In Atomfall, the Core i7-2600 is slower than the Core Ultra 9 285. However, it's a better value for money, as it's $337 cheaper!
Core i7-2600
- Up to 60% cheaper – $226.37 vs $563.41
- Up to 60% cheaper
- Up to 48% better value in Atomfall – $1.18 vs $2.27/FPS
- Up to 48% better value in Atomfall
Core Ultra 9 285
- Up to 30% faster in Atomfall – 248 vs 191 FPS
- Up to 30% faster in Atomfall
- Is 14 years and 5 days newer – Jan 14, 2025 vs Jan 09, 2011
- Is 14 years and 5 days newer
- Consumes up to 32% less energy – 65 vs 95 Watts
- Consumes up to 32% less energy
Atomfall FPS Calculator
Core i7-2600 vs Core Ultra 9 285: Comparison of performance and price
Core i7-2600
Jan 9th, 2011
Average FPS
191 FPS
77%
Min 1% FPS
143 FPS
77%
Price, $
$226.37
100%
Value, $/FPS
$1.18/FPS
100%
Core Ultra 9 285
Jan 14th, 2025
Average FPS
248 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
186 FPS
100%
Price, $
$563.41
40%
Value, $/FPS
$2.27/FPS
52%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i7-2600 vs Core Ultra 9 285 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i7-2600 vs Core Ultra 9 285 in core CPU performance specifications
Core i7-2600
Jan 9th, 2011
Cores
4-core
17%
L3 Cache
8 MB
22%
Base Frequency
3.4 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
3.8 GHz
68%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Core Ultra 9 285
Jan 14th, 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 i7-2600 Jan 9th, 2011 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Core Ultra 9 285 Jan 14th, 2025 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Jan 9th, 2011 | Released | Jan 14th, 2025 |
| – | MSRP | $579.00 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| LGA1155 | Socket | LGA1851 |
| 95 W | Power Consumption | 65 W |
| Other Features | ||
| DDR3 | RAM | 6400 MHz (DDR5) |
| Intel HD 2000 | Integrated GPU | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
