69.8%

Core Ultra 9 285K outperforms Xeon W-3275M by an impressive 70% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon W-3275M and Core Ultra 9 285K processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking20154
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.0774.27
Market segmentServerDesktop processor
SeriesIntel Xeon Wno data
Power efficiency11.7032.56
Architecture codenameCascade Lake (2019−2020)Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025)
Release date3 June 2019 (5 years ago)24 October 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$7,453$589

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Ultra 9 285K has 1365% better value for money than Xeon W-3275M.

Detailed specifications

Xeon W-3275M and Core Ultra 9 285K 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 cores28 (Octacosa-Core)24 (Tetracosa-Core)
Threads5624
Base clock speed2.5 GHz3.7 GHz
Boost clock speed4.6 GHz5.6 GHz
Bus typeDMI 3.0no data
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/s250 MHz
Multiplier25no data
L1 cache1.75 MB112 KB (per core)
L2 cache28 MB3 MB (per core)
L3 cache38.5 MB36 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm3 nm
Die sizeno data243 mm2
Maximum core temperature76 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data17,800 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+no data
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on Xeon W-3275M and Core Ultra 9 285K 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.

Number of CPUs in a configuration1 (Uniprocessor)1
SocketFCLGA3647FCLGA1851
Power consumption (TDP)205 Watt125 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon W-3275M and Core Ultra 9 285K. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® AVX-512Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2
AES-NI++
AVX++
vPro++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shift++
Turbo Boost Technology2.02.0
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
TSX++
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
SIPP-+
Turbo Boost Max 3.0++
Deep Learning Boost++
Supported AI Software Frameworks-OpenVINO™, WindowsML, DirectML, ONNX RT, WebNN

Security technologies

Xeon W-3275M and Core Ultra 9 285K technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT++
EDB++
Secure Keyno data+
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon W-3275M and Core Ultra 9 285K are enumerated here.

VT-d++
VT-x++
EPT++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon W-3275M and Core Ultra 9 285K. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-2933DDR5-6400
Maximum memory size2 TB192 GB
Max memory channels62
Maximum memory bandwidth140.8 GB/sno data
ECC memory support++

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataIntel® Graphics
Quick Sync Video-+
Graphics max frequencyno data2 GHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Xeon W-3275M and Core Ultra 9 285K integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data4

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Xeon W-3275M and Core Ultra 9 285K integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

Max resolution over HDMI 1.4no data4K @ 60Hz (HDMI 2.1 TMDS) 8K @ 60Hz (HDMI2.1 FRL)
Max resolution over eDPno data4K @ 60Hz
Max resolution over DisplayPortno data8K @ 60Hz

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Xeon W-3275M and Core Ultra 9 285K integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno data12
OpenGLno data4.5

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon W-3275M and Core Ultra 9 285K.

PCIe version3.05.0 and 4.0
PCI Express lanes6420

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.

Xeon W-3275M 25.35
Ultra 9 285K 43.04
+69.8%

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.

Xeon W-3275M 40261
Ultra 9 285K 68370
+69.8%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 25.35 43.04
Recency 3 June 2019 24 October 2024
Physical cores 28 24
Threads 56 24
Chip lithography 14 nm 3 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 205 Watt 125 Watt

Xeon W-3275M has 16.7% more physical cores and 133.3% more threads.

Ultra 9 285K, on the other hand, has a 69.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 366.7% more advanced lithography process, and 64% lower power consumption.

The Core Ultra 9 285K is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon W-3275M in performance tests.

Be aware that Xeon W-3275M is a server/workstation processor while Core Ultra 9 285K is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon W-3275M and Core Ultra 9 285K, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


Intel Xeon W-3275M
Xeon W-3275M
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K
Core Ultra 9 285K

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3 64 votes

Rate Xeon W-3275M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 167 votes

Rate Core Ultra 9 285K on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon W-3275M or Core Ultra 9 285K, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.