At T4G, my task is to cover the latest news around the gaming globe ASAP and with the utmost precision. I adore all the games and respect all the devs behind the amazing games that we get all year. So, whether it’s a PC or a Console game, I got it all covered.
Story Highlight
The Black Myth: Wukong team was reportedly crying after losing the GOTY award.
The game lost to Astro Bot at The Game Awards 2024 after winning other accolades.
The CEO has also openly criticized the winner’s selection criteria.
Black Myth: Wukong was the breakout title of this year. It broke several records and got excellent reviews from players and critics. However, to everyone’s surprise, it lost the Game of the Year award to Astro Bot at TGA 2024.
After the loss, Black Myth developers reportedly cried at the event.
Why it matters: People have openly criticized the Game Awards for being biased, and this seems to be one instance where the winner wasn’t selected solidly on merit.
Former Santa Monica writer says Black Myth devs cried after losing GOTY
According to Alanah Pearce, a former Santa Monica writer, a Black Myth dev was actually crying when Astro Bot was announced as the winner. She says this is something she has never seen before, and they were ‘clearly upset.‘
The Black Myth: Wukong team, I don’t know which person on the team, were crying when Astro Bot got the GOTY award.
– Alanah Pearce
Black Myth: Wukong lost the GOTY award to Astro Bot
Game Science is disappointed with the results. Previously, its CEO also criticized the winning criteria for the event. His main concern was coming all the way to TGA for nothing by losing out on the award.
There is no denying that Astro Bot was a solid contender, but most fans argue that Black Myth was more revolutionary, especially as it was the first time ever a Chinese game got nominated for the prestige award.
Anyhow, Game Science developers should keep their heads up as they did an excellent job. Awards aren’t necessarily the thing that defines a game’s quality. We can’t wait to see what the studio and other China-based will come up with next.
What are your thoughts on Black Myth developers crying after losing the GOTY award? Let us know your opinions in the comments or join the discussion at the official Tech4Gamers Forum.
Lead the comparison and blog writing teams at Tech4Gamers.
Oversee teams with a keen eye for detail and precision.
Ensure hands-on writing, with benchmarks and testing as guiding principles.
Guarantee the delivery of the best possible results in concise yet impactful tech tales.
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K
Rated: 7.5/10
AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D
Rated: 9/10
Pros And Cons
CPU
Pros
Cons
Core Ultra 9 285K
✅ Has 8 more physical cores
✅ More modern manufacturing process
❌ Much more expensive
Ryzen 9 7950X3D
✅ Has 92 MB larger L3 cache size
✅ Better in terms of performance
❌ Minor improvements
Key Takeaways
The 7950X3D was better in our gaming tests by around 23% when compared to the 285K, while the productivity tests were also smoother on the 285K.
Both chips had largely the same temperatures, while the 7950X3D used about 40% less power than the Core Ultra 9 285K.
As of this article’s writing, the Intel processor is about $25 more expensive than the 7950X3D, though this difference is subject to change.
For most people, the 7950X3D is the clear winner in this comparison. However, if you require tons of multi-core performance, you might want to go with the 285K.
Core Count: The Core Ultra 285K has 24 cores and 24 threads (8 P-cores and 16 E-cores), while the Ryzen 9 7950X3D has 16 cores and 32 threads.
Clock Speed: The 285K has a base clock of 3.7GHz and a boost 5.5GHz, whereas the 7950X3D has a base clock of 4.2GHz and a boost clock of up to 5.7GHz.
Cache: Intel’s flagship processor has 36 MB of L3 Cache, while the 7950X3D has 128 MB of cache.
TDP: The 285 K’s PL1 TDP is 125 watts, while the 7950X3D’s is 120 watts. The 285 K’s PL2 TDP is much higher than that of the 7950X3D.
Process Node: AMD’s 7950X3D has a 5nm fabrication process, while the 285K is more advanced with its 3nm process.
With the release of the 9800X3D, AMD has clearly established that it can far exceed what Intel is capable of in terms of gaming performance. Let us see in the Core Ultra 9 285K vs Ryzen 9 7950X3D comparison if this trend extends to the last generation of X3D chips as well!
Gaming Benchmarks – 1080p
After getting the specifications of these chips out of the way, this is the time to see these chips perform against each other in gaming tests. To perform this testing, we have used a measured test bench, the specs of which are written below.
Star Wars Jedi: Survivor @1080p (Image By Tech4Gamers)
We see the 7950X3D shooting past the 285K in Jedi: Survivor with an average of 204 FPS, while the Intel is 29% behind with an average of 158 FPS.
