For those looking to invest in high-end PC components or laptops with longevity in mind, it’s crucial to be informed before purchasing top-tier models. For example, in the PC market, the RTX 5090 is often an unreasonable choice given its current prices of 3,500-4,000 euros, and the same applies to CPUs like the Ryzen 9 9950X3D2, which is only 0.8% faster than the 9950X3D. Intel is not immune to this trend; we’ve seen multiple instances where Intel Core 7 CPUs (including older Core i7 models) offered minimal improvements over Core 5 processors, especially in laptops. This was the case with the Core Ultra 9 290K Plus desktop processor, and it’s fortunate that Intel discarded it, as the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus offers the same performance.
When Intel launched its Core Ultra series (which were originally intended to be the Core i5 lineup), they didn’t generate significant excitement. While there were some changes, such as the use of cores without Hyper-Threading and a reduction from 24 cores to 20 cores in the top-tier models, the performance gains were not impressive. There were improvements considering these architectural changes, but users expect tangible performance increases, and here, the difference was almost negligible. Something similar would have happened had Intel released the 290K Plus, likely resulting in poor sales.
Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus Specifications Revealed: Essentially a Core Ultra 7 270K Plus with +100 MHz
Although we reported months ago that Intel had canceled the Core Ultra 9 290K Plus for PCs, a content creator from Bilibili has apparently obtained one. To be precise, it’s a prototype of the CPU, as it never went on sale, but it was canceled late in the development cycle, suggesting the specifications are likely final. It is indeed recognized as an Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus processor, as seen in the CPU-Z screenshots.
This processor features 8 P-Cores operating at a maximum frequency of 5.5 GHz and 6 E-Cores that boost up to 4.8 GHz. For comparison, the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has the same P-Cores but runs at a frequency of 5.4 GHz, and its E-Cores also max out at 4.7 GHz. Now that we know its actual specifications, it’s evident that its performance would barely change, being only 100 MHz faster than the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus.
Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus Shows Only a 2-3% Performance Increase Over the 270K Plus
Moving on to performance metrics, we can confirm this observation. In CPU-Z, the Core Ultra 9 290K achieves 920 points in single-core and 19,546 points in multi-core, while the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus scores 905 points in single-core and 19,007 points in multi-core. In Cinebench R23, the scores are nearly identical: 2,465 vs. 2,433 points in single-core and 44,810 vs. 44,230 points in multi-core.
Cinebench R24 shows minimal differences, with 145 points in single-core for the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus and 146 points for the Core Ultra 9 290K Plus. In Geekbench, the difference is around 3%, consistent with the previous tests. Finally, in gaming benchmarks, there are also no significant differences. The Core Ultra 9 290K Plus might offer a gain of 1-6 FPS, with the exception of Delta Force where it’s 18 FPS faster. However, this is nowhere near the Ryzen 9 9950X3D2, which outperforms the 270K Plus by 63 FPS.
