In Atomfall, the Xeon W3670 is slower than the Core Ultra 9 285K. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Xeon W3670
No clear advantages
Core Ultra 9 285K
- Up to 32% faster in Atomfall – 251 vs 190 FPS
- Up to 32% faster in Atomfall
- Is 14 years and 1 month newer – Oct 24, 2024 vs Aug 29, 2010
- Is 14 years and 1 month newer
- Consumes up to 4% less energy – 125 vs 130 Watts
- Consumes up to 4% less energy
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
Atomfall FPS Calculator
Xeon W3670 vs Core Ultra 9 285K: Comparison of performance and price
All items are out of stock
Core Ultra 9 285K
Oct 24th, 2024
Average FPS
251 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
188 FPS
100%
Price, $
$505.16
100%
Value, $/FPS
$2.01/FPS
100%
![Intel Core Ultra 9 285K Tetracosa-core [24 Core] 3.70 GHz Processor - OEM Pack - Box](https://howmanyfps.nyc3.digitaloceanspaces.com/static/cpus/B0DFKC99VL.jpg)
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Xeon W3670 vs Core Ultra 9 285K in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Xeon W3670 vs Core Ultra 9 285K in core CPU performance specifications
Xeon W3670
Aug 29th, 2010
Cores
6-core
25%
L3 Cache
12 MB
33%
Base Frequency
3.2 GHz
86%
Turbo Frequency
3.466 GHz
61%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
MHz
Core Ultra 9 285K
Oct 24th, 2024
Cores
24-core
100%
L3 Cache
36 MB
100%
Base Frequency
3.7 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
5.7 GHz
100%
Max. DDR5 RAM Speed
6400 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Xeon W3670 Aug 29th, 2010 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Core Ultra 9 285K Oct 24th, 2024 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Aug 29th, 2010 | Released | Oct 24th, 2024 |
| – | MSRP | $589.00 |
Server | Segment | Desktop |
| LGA1366 | Socket | LGA1851 |
| 130 W | Power Consumption | 125 W |
| Other Features | ||
| DDR3 | RAM | 6400 MHz (DDR5) |
| No Integrated Graphics | Integrated GPU | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Overclockable |
