In Deathloop, the Core i3-3240 is slightly slower than the Core Ultra 9 285. However, it's a much better value for money, as it's $431 cheaper!
Core i3-3240
- Up to 77% cheaper – $128.99 vs $560.00
- Up to 77% cheaper
- Up to 75% better value in Deathloop – $0.58 vs $2.28/FPS
- Up to 75% better value in Deathloop
- Consumes up to 15% less energy – 55 vs 65 Watts
- Consumes up to 15% less energy
Core Ultra 9 285
- Up to 11% faster in Deathloop – 245 vs 221 FPS
- Up to 11% faster in Deathloop
- Is 12 years and 4 months newer – Jan 15, 2025 vs Sep 03, 2012
- Is 12 years and 4 months newer
Deathloop FPS Calculator
Core i3-3240 vs Core Ultra 9 285: Comparison of performance and price
Core i3-3240
Sep 3rd, 2012
Average FPS
221 FPS
90%
Min 1% FPS
166 FPS
91%
Price, $
$128.99
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.58/FPS
100%
Core Ultra 9 285
Jan 15th, 2025
Average FPS
245 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
183 FPS
100%
Price, $
$560
23%
Value, $/FPS
$2.28/FPS
25%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i3-3240 vs Core Ultra 9 285 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i3-3240 vs Core Ultra 9 285 in core CPU performance specifications
Core i3-3240
Sep 3rd, 2012
Cores
2-core
8%
L3 Cache
3 MB
8%
Base Frequency
3.4 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
GHz
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Core Ultra 9 285
Jan 15th, 2025
Cores
24-core
100%
L3 Cache
36 MB
100%
Base Frequency
2.5 GHz
74%
Turbo Frequency
5.6 GHz
100%
Max. DDR5 RAM Speed
6400 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Core i3-3240 Sep 3rd, 2012 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Core Ultra 9 285 Jan 15th, 2025 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Sep 3rd, 2012 | Released | Jan 15th, 2025 |
| – | MSRP | $579.00 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| LGA1155 | Socket | LGA1851 |
55 W | Power Consumption | 65 W |
| Other Features | ||
| DDR3 | RAM | 6400 MHz (DDR5) |
| Intel HD 2500 | Integrated GPU | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
