Core Ultra 9 285T vs EPYC 8124P

CPU

GPU

Core Ultra 9 285T

24 Cores24 Thrd35 WWMax: 5.4 GHz2025

Popular choices:

•••••••••

EPYC 8124P

16 Cores32 Thrd125 WWMax: 3 GHz2023

Popular choices:

•••••••••

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Core Ultra 9 285T

24 / 24

36,916

+2.3%

36,079

0.0%

Ryzen Embedded V3C48

Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350

Ryzen 7 5800XT

Ryzen Threadripper 2990WX

Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 9955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX

Ryzen Threadripper 7970X

About PassMark

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook

This comparison brings together gaming FPS, productivity performance, platform differences, power efficiency, pricing context, and upgrade path so you can see which CPU actually makes more sense.

Core Ultra 9 285T

2025

Why buy it

✅Costs $90 less on MSRP ($549 MSRP vs $639 MSRP).
✅Delivers 19.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 67.2 vs 56.5 PassMark/$ ($549 MSRP vs $639 MSRP).
✅Draws 35W instead of 125W, a 90W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel Arc Xe-LPG Graphics, while EPYC 8124P needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (36 MB vs 64 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 8124P, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 96 PCIe lanes.
❌No AVX-512 support for niche heavy compute workloads where it can matter.

EPYC 8124P

2023

Why buy it

✅+77.8% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 36 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads, plus 96 PCIe lanes vs 20.
✅380% more PCIe lanes (96 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (36,079 vs 36,916).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 56.5 vs 67.2 PassMark/$ ($639 MSRP vs $549 MSRP).
❌257.1% higher power demand at 125W vs 35W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core Ultra 9 285T can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core Ultra 9 285T

2025

EPYC 8124P

2023

Why buy it

✅Costs $90 less on MSRP ($549 MSRP vs $639 MSRP).
✅Delivers 19.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 67.2 vs 56.5 PassMark/$ ($549 MSRP vs $639 MSRP).
✅Draws 35W instead of 125W, a 90W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel Arc Xe-LPG Graphics, while EPYC 8124P needs a discrete GPU.

Why buy it

✅+77.8% larger total L3 cache (64 MB vs 36 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads, plus 96 PCIe lanes vs 20.
✅380% more PCIe lanes (96 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (36 MB vs 64 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 8124P, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 96 PCIe lanes.
❌No AVX-512 support for niche heavy compute workloads where it can matter.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (36,079 vs 36,916).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 56.5 vs 67.2 PassMark/$ ($639 MSRP vs $549 MSRP).
❌257.1% higher power demand at 125W vs 35W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core Ultra 9 285T can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Core Ultra 9 285T better than EPYC 8124P?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. EPYC 8124P makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core Ultra 9 285T is the better mainstream desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and day-to-day practicality.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core Ultra 9 285T is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 0.1% more average FPS across 3 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core Ultra 9 285T is the better fit. You are getting 2.3% better PassMark, backed by 24 cores and 24 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Core Ultra 9 285T is the smarter buy today. Core Ultra 9 285T is $90 cheaper on MSRP at $549 MSRP versus $639 MSRP, and it gives you a 0.1% average FPS lead across 3 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 19.1% better value on MSRP (67.2 vs 56.5 PassMark/$), so the better CPU is not just faster, it is also the cleaner value play on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Core Ultra 9 285T is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2025 vs 2023) and more multi-core headroom with 24 cores / 24 threads instead of 16/32. That should give you a better long-term upgrade path for motherboard, RAM, and future CPU swaps.

Games Benchmarks

Paired with RTX 4090

To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.

Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

Core Ultra 9 285T Benchmark Check

EPYC 8124P Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core Ultra 9 285T	EPYC 8124P
1080p
low	309 FPS	153 FPS
medium	299 FPS	125 FPS
high	246 FPS	105 FPS
ultra	208 FPS	83 FPS
1440p
low	269 FPS	139 FPS
medium	228 FPS	111 FPS
high	175 FPS	87 FPS
ultra	154 FPS	70 FPS
4K
low	179 FPS	67 FPS
medium	151 FPS	57 FPS
high	112 FPS	44 FPS
ultra	101 FPS	36 FPS

Open Core Ultra 9 285T Open EPYC 8124P

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core Ultra 9 285T	EPYC 8124P
1080p
low	429 FPS	387 FPS
medium	375 FPS	344 FPS
high	306 FPS	281 FPS
ultra	267 FPS	224 FPS
1440p
low	364 FPS	327 FPS
medium	328 FPS	296 FPS
high	273 FPS	250 FPS
ultra	220 FPS	191 FPS
4K
low	204 FPS	202 FPS
medium	187 FPS	186 FPS
high	178 FPS	157 FPS
ultra	154 FPS	127 FPS

