Hardware

Intel scrapped the Core Ultra 9 290K Plus because benchmarks showed only 2% gain

SiliconFeed Editorial
IntelCore UltraCPU benchmarksproduct cancellationAMD Ryzen

Sections and tags — in the Topics menu Search the feed

At a glance:

  • Intel canceled the Core Ultra 9 290K Plus before release due to underwhelming benchmark results.
  • Prototype tests show only a 2% average FPS gain in gaming and 4% in productivity over the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus.
  • The decision preserves the excellent value of the existing Arrow Lake refresh CPUs amid stiff competition from AMD.

Intel's Canceled Flagship

Intel has officially scrapped the Core Ultra 9 290K Plus, a flagship processor that was rumored to be part of the Arrow Lake refresh lineup. Despite leaks and confirmations of its existence, the chip never made it to market. A Chinese reviewer recently obtained an engineering sample and conducted extensive benchmarks, revealing performance gains so marginal that they likely prompted Intel to keep the prototype in the archives. The Core Ultra 9 290K Plus was based on the existing Core Ultra 7 270K Plus but with minor clock speed increases, DDR5-7200 support, and Intel's binary optimization tool, which is exclusive to Arrow Lake refresh silicon.

The engineering sample was validated through the BIOS and the optimization tool, confirming its legitimacy. However, the benchmark results across various applications and games showed only slim improvements, raising questions about the necessity of a higher-tier SKU that would likely command a much higher price without delivering commensurate performance benefits.

Benchmark Results Revealed

Comprehensive benchmarks from the prototype highlight the minimal gains. In CPU and productivity tests, the Core Ultra 9 290K Plus edged out the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus by an average of 2.84% in multi-core CPU-Z, 2.84% in Cinebench R23 multi-core, 1.10% in Cinebench R24 multi-core, and 2.67% in Geekbench 6 multi-core. Single-core performance saw even smaller deltas, ranging from 0.69% to 1.65%. In intensive tasks like compression and rendering, the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D2 often outperformed both Intel chips, though the 290K Plus was 9.3% faster in Ansys Fluent Simulation and 4.6% faster than the 270K Plus in the same test.

Gaming benchmarks further illustrate the narrow gap. At 1080p, the average FPS improvement over the 270K Plus was just 2% across six titles. The largest difference occurred in Delta Force, with an 8.3% higher FPS and 3.33% better 1% lows, but Black Myth: Wukong and Resident Evil 9 saw the 290K Plus lose to the 270K Plus by around 1%. At 1440p, the disparity shrank even more, with an average gain of only 1.5%, as GPU limitations became more pronounced.

Benchmark Metric Core Ultra 9 290K Plus Core Ultra 7 270K Plus Performance Delta (U9 vs U7)
CPU-Z (Single-Core) 920 905 +1.65%
CPU-Z (Multi-Core) 19,546 19,007 +2.84%
Cinebench R23 (Single-Core) 2,465 2,433 +1.32%
Cinebench R23 (Multi-Core) 44,810 44,230 +1.31%
Cinebench R24 (Single-Core) 146 145 +0.69%
Cinebench R24 (Multi-Core) 2,568 2,540 +1.10%
Geekbench 6 (Single-Core) 3,315 3,286 +0.88%
Geekbench 6 (Multi-Core) 24,273 23,642 +2.67%
Game Core Ultra 9 290K Plus Core Ultra 7 270K Plus Performance Delta (U9 vs U7)
Counter Strike 2 Avg: 368 / 1% Low: 214 Avg: 364 / 1% Low: 212 Avg: +1.10% / 1% Low: +0.94%
PUBG Avg: 193 / 1% Low: 99 Avg: 189 / 1% Low: 96 Avg: +2.12% / 1% Low: +3.12%
Delta Force Avg: 234 / 1% Low: 93 Avg: 216 / 1% Low: 90 Avg: +8.33% / 1% Low: +3.33%
Black Myth: Wukong Avg: 98 / 1% Low: 87 Avg: 99 / 1% Low: 88 Avg: -1.01% / 1% Low: -1.14%
Resident Evil 9 Avg: 138 / 1% Low: 103 Avg: 139 / 1% Low: 100 Avg: -0.72% / 1% Low: +3.00%
Cyberpunk 2077 Avg: 206 / 1% Low: 123 Avg: 201 / 1% Low: 123 Avg: +2.49% / 1% Low: 0.00%
Game Core Ultra 9 290K Plus Core Ultra 7 270K Plus Performance Delta (U9 vs U7)
Counter Strike 2 Avg: 352 / 1% Low: 211 Avg: 344 / 1% Low: 209 Avg: +2.33% / 1% Low: +0.96%
PUBG Avg: 189 / 1% Low: 103 Avg: 188 / 1% Low: 94 Avg: +0.53% / 1% Low: +9.57%
Delta Force Avg: 218 / 1% Low: 89 Avg: 204 / 1% Low: 78 Avg: +6.86% / 1% Low: +14.10%
Black Myth: Wukong Avg: 86 / 1% Low: 76 Avg: 87 / 1% Low: 78 Avg: -1.15% / 1% Low: -2.56%
Resident Evil 9 Avg: 95 / 1% Low: 73 Avg: 95 / 1% Low: 73 Avg: 0.00% / 1% Low: 0.00%
Cyberpunk 2077 Avg: 184 / 1% Low: 127 Avg: 183 / 1% Low: 129 Avg: +0.55% / 1% Low: -1.55%