The disparity grows in the 1% lows, with the AMD chip getting lows of 184 FPS, which is around 39% higher than the 132 FPS of the 285K.
The Last Of Us Part 1
The Last Of Us Part 1 @1080p (Image By Tech4Gamers)
Surprisingly, the second game we tested had no difference between the Core Ultra 9 285K and the Ryzen 9 7950X3D, with both chips getting an average framerate of 196 FPS.
Our Last Of Us benchmark starts to lean towards the 285K in terms of the 1% lows, with the chip getting 145 FPS instead of the 12% lower 129 FPS of the 7950X3D.
Cyberpunk 2077
Cyberpunk 2077 @1080p (Image By Tech4Gamers)
There was a 40% difference between these chips in Cyberpunk, with the Core Ultra getting an average of 132 FPS while the Ryzen held closer to 185 FPS.
The minimum framerate was 36% higher on the AMD chip at 136 FPS instead of the more stuttery 100 FPS we saw while testing the Intel chip.
Assetto Corsa Competizione
Assetto Corsa Competizione @1080p (Image By Tech4Gamers)
ACC saw a 48% improvement with the Ryzen chip, getting an average framerate of 235 FPS, while the Core Ultra struggled to get an average of around 159 FPS.
1% lows differed by around 34%, with the Ryzen getting close to 185 FPS when there was a hard-to-render scene on screen, while the Core Ultra 9 hovered closer to 138 FPS.
Remnant 2
Remnant 2 @1080p (Image By Tech4Gamers)
The difference shrank to only 13% when testing Remnant 2 on both chips, where the Ryzen hung on to 137 FPS, while the Intel processor was closer to an average of 121 FPS.
The minimums showed a difference of around 12%, with the Ryzen processor hovering around 119 FPS, whereas the 285K tried to keep up with lows of around 106 FPS.
Homeworld 3
Homeworld 3 @1080p (Image By Tech4Gamers)
The average framerates of these processors were about 22% apart in Homeworld 3, with the 285K sticking to around 72 FPS, while the 7950X3D held closer to 88 FPS.
When we checked the 1% lows, the X3D processor was around 43 FPS, low, but still 79% ahead of the 24 FPS that the Core Ultra could supply.
Starfield
Starfield @1080p (Image By Tech4Gamers)
Towards the tail end of our comparison, we saw that the 7950X3D was only 25% ahead of the Core Ultra with an average of 129 FPS against the 285K’s 119 FPS.
The 1% lows were also only 7% apart, with the 7950X3D holding on to around 103 FPS, whereas the Core Ultra 9 stuck closer to about 96 FPS.
Watch Dogs: Legion
Watch Dogs: Legion @1080p (Image By Tech4Gamers)
Finally, the last test of our gaming benchmarks had an average framerate of around 203 FPS on the 7950X3D processor, which was 25% higher than the 162 FPS of the Core Ultra 9.
The minimums had a difference of around 29%, with the 7950X3D plateauing to around 150 FPS, while the 285K stuck closer to minimums of 116 FPS.
Productivity Tests
Now that we’re done with our gaming tests, we will focus on our newly added productivity test suite. We have performed these tests using the same benchmark as we used in the gaming benchmarks.
Cinebench R24
Cinebench R24 (Image By Tech4Gamers)
The Intel chip’s single-core performance was around 22% better, with a score of 150 points instead of the 123 points that the Ryzen processor achieved.
The multi-core performance proved to be a win for Intel, with a score of 2523 points against the 2119 points of the Ryzen processor.
7-Zip
7-Zip (Image By Tech4Gamers)
The Compression tests had a score of 203 points on the Core Ultra processor, which was only 1% lower than the 205 points that the 7950X3D could muster.
Decompression was a win on the Ryzen CPU, which had a score of 265 points, around 25% higher than the 212 points of the Core Ultra.
Photoshop
Photoshop (Image By Tech4Gamers)
Finally, our test of Photoshop using the Pudget systems benchmark showed that the Ryzen is the superior processor.
In our testing, the Ryzen 9 7950X3D scored 10399 points, 15% higher than the Intel chip’s 9026 points.
Our gaming tests signified that the Core Ultra 9 285K is far superior to the 7950X3D in almost anything you can play on it. The only exception to this was The Last Of Us, in which both processors got the same average framerate. Overall, there was a 23% increment in performance, going from the Core Ultra 285K to the 7950X3D.
