Why you can trust 3DTested Our expert reviewers spend hours testing and comparing products and services so you can choose the best for you. Find out more about how we test.

Go to page:

A Step in the Right Direction

Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus — (Image credit: 3DTested)

The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus carries two identities. On the productivity front, it’s unbelievable. You’re getting flagship performance at a mainstream price, and there’s no other way to frame it. Not only is Intel besting its own Arrow Lake flagship, it’s also standing toe-to-toe with the Ryzen 9 9950X while asking for half the price. Looking just at application performance, it’s an unbelievable value.

Gaming performance brings things back down to earth. Intel is only able to marginally outclass the Core i7-14700K and Ryzen 7 9700X. It also isn't able to beat the Core i9-14900K. If you want to game and run demanding apps in equal measure, the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is excellent. But if you lean heavily in the direction of gaming, AMD’s options still reign supreme, including the Ryzen 7 9700X and especially the Ryzen 5 7600X3D if you have a Micro Center nearby.

A big reason why is platform longevity. As impressive as the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is in some workloads, it’s launching on a dead-end platform. We likely won’t see any further releases on the LGA 1851 socket that push past the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus. All eyes are on Nova Lake, and it’s difficult to justify buying into a platform that is on its way out the door. That’s especially true against AM5, which will see support through at least the end of next year.

Still, the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is compelling at this moment. With RAM prices through the roof, SSD prices continually climbing, and GPUs doubling down with scarcity, you need a cost-effective system that will last. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is a well-rounded chip taking into account both productivity and gaming performance, and it’s arriving at a price that’s actually reasonable. Add the fact that you can get away with a B- or H-series chipset, and the whole package isn’t too shabby.

Current page: A Step in the Right Direction

Prev Page Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus Power, Efficiency, and Test Bench

TOPICS

27 Comments Comment from the forums

Gururu

I'd hate to be coming back into hardware scene right now. So many different SKUs from everyone, quite overwhelming.
Reply
bit_user

I think it's a little controversial to include iBOT in a hardware review, unless you at least test with it both on & off, so see how much it's contributing.

I'm not really surprised to see something like this come along. I figured we'd have it by now, but I thought it'd be accompanied by hardware changes that required it. Based on my understanding, it's not really different than what JIT-based emulators are doing, for instance like when you run x86 code on ARM CPUs. In this case, it just so happens to be doing x86 -> x86.
Reply
TerryLaze

Admin said:
Gaming performance still struggles,
114 minimum FPS on average in a suite of 17 games...."Struggles"
Reply
colossusrage

TerryLaze said:
114 minimum FPS on average in a suite of 17 games...."Struggles"
Yeah, poor choice of words, maybe struggles to keep up with 9800X3D, but on its own it's a good gaming CPU.
Reply
usertests

The die-to-die frequency increase has helped it to perform much better than a typical refresh, although it clearly tanks efficiency and idle power consumption badly.

Combined with the price, while it's not magic, it's the best possible outcome for Arrow Lake.

It will be interesting to see if the other reviews are so generous with iBOT.
Reply
Gururu

Reviews across the board are painting it as an absolute best for value. HU complained about the temps but the major tiff everyone had was of course the platform, being DDR5 and dead end. If I waited this long to upgrade from a DDR4, I'd just wait for Nova or Zen 6. If I have an 1851 already, the performance bump doesn't warrant more spending. If I was buying for family or significant others who don't upgrade period, this is a no-brainer.
Reply
Notton

I know builder and tycoon games aren't popular, but if you really want to test out CPU performance, load an end game save from Factorio, Timberborn, Cities Skylines 2, or Transport Fever 2.

The path finding calculation will bring a 9850X3D to its knees, and you'll get to see the true value of an X3D processor.

Also, where is the i5 250K review?
Reply
warezme

TerryLaze said:
114 minimum FPS on average in a suite of 17 games...."Struggles"
This is valid. The test configuration is a 5090FE at 1920x1080, where the CPU becomes the limiting factor. Otherwise if you were to put a 5090FE on pretty much any modern CPU you would get equally high frame rates even at higher resolutions just not as many as you would on a 9800X3D, 9850X3D or even 9700 where the 270 wouldn't keep up.
Reply
rluker5

warezme said:
This is valid. The test configuration is a 5090FE at 1920x1080, where the CPU becomes the limiting factor. Otherwise if you were to put a 5090FE on pretty much any modern CPU you would get equally high frame rates even at higher resolutions just not as many as you would on a 9800X3D, 9850X3D or even 9700 where the 270 wouldn't keep up.
No Ryzen that isn't an X3D tested here can keep up with the 270K+ in games, the more expensive and vastly slower in everything else 9700X included.
Https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/WVvc7x7yHrYgJKwdTp7WEo-1200-80.png.webpTom's should just add that the non X3D Ryzens are all a worse choice for gaming when they mention that better gaming chips are lackluster. That would be a way to seem unbiased.

Edit: You could call the 270K+ the $300 9950X.
Reply
bit_user

Gururu said:
If I waited this long to upgrade from a DDR4, I'd just wait for Nova or Zen 6.
But, what if they're both delayed until 2027, as some rumors have suggested?
Reply

Show more comments

Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus review: Back from the brink

Unbelievable productivity performance at an even more unbelievable price – shame gaming still takes a backseat.