Intel Arrow Lake review analysis shows Core Ultra 200S CPUs are efficiency champs and gaming duds
The launch of the Intel Arrow Lake Core Ultra 200S CPUs has been divisive, to say the least. On one hand, Arrow Lake CPUs bring no appreciable performance gains and even take a hit on the gaming chops. On the other hand, Intel has delivered on its promises of a major leap in efficiency.
That said, amidst the chaos of a plethora of launch reviews, it can get confusing to judge the actual capabilities or lack thereof of the reviewed products since different outlets test CPUs differently. Thankfully, 3DCenter has now compiled 20 Arrow Lake launch reviews to give customers a thorough look at Intel’s new desktop processors.
Arrow Lake application performance
Right off the bat, we can see that the Arrow Lake processors bring a noticeable but ultimately unimpressive gain in application performance. Per 3DCenter's compiled data, the flagship Core Ultra 9 285K is, on average, 7% faster than the Core i9-14900K and 3% slower than the Ryzen 9 9950X.
Stepping down the ladder, the Core Ultra 5 245K and the Core Ultra 7 265K appear 3.9% and 4.6% ahead of the Core i5-14600K and the Core i7-14700K, respectively. Moreover, the Core Ultra 5 245K is 3.5% faster vs the Ryzen 7 9700X while the Core Ultra 7 265K matches the performance of the Ryzen 9 9900X.
Overall, Intel Arrow Lake chips bring a small improvement over the 14th-gen chips despite lacking hyperthreading.
Arrow Lake gaming performance
Sadly, the Arrow Lake CPUs suffer when it comes to gaming performance and are generally slower than their predecessors and the competing Zen 5 chips.
Looking at some numbers, the Core Ultra 9 285K reportedly falls behind the Core i9-14900K by 6% and trails the Ryzen 9 9950X by 4.2%. The chip is also no match for the current gaming champ, the Ryzen 7 7800X3D, as AMD’s CPU is a massive 16% faster. This is a disappointing result from Intel, especially when the new Ryzen 7 9800X3D is now official and brings an advertised 20% gaming performance improvement over the Core Ultra 9 285K.
The Core Ultra 7 265K and the Core Ultra 5 245K also don’t fare any better with the former suffering a 7% regression vs the Core i7-14700K while the latter lags by a smaller 4% vs the Core i5-14600K. The Ryzen 7 9700X and the Ryzen 9 9900X are also faster, as their Intel rivals lose by margins of 10% and 3.3%, respectively.
In short, Intel fans waiting for Team Blue to dethrone AMD will need to wait for future architectures like Panther Lake and Nova Lake, since Intel currently has no answer.
Arrow Lake efficiency
Power consumption is the one thing that the Core Ultra 200S CPUs has going for them. Through a range of improvements like a new process node and removing hyperthreading, Intel has managed to make a giant leap in power consumption over the 14th-gen Raptor Lake CPUs, a fact that we have discussed at length in our review of the Core Ultra 9 285K.
Per the numbers compiled by 3DCenter, the Core Ultra 9 285K consumes, on average, only 147 W in application workloads vs 198 W for the Core i9-14900K and 160 W for the Ryzen 9 9950X. This low consumption also results in the flagship Arrow Lake chip boasting 44% and 6% more application energy efficiency vs the Core i9-14900K and the Ryzen 9 9950X, respectively.
Arrow Lake’s efficiency gains are also evident in gaming where the Core Ultra 9 285K only consumes around 88 W on average, besting the Core i9-14900K (140 W) and the Ryzen 9 9950X (111 W). The only CPU that is both faster in gaming and consumes less power is the Ryzen 7 7800X3D which is in a class of its own at only 56 W.
Moving on to the Core Ultra 5 245K and the Core Ultra 7 265K, the Arrow Lake chips show an application efficiency advantage of 33% and 42% vs the Core i5-14600K and Core i7-14700K, respectively. However, the Ryzen 7 9700X is still more efficient in applications than the Core Ultra 5 245K to the tune of 16% while the Ryzen 9 9900X falls behind the Core Ultra 7 265K by a 9% margin.
Finally, gaming power consumption for both the Core Ultra 5 and Ultra 7 is lower than their 14th-gen and AMD Zen 5 rivals, coming in only at 68 W and 80 W, respectively.
To sum up, Intel Arrow Lake chips appear to be for fans who are either upgrading from older architectures or looking for processors prioritizing efficiency over raw performance. For everyone else, there are clearly better options on the market.
Source(s)
Price comparison