1% Lows
The difference in the 1% lows was also more of the same story, with the 285K actually breaking the trend and winning in one game. Still, the overall gaming experience was much smoother on the X3D chip. We noticed a difference of around 22% on average in this metric.
Productivity
We noticed an overall difference of 8% in our productivity tests, leaning towards favoring the X3D processor. In our tests, the 7950X3D did much better than the 285K, except for the synthetic Cinebench benchmark in which the 285K flexed its performance in multi-threaded workloads.
Power Consumption
Game
Ryzen 9 7950X3D
Core Ultra 9 285K
Star Wars Jedi: Survivor
87
144
The Last Of Us Part 1
82
146
Cyberpunk 2077
88
123
Assetto Corsa Competizione
81
156
Remnant 2
89
154
Homeworld 3
80
134
Starfield
90
159
Watch Dogs: Legion
79
138
Average Power Draw
84.5⚡
144.25⚡
Winner: Ryzen 9 7950X3D
The 7950X3D and all the X3D processors in general have always been excellent at managing their power consumption, and the chip for today’s comparison is no different. We measured a whopping 70% increase in power going from the 7950X3D to the 285K.
Temperature
Game
Ryzen 9 7950X3D
Core Ultra 9 285K
Star Wars Jedi: Survivor
72
66
The Last Of Us Part 1
71
64
Cyberpunk 2077
69
68
Assetto Corsa Competizione
73
78
Remnant 2
66
67
Homeworld 3
64
76
Starfield
71
68
Watch Dogs: Legion
65
65
Average Temperatures
68.88🌡️
69🌡️
Winner: Ryzen 9 7950X3D
The difference in temperatures between the two chips was unremarkable. They hovered around the same temperature, and both processors stayed well within the safe temperature range for a modern CPU.
Price And Value
CPU
Ryzen 9 7950X3D
Core Ultra 9 285K
Price Difference
Launch MSRP
💲699
💲589
18.68%
Current Price
💲594
💲619
4.21%
Though the 7950X3D had a much higher launch MSRP, it has dropped substantially in price and will continue to do so in the months after the release of the 9800X3D and subsequent X3D chips. As of late November 2024, the 7950X3D is about 25 dollars cheaper than its rival for this comparison.
What We Recommend
AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D: In our Core Ultra 9 285K vs Ryzen 9 7950X3D comparison, the latter chip comes out ahead by so much. It has excellent power consumption, excellent performance, and a competitive price. The one drawback this processor can have is its worse multi-core performance.
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K: Though the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K does not have the same performance headroom as the 7950X3D, it is fine for most tasks. Though better than previous generations, the power consumption is nowhere close to that of the Ryzen 9 7950X3D.
We recommend the Ryzen chip for anyone whose primary focus is gaming. In our tests, productivity also seemed to run better on the 7950X3D, but if your workload needs more multi-core performance, it might be wiser to go with the Core Ultra 9 285K.
FAQs
What platform does the 9800X3D use?
The AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D uses the AM5 platform.
Do both processors support the same memory type?
Yes, both the Ryzen 9 7950X3D and the Core Ultra 9 285K support only DDR5 memory.
What motherboards support the Ryzen 9 7950X3D?
Any motherboard built with the AM5 platform is supported by the Ryzen 9 7950X3D.
Do the new Intel processors support hyperthreading?
No, the new Core Ultra line of processors from Intel does not have hyperthreading.
What is the maximum resolution I can display with the 285K?
The 285K can display 8K @60Hz using a Display Port.
At Tech4Gamers, I proudly wear the title of Comparisons Specialist. Focused on CPUs and GPUs, I bring forth a wealth of hands-on experience and a keen eye for detail to provide our audience with the latest insights and analyses.
AMD Ryzen 9 7900X3D
Rated: 8/10
Intel Core Ultra 7 265K
Rated: 7.4/10
Pros And Cons
CPU
Pros
Cons
Core Ultra 7 265K
✅ Has 8 more physical cores
✅ More modern manufacturing process
❌ Worse in terms of performance
Ryzen 9 7900X3D
✅ Has 100 MB larger L3 cache size
✅ Better in terms of performance
❌ Much more expensive
Key Takeaways
The Ryzen 9 7900X3D was about 10% faster in our gaming tests, whereas the productivity benchmarks were more or less a draw on these systems.
The power consumption was about 39% lower on the Ryzen 9 7900X3D compared to the Core Ