
Core i9-9900KF
Popular choices:

Core Ultra 7 265U
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - CPU
About PassMark
PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.
Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook
This comparison brings together gaming FPS, productivity performance, platform differences, power efficiency, pricing context, and upgrade path so you can see which CPU actually makes more sense.
Core i9-9900KF
2019Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +6.8% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (16 MB vs 12 MB).
- ✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $488 MSRP, while Core Ultra 7 265U mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌578.6% higher power demand at 95W vs 14W.
- ❌Older platform position on LGA1151 with DDR4, while Core Ultra 7 265U moves to FCBGA2049 and DDR5.
Core Ultra 7 265U
2025Why buy it
- ✅Draws 14W instead of 95W, a 81W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on FCBGA2049 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1151 and DDR4.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i9-9900KF across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (17,900 vs 18,029).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 16 MB).
Core i9-9900KF
2019Core Ultra 7 265U
2025Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +6.8% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (16 MB vs 12 MB).
- ✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Why buy it
- ✅Draws 14W instead of 95W, a 81W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on FCBGA2049 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1151 and DDR4.
Trade-offs
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $488 MSRP, while Core Ultra 7 265U mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌578.6% higher power demand at 95W vs 14W.
- ❌Older platform position on LGA1151 with DDR4, while Core Ultra 7 265U moves to FCBGA2049 and DDR5.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i9-9900KF across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (17,900 vs 18,029).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 16 MB).
Quick Answers
So, is Core i9-9900KF better than Core Ultra 7 265U?
Which one is better for gaming?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Games Benchmarks
To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.
Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | Core i9-9900KF | Core Ultra 7 265U |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 301 FPS | 278 FPS |
| medium | 264 FPS | 249 FPS |
| high | 222 FPS | 210 FPS |
| ultra | 190 FPS | 181 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 247 FPS | 231 FPS |
| medium | 195 FPS | 186 FPS |
| high | 159 FPS | 153 FPS |
| ultra | 140 FPS | 134 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 170 FPS | 161 FPS |
| medium | 136 FPS | 131 FPS |
| high | 105 FPS | 102 FPS |
| ultra | 92 FPS | 89 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i9-9900KF | Core Ultra 7 265U |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 451 FPS | 448 FPS |
| medium | 451 FPS | 372 FPS |
| high | 451 FPS | 327 FPS |
| ultra | 405 FPS | 287 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 451 FPS | 415 FPS |
| medium | 451 FPS | 344 FPS |
| high | 421 FPS | 303 FPS |
| ultra | 361 FPS | 256 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 404 FPS | 310 FPS |
| medium | 342 FPS | 268 FPS |
| high | 320 FPS | 249 FPS |
| ultra | 274 FPS | 211 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i9-9900KF | Core Ultra 7 265U |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 451 FPS | 448 FPS |
| medium | 451 FPS | 448 FPS |
| high | 451 FPS | 448 FPS |
| ultra | 451 FPS | 448 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 451 FPS | 448 FPS |
| medium | 451 FPS | 448 FPS |
| high | 451 FPS | 448 FPS |
| ultra | 451 FPS | 448 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 451 FPS | 448 FPS |
| medium | 451 FPS | 448 FPS |
| high | 425 FPS | 415 FPS |
| ultra | 354 FPS | 348 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i9-9900KF | Core Ultra 7 265U |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 451 FPS | 448 FPS |
| medium | 451 FPS | 448 FPS |
| high | 451 FPS | 448 FPS |
| ultra | 451 FPS | 448 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 451 FPS | 448 FPS |
| medium | 451 FPS | 448 FPS |
| high | 451 FPS | 448 FPS |
| ultra | 451 FPS | 448 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 451 FPS | 448 FPS |
| medium | 451 FPS | 448 FPS |
| high | 451 FPS | 448 FPS |
| ultra | 437 FPS | 414 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i9-9900KF and Core Ultra 7 265U

Core i9-9900KF
Core i9-9900KF
The Core i9-9900KF is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 8 January 2019 (6 years ago). It is based on the Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 3.6 GHz, with boost up to 5 GHz. L3 cache: 16 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1151. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2666. Passmark benchmark score: 18,029 points. Launch price was $488.

Core Ultra 7 265U
Core Ultra 7 265U
The Core Ultra 7 265U is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 January 2025 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Arrow Lake-U (2025) architecture. It features 12 cores and 14 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 5.3 GHz. L3 cache: 12 MB. Built on 5 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA2049. Thermal design power (TDP): 14 MB + 12 MB. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 17,900 points. Launch price was $299.
Processing Power
The Core i9-9900KF packs 8 cores / 16 threads, while the Core Ultra 7 265U offers 12 cores / 14 threads — the Core Ultra 7 265U has 4 more cores. Boost clocks reach 5 GHz on the Core i9-9900KF versus 5.3 GHz on the Core Ultra 7 265U — a 5.8% clock advantage for the Core Ultra 7 265U (base: 3.6 GHz vs 2.4 GHz). The Core i9-9900KF uses the Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019) architecture (14 nm), while the Core Ultra 7 265U uses Arrow Lake-U (2025) (5 nm). In PassMark, the Core i9-9900KF scores 18,029 against the Core Ultra 7 265U's 17,900 — a 0.7% lead for the Core i9-9900KF. L3 cache: 16 MB (total) on the Core i9-9900KF vs 12 MB on the Core Ultra 7 265U.
| Feature | Core i9-9900KF | Core Ultra 7 265U |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 8 / 16 | 12 / 14+50% |
| Boost Clock | 5 GHz | 5.3 GHz+6% |
| Base Clock | 3.6 GHz+50% | 2.4 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 16 MB (total)+33% | 12 MB |
| L2 Cache | 256K (per core) | — |
| Process | 14 nm | 5 nm-64% |
| Architecture | Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019) | Arrow Lake-U (2025) |
| PassMark | 18,029 | 17,900 |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 12,812 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 1,720 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 8,150 | — |
Memory & Platform
The Core i9-9900KF uses the LGA1151 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core Ultra 7 265U uses FCBGA2049 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Core i9-9900KF | Core Ultra 7 265U |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1151 | FCBGA2049 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 5.0+67% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR4-2666 | — |
| Max RAM Capacity | 128 GB | — |
| RAM Channels | 2 | — |
| ECC Support | No | — |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | — |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d (Core i9-9900KF) / not specified (Core Ultra 7 265U). Primary use case: Core i9-9900KF targets Gaming.
| Feature | Core i9-9900KF | Core Ultra 7 265U |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | — |
| Unlocked | Yes | — |
| AVX-512 | No | — |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | — |
| Target Use | Gaming | — |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.












