Intel’s transition to the Ultra CPU series in late 2024 saw mixed reviews, notably with it being picked apart for its lacklustre gaming performance when benchmarked against the prior generation. None the less the flagship 285K and good value 265K models performed well with productivity workloads, all the while managing the power handling more efficiently than their immediate predecessors. After we saw the final few generations of increasingly power hungry “i” series chips, it really seemed like the Ultra range put Intel back in the running and here we see a mid-cycle refresh with two new chips for their range, with the Ultra 5 250K Plus 18 core and Ultra 270K Plus 24 Core.
Just on core count alone, the 270K Plus is an interesting proposition, arriving with the same number of cores as the flagship 285K CPU. With the 285K offering a 5.5GHz Performance core max turbo and 4.6GHz on the Efficient cores, we in contrast see that the 270K receives up to 5.4GHz on the Performance cores and 4.7GHz on the Efficient cores. With there being more Efficient cores on the 8P/16E configuration, the overall performance when you count up the clocks gives the 270K the edge on paper, with the mixed P/E cores being more closely clocked than previously. For apps that can take full advantage of all of the cores, this historically has tended to be beneficial when load balancing and often none more so than with applications used in the audio world. Windows 11 and the subsequent DAW software updates have been working hard towards optimizing for the mixed performance Intel chips, so it will be interesting to see the what happens when they close the gap again between the various cores.
Another interesting point of note is that around launch, the price of the 285K sits at some £220 more than the 270K setting up the new chip to create a major value shift within the range. On the silicon side they’ve improved the performance of the on-chip interconnects which should in turn help to reduce some internal processing latency and possibly improve memory handling. The 270K has a 250W max power limit much like the 285K above it in the range and so requires a high-end air cooler or AIO solution to keep it in check. The 250K Plus weighs in with a 159W maximum limit matching the 245K 14 core model it joins in the range. The ASUS based Z890 chipset testing setup remains the same as the prior Intel Ultra range testing with a triple fan AIO solution for cooling and the BIOS update applied to support the new chips. All testing carried out with an RME Babyface and Reaper as the DAW.
The DSP test opens straight away with a notable result, coming out marginally ahead of the 285K. I did recreate the 285K results on the current BIOS during this round of testing, so this does point towards the increase in efficient core performance as having enough impact to give it the lead in a spread workload. The 250K lands behind the 265K in performance terms more as expected, although at a price point closer to the 245K which once again changes the value perception within the range at this level.
The VI test gives us more of a focus on memory performance and handling of libraries, with the new Ultra Plus models slotting in behind the respective 265K and 285K models on the chart. The Ultra Plus chips increase the supported DDR5 RAM options to 7200MHz, which were used to obtain the results here. We also ran testing on the 6400MHz kit used on the prior 285K generation, with a shortfall of around 1 – 2% (depending on the ASIO buffer setting) when using the slower memory kits specifically on the VI test, with no impact on the other testing here. With the on-chip improvements this feels like it could have landed better on the 270K, but there remains the possibility of improved memory tuning in future BIOS updates. At a time of limited memory options however, particularly when it comes to the larger RAM kits, this tight set of results across the various memory speeds may help to ensure you have flexibility when building a system without having to make major compromises.
Finally the bus test again gives us no major surprises as the 270K lines up with the 285K, whereas the 250K manages to land somewhere between the 245K and 265K either side of it in the range depending on where we look in terms of the ASIO buffer setting.
The Ultra range refresh gave Intel a well needed overhaul, although failed to set the world alight for a good number of user scenarios. None the less for productivity setups the chips have been strong performers, so whilst the poor gaming reviews saw Intel reprice the 265K aggressively shortly after its launch, it’s been nothing less than a boon for workstation builds in a time where component pricing has been generally erratic. The Intel Ultra 270K plus is a surprising chip not just what they brought to the table in comparison to the 285K chip above it, but also with the price point they’ve introduced it at. We’re looking at flagship level performance for not much more than the price of the 265K, making this a relative bargain at a time when such things are generally rare.
The latest Intel Ultra Plus models don’t reinvent the wheel, rather they refine, optimize and build upon the platform successfully by doing so at new price points. Its time on the market however is only a short one, before we see AMD bring a long term “what if” chip to the market. Since the original launch of the X3D CPU series, there’s been a question of how well would such a chip work with dual 3D cache instead of the traditional single stack design. Finally we’re due to find out the answer in the coming weeks with the arrival of the 9950X3D2 chip, although not only will have to pull out all of the stops performance wise but also try and compete with the value offerings from Intel’s side. Can AMD shake up the market once again in response to the latest Ultra releases?