Why Intel Shelved the 290K Plus

The slim performance margins make it difficult to justify a significantly higher price for the Core Ultra 9 SKU. Intel likely concluded that releasing the 290K Plus would have disrupted the value proposition of the Arrow Lake refresh lineup, especially since the existing models, like the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus, already offer excellent performance. Optics also play a role; introducing a flagship with only minor improvements could have led to consumer confusion and criticism, undermining confidence in Intel's product strategy.

Moreover, the competitive landscape with AMD's Ryzen 9 9950X3D2, which leads in many benchmarks, means Intel must be strategic about its offerings. By canceling the 290K Plus, Intel avoids direct comparison where it falls short and focuses on strengthening its mid-range and value segments, where it can compete more effectively.

Implications for Intel and the Market

This cancellation underscores Intel's challenges in the high-end desktop market, where AMD has gained ground with innovations like 3D V-Cache. For consumers, the decision means the Arrow Lake refresh lineup remains a compelling choice for value, without an overpriced flagship diluting the brand. Looking ahead, Intel may need to accelerate architectural improvements or adjust pricing strategies to regain leadership in performance segments. The incident also highlights the importance of thorough internal benchmarking before product launches, ensuring that new models offer clear benefits over existing ones.

In the broader context, this move reflects a trend where incremental upgrades are less justifiable in a competitive market, pushing companies to focus on meaningful innovations rather than just higher model numbers.

Editorial SiliconFeed is an automated feed: facts are checked against sources; copy is normalized and lightly edited for readers.

FAQ

Why did Intel decide to cancel the Core Ultra 9 290K Plus?
Intel canceled the Core Ultra 9 290K Plus because internal benchmarks showed only a 2% performance gain in gaming and 4% in productivity over the existing Core Ultra 7 270K Plus. These slim margins made it difficult to justify a higher price tag for the flagship model, which could have disrupted the value proposition of the Arrow Lake refresh lineup and led to poor market reception amid stiff competition from AMD.
How did the prototype benchmarks compare to AMD's Ryzen 9 9950X3D2?
In the benchmarks, the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D2 often outperformed both Intel chips in intensive tasks and gaming. The Core Ultra 9 290K Plus was about 8.3% behind the 9950X3D2 on average, while the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus was even further behind. However, the 290K Plus did show a 9.3% advantage over the 9950X3D2 in Ansys Fluent Simulation, highlighting specific niche strengths where Intel's architecture excels.
What impact does this cancellation have on Intel's product strategy?
The cancellation allows Intel to maintain the excellent value of its released Arrow Lake refresh CPUs without an overpriced flagship that offers minimal improvements. It reflects a strategic focus on competitive segments where Intel can excel, rather than pushing marginal upgrades in a market where AMD leads. This move may prompt Intel to accelerate architectural innovations to regain high-end performance leadership and avoid similar missteps in future product cycles.

More in the feed

Prepared by the editorial stack from public data and external sources.

Original article