Intel Core Ultra 7 265K

Alot of hate on intel these days with the x3d chips out and all. I got this on sale and its performing just fine. If you run the 200s boost it performs on 7800x3d levels and its 200 cheaper than the 9800x3d.

JacobM · 2026-01-02 · via bestbuy

The Gaming performance is decent, the CPU is stable, and it doesn't run hot or consume a ton of power. In Gaming it beats on and beats out older 14nm Intel processors, and it can go toe to toe with Alder Lake processors. I haven't checked out the performance of the Integrated Graphics, but it is supposedly way better than what Intel had used for years with their Core i desktop processors. Where this processor really shines is with workstation type tasks. Pound for pound and dollar for dollar there isn't a better value. I ran a number of benchmarks such as a few different versions of Cinebench and the benchmark numbers this thing puts out is amazing. The Skymont based E-Cores on these Arrow Lake processors are greatly improved over the Gracemont E-Cores that were used in Raptor Lake and Alder Lake. The reason I bought this is I was forced to buy a motherboard with a 5090, and I decided to upgrade my Daughter's computer which had a Core i9-9900k. I gave her a choice between Intel and AMD Ryzen, and she picked Intel. Since I had a spare motherboard for both platforms, I decided on this processor. The Core Ultra 9 285k would have been nice, but I didn't see a reason to pay almost twice as much for four extra E-Cores and slightly higher clock frequencies. Given a choice for my own system, I probably wouldn't buy one of these unless I needed something cheap for CAD, Premiere Pro, or something that can leverage Quick-Sync. What I dislike the most is not the CPU, but the platform. Intel plans to release Arrow Lake refresh processors for this platform, then they'll ditch it for another socket with Panther/Nova Lake. At least AMD is going to squeeze out Zen 6 for socket AM5. Overall this is a good processor. In some ways it reminds me of the workstation type value the old FX-8150 and FX-8350 brought to the table, but it doesn't have all of the heat and power consumption issues that came with those processors.

Another Customer · 2025-06-22 · via amazon

I am not one to be on the bleeding edge of tech especially knowing the LGA-1851 socket will not last 3 gens like the LGA-1700. However there were too many new benefits for me. Specifically the 4 additional PCIe 5 lanes for faster Nvme speeds as well as Built in Thunderbolt, and running less hot. I had a Z790 with a 14700k that ran very hot and realizing this one may also run hot, I opted for a 360 AIO instead of the 280 push/pull rad I had on the 14700k. Overall, the initial benchmarks are better than the 14700, not hugely substantial, but still outperforms. The z890 also outperforms the Z790. I also benched just the chip and the new GPU which is impressive for an on chip GPU. They have learned a lot from their ARC graphics and the tech and drivers have gotten better. The graphics are a vast improvement over their other built in GPUs. I happened to use a separate video card in daily use, but wanted to highlight the improvements since they were noticeable IMO. The GPU obviously doesnt compare to a dedicated GPU, however for business users and even some light gaming you can be happy with its performance. This is a good solid CPU upgrade regardless of whether you have a dedicated GPU or not and it runs a lot cooler at slightly better cpu performance. I was already using some fast DDR5 so it was an easy upgrade for me.

Craigc · 2025-11-05 · via amazon

If you watch certain popular YouTube tech channels and read the hivemind babble at a certain site that rhymes with “head hit”, then you would believe that computers have no other purpose in this world but to play games. In that regard, there is no denying that AMD excels at building CPUs that out-game Intel (although, the margins are not as great as they want you to believe), but Intel excels in productivity tasks which is far more important than getting a few more frames in whatever the latest and greatest AAA game is. I mean, AMD uses computers to design and build their CPUs for all those gamey people (yes, some of them do stink - attitudes anyway), so productivity is king. Intel took a pretty good beat down for the issues with 13th and 14th generation CPUs and stumbled out of the gate with these Core Ultra chips, but these problems are blown out of proportion by the aforementioned outlets and I have not seen much in the way of retractions when Intel admitted (and fixed) the problems with this current gen, so be careful where you get your information. If you are considering buying this CPU, there are two videos I highly recommend watching. Go to YouTube and search “Is The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K Really That Bad? Blackbird PC”, and “We're looking at it ALL wrong...AMD Ryzen 9900x vs Intel Core Ultra 7 265k Tech Notice”. These are two YouTubers who provide proper objective results without all the drama and hyperbole of the popular channels who are just feeding the “head hit” beast and working their own personal agendas. I have run a few synthetic benchmarks and performance was very good, but I prefer real world results like video compression with Handbrake, which produced some seriously impressive numbers. The time it takes to process a 2-pass encode for Blu Ray files is about 50% -60% less than it took my i5 10600k, and it stays pretty cool with the highest temps on some of the cores hitting 84C with a Thermalright Phantom Spirit cooler. Even though my temps were perfectly fine out of the box, I still like to keep things as cool as possible and I have undervolted to a stable - 0.075. The Core Ultra chips benefit greatly from faster RAM, and 8000MHz seems to be the stable sweet spot from all the reviews I have watched, but I opted for less expensive 7200MHz which is more than adequate for a home setup. If there are concerns about CPU bending like previous gens, then look for motherboards that utilize the new reduced load ILM (RL-ILM). The initial release price was a bit tough to swallow, but now they are very budget-friendly and pretty much a no-brainer if you like to do things with your PC other than play games.

Richard3107 · 2025-07-23 · via amazon

I don’t usually write reviews, but I had to give credit where it’s due. I upgraded to the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K after using an older i7 for years, and the difference is night and day. This thing flies. Whether I’m editing 4K video, running multiple VMs, gaming on ultra settings, or doing 3D rendering in Blender — the 265K handles it all without breaking a sweat. What impressed me the most was the balance between power and efficiency. Even under heavy load, thermals are very manageable (paired it with a decent cooler), and it doesn’t chug watts like older high-core-count CPUs. The 20-core architecture is perfect for multitasking — I’ve literally had 50 Chrome tabs open, Premiere Pro rendering, and a game running simultaneously. No hiccups. Also, shoutout to Intel for keeping single-core performance top-notch. Games run crazy smooth, and frame times are tight. I considered going AMD for a minute, but honestly, this chip gave me the best of both worlds: high thread count and insane IPC. If you’re building a high-performance rig for creative work, content creation, or serious gaming — this CPU is worth every penny. It’s future-proof, it’s fast, and it’s shockingly efficient. 10/10.

Josiah Allen · 2025-07-30 · via amazon

MSI

Not tracked at this retailer

Newegg (Open Box)

Not tracked at this retailer

VALUE SCORE

FUTURE-PROOFING

Cores

20C/20T

Boost

5.5GHz

Socket

LGA1851

TDP

125W

Cores

24C/undefinedT

Boost

5.5GHz

Socket

LGA1851

TDP

125W