Open Core Ultra 9 285T Open EPYC 8124P

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core Ultra 9 285T	EPYC 8124P
1080p
low	844 FPS	856 FPS
medium	690 FPS	767 FPS
high	612 FPS	743 FPS
ultra	525 FPS	667 FPS
1440p
low	723 FPS	660 FPS
medium	594 FPS	573 FPS
high	514 FPS	546 FPS
ultra	441 FPS	487 FPS
4K
low	512 FPS	432 FPS
medium	434 FPS	341 FPS
high	392 FPS	305 FPS
ultra	335 FPS	250 FPS

Open Core Ultra 9 285T Open EPYC 8124P

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core Ultra 9 285T	EPYC 8124P
1080p
low	923 FPS	902 FPS
medium	923 FPS	902 FPS
high	829 FPS	769 FPS
ultra	744 FPS	647 FPS
1440p
low	853 FPS	823 FPS
medium	747 FPS	707 FPS
high	650 FPS	596 FPS
ultra	575 FPS	488 FPS
4K
low	629 FPS	596 FPS
medium	559 FPS	521 FPS
high	493 FPS	449 FPS
ultra	435 FPS	372 FPS

Open Core Ultra 9 285T Open EPYC 8124P

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core Ultra 9 285T and EPYC 8124P

Core Ultra 9 285T

The Core Ultra 9 285T is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 7 January 2025 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025) architecture. It features 24 cores and 24 threads. Base frequency is 1.4 GHz, with boost up to 5.4 GHz. L3 cache: 36 MB (total). L2 cache: 3 MB (per core). Built on 3 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1851. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-6400. Passmark benchmark score: 36,916 points. Launch price was $549.

EPYC 8124P

The EPYC 8124P is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 18 September 2023 (2 years ago). It is based on the Siena (2023−2024) architecture. It features 16 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 2.45 GHz, with boost up to 3 GHz. L3 cache: 64 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 5 nm process technology. Socket: SP6. Thermal design power (TDP): 125 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 36,079 points. Launch price was $639.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core Ultra 9 285T packs 24 cores / 24 threads, while the EPYC 8124P offers 16 cores / 32 threads — the Core Ultra 9 285T has 8 more cores. Boost clocks reach 5.4 GHz on the Core Ultra 9 285T versus 3 GHz on the EPYC 8124P — a 57.1% clock advantage for the Core Ultra 9 285T (base: 1.4 GHz vs 2.45 GHz). The Core Ultra 9 285T uses the Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025) architecture (3 nm), while the EPYC 8124P uses Siena (2023−2024) (5 nm). In PassMark, the Core Ultra 9 285T scores 36,916 against the EPYC 8124P's 36,079 — a 2.3% lead for the Core Ultra 9 285T. L3 cache: 36 MB (total) on the Core Ultra 9 285T vs 64 MB (total) on the EPYC 8124P.

Feature	Core Ultra 9 285T	EPYC 8124P
Cores / Threads	24 / 24+50%	16 / 32
Boost Clock	5.4 GHz+80%	3 GHz
Base Clock	1.4 GHz	2.45 GHz+75%
L3 Cache	36 MB (total)	64 MB (total)+78%
L2 Cache	3 MB (per core)+200%	1 MB (per core)
Process	3 nm-40%	5 nm
Architecture	Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025)	Siena (2023−2024)
PassMark	36,916+2%	36,079

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core Ultra 9 285T uses the LGA1851 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the EPYC 8124P uses SP6 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 6400 on the Core Ultra 9 285T versus 4800 on the EPYC 8124P — the Core Ultra 9 285T supports 28.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 8124P supports up to 2048 of RAM compared to 256 — 155.6% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core Ultra 9 285T) vs 6 (EPYC 8124P). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core Ultra 9 285T) vs 96 (EPYC 8124P) — the EPYC 8124P offers 76 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Z890,B860 (Core Ultra 9 285T) and SP6 (EPYC 8124P).

Feature	Core Ultra 9 285T	EPYC 8124P
Socket	LGA1851	SP6
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+25%	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	6400+33%	4800
Max RAM Capacity	256	2048+700%
RAM Channels	2	6+200%
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	20	96+380%

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Only the EPYC 8124P supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core Ultra 9 285T) vs AMD-V, IOMMU (EPYC 8124P). The Core Ultra 9 285T includes integrated graphics (Intel Arc Xe-LPG Graphics), while the EPYC 8124P requires a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: Core Ultra 9 285T rivals Ryzen 9 7900; EPYC 8124P rivals Xeon Gold 6426Y.

Feature	Core Ultra 9 285T	EPYC 8124P
Integrated GPU	Yes	No
IGPU Model	Intel Arc Xe-LPG Graphics	None
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	Yes
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	AMD-V, IOMMU

💰

Value Analysis

The Core Ultra 9 285T launched at $549 MSRP, while the EPYC 8124P debuted at $639. On MSRP ($549 vs $639), the Core Ultra 9 285T is $90 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core Ultra 9 285T delivers 67.2 pts/$ vs 56.5 pts/$ for the EPYC 8124P — making the Core Ultra 9 285T the 17.4% better value option.