Ultra 9 285K vs GX-210JA

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

Comparing GX-210JA and Core Ultra 9 285K processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the rankingnot rated58
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data70.24
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesAMDno data
Power efficiencyno data31.40
Architecture codenameTemash (2013)Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025)
Release date23 May 2013 (11 years ago)24 October 2024 (recently)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$589

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

GX-210JA 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 cores2 (Dual-core)24 (Tetracosa-Core)
Threads224
Base clock speedno data3.7 GHz
Boost clock speed1 GHz5.7 GHz
Bus rateno data250 MHz
L1 cache128 KB112 KB (per core)
L2 cache1 MB3 MB (per core)
L3 cacheno data36 MB (shared)
Chip lithography28 nm3 nm
Die sizeno data243 mm2
Number of transistorsno data17,800 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on GX-210JA 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 configurationno data1
SocketFT3 BGA1851
Power consumption (TDP)6 Watt125 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by GX-210JA and Core Ultra 9 285K. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensions86x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVXno data
AES-NI++
AVX++
vProno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
TSX-+

Security technologies

GX-210JA and Core Ultra 9 285K technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by GX-210JA and Core Ultra 9 285K are enumerated here.

VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by GX-210JA and Core Ultra 9 285K. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR5 Depends on motherboard

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataArc Xe-2 Graphics 64EU

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by GX-210JA and Core Ultra 9 285K.

PCIe versionno data5.0
PCI Express lanesno data20

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.



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.

GX-210JA 248
Ultra 9 285K 65873
+26462%

Pros & cons summary


Recency 23 May 2013 24 October 2024
Physical cores 2 24
Threads 2 24
Chip lithography 28 nm 3 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 6 Watt 125 Watt

GX-210JA has 1983.3% lower power consumption.

Ultra 9 285K, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 11 years, 1100% more physical cores and 1100% more threads, and a 833.3% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between GX-210JA and Core Ultra 9 285K. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GX-210JA is a notebook processor while Core Ultra 9 285K is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between GX-210JA 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.


AMD GX-210JA
GX-210JA
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.


2.5 4 votes

Rate GX-210JA on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 41 vote

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 GX-210JA or Core Ultra 9 285K, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.