In Atomfall, the FX-8370 is slower than the Core Ultra 9 285. However, it's a better value for money, as it's $311 cheaper!
FX-8370
- Up to 55% cheaper – $252.02 vs $563.41
- Up to 55% cheaper
- Up to 42% better value in Atomfall – $1.31 vs $2.27/FPS
- Up to 42% 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 10 years and 4 months newer – Jan 14, 2025 vs Sep 02, 2014
- Is 10 years and 4 months newer
- Consumes up to 48% less energy – 65 vs 125 Watts
- Consumes up to 48% less energy
Atomfall FPS Calculator
FX-8370 vs Core Ultra 9 285: Comparison of performance and price
FX-8370
Sep 2nd, 2014
Average FPS
191 FPS
77%
Min 1% FPS
143 FPS
77%
Price, $
$252.02
100%
Value, $/FPS
$1.31/FPS
100%
Core Ultra 9 285
Jan 14th, 2025
Average FPS
248 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
186 FPS
100%
Price, $
$563.41
44%
Value, $/FPS
$2.27/FPS
58%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The FX-8370 vs Core Ultra 9 285 in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The FX-8370 vs Core Ultra 9 285 in core CPU performance specifications
FX-8370
Sep 2nd, 2014
Cores
8-core
33%
L3 Cache
8 MB
22%
Base Frequency
4 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
4.3 GHz
77%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
1866 MHz
29%
Core Ultra 9 285
Jan 14th, 2025
Cores
24-core
100%
L3 Cache
36 MB
100%
Base Frequency
2.5 GHz
62%
Turbo Frequency
5.6 GHz
100%
Max. DDR5 RAM Speed
6400 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
FX-8370 Sep 2nd, 2014 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Core Ultra 9 285 Jan 14th, 2025 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Sep 2nd, 2014 | Released | Jan 14th, 2025 |
$199.00 | MSRP | $579.00 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| AM3+ | Socket | LGA1851 |
| 125 W | Power Consumption | 65 W |
| Other Features | ||
| 1866 MHz (DDR3) | RAM | 6400 MHz (DDR5) |
| On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | Integrated GPU | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU |
Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
