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.

Core Ultra 9 285T vs Xeon 6724P FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Core Ultra 9 285T vs Xeon 6724P: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Core Ultra 9 285T

2025

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +6.9% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $3,073 less on MSRP ($549 MSRP vs $3,622 MSRP).
✅Delivers 539.9% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 67.2 vs 10.5 PassMark/$ ($549 MSRP vs $3,622 MSRP).
✅Draws 35W instead of 210W, a 175W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel Arc Xe-LPG Graphics, while Xeon 6724P needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (36,916 vs 38,061).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (36 MB vs 72 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon 6724P, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 88 PCIe lanes.

Xeon 6724P

2025

Why buy it

✅+3.1% higher PassMark.
✅+100% larger total L3 cache (72 MB vs 36 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads, plus 88 PCIe lanes vs 20.
✅340% more PCIe lanes (88 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 9 285T across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 10.5 vs 67.2 PassMark/$ ($3,622 MSRP vs $549 MSRP).
❌500% higher power demand at 210W 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 Xeon 6724P?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon 6724P makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core Ultra 9 285T is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon 6724P is the stronger fit. You are getting 3.1% better PassMark, backed by 16 cores and 32 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 100% larger total L3 cache (72 MB vs 36 MB).

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

Core Ultra 9 285T is the better buy right now. Core Ultra 9 285T comes in $3,073 cheaper on MSRP at $549 MSRP versus $3,622 MSRP, and it still gives you a 6.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The compromise is that Xeon 6724P is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 3.1% better PassMark. It is also 539.9% better value on MSRP (67.2 vs 10.5 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Xeon 6724P makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting 100% larger total L3 cache (72 MB vs 36 MB), more multi-core headroom with 16 cores / 32 threads instead of 24/24, and AVX-512 support for heavier modern compute workloads. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Core Ultra 9 285T vs Xeon 6724P Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

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.

Xeon 6724P

The Xeon 6724P is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 24 February 2025 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Granite Rapids (2024−2025) architecture. It features 16 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 3.6 GHz, with boost up to 4.3 GHz. L3 cache: 72 MB (total). L2 cache: 2 MB (per core). Built on Intel 3 nm process technology. Socket: LGA4710. Thermal design power (TDP): 210 Watt. Memory support: DDR5(6400MT/s). Passmark benchmark score: 38,061 points. Launch price was $3,622.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core Ultra 9 285T packs 24 cores / 24 threads, while the Xeon 6724P 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 4.3 GHz on the Xeon 6724P — a 22.7% clock advantage for the Core Ultra 9 285T (base: 1.4 GHz vs 3.6 GHz). The Core Ultra 9 285T uses the Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025) architecture (3 nm), while the Xeon 6724P uses Granite Rapids (2024−2025) (Intel 3 nm). In PassMark, the Core Ultra 9 285T scores 36,916 against the Xeon 6724P's 38,061 — a 3.1% lead for the Xeon 6724P. L3 cache: 36 MB (total) on the Core Ultra 9 285T vs 72 MB (total) on the Xeon 6724P.

Feature	Core Ultra 9 285T	Xeon 6724P
Cores / Threads	24 / 24+50%	16 / 32
Boost Clock	5.4 GHz+26%	4.3 GHz
Base Clock	1.4 GHz	3.6 GHz+157%
L3 Cache	36 MB (total)	72 MB (total)+100%
L2 Cache	3 MB (per core)+50%	2 MB (per core)
Process	3 nm	Intel 3 nm
Architecture	Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025)	Granite Rapids (2024−2025)
PassMark	36,916	38,061+3%
Geekbench 6 Single	—	1,800
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	25,000

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core Ultra 9 285T uses the LGA1851 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Xeon 6724P uses LGA4710 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to 6400 memory speed. The Xeon 6724P supports up to 4096 GB of RAM compared to 256 GB — 1500% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core Ultra 9 285T) vs 8 (Xeon 6724P). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core Ultra 9 285T) vs 88 (Xeon 6724P) — the Xeon 6724P offers 68 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Z890,B860 (Core Ultra 9 285T) and C741 (Xeon 6724P).

Feature	Core Ultra 9 285T	Xeon 6724P
Socket	LGA1851	LGA4710
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+25%	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	6400	DDR5-6400
Max RAM Capacity	256 GB	4096 GB+1500%
RAM Channels	2	8+300%
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	20	88+340%

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Only the Xeon 6724P supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Both support VT-x, VT-d virtualization. The Core Ultra 9 285T includes integrated graphics (Intel Arc Xe-LPG Graphics), while the Xeon 6724P requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Xeon 6724P targets Server. Direct competitor: Core Ultra 9 285T rivals Ryzen 9 7900; Xeon 6724P rivals EPYC 9554.

Feature	Core Ultra 9 285T	Xeon 6724P
Integrated GPU	Yes	No
IGPU Model	Intel Arc Xe-LPG Graphics	None
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	Yes
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	VT-x, VT-d
Target Use	—	Server

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Core Ultra 9 285T was priced at $549, while the Xeon 6724P came in at $3622. On launch pricing ($549 vs $3622), Core Ultra 9 285T was $3073 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core Ultra 9 285T delivers 67.2 pts/$ vs 10.5 pts/$ for the Xeon 6724P — making the Core Ultra 9 285T the 145.9% better value option.

Feature	Core Ultra 9 285T	Xeon 6724P
MSRP	$549-85%	$3622
Performance per Dollar	67.2+540%	10.5
Release Date	2025	2025

Search Core Ultra 9 285T on Amazon

Search Xeon 6724P on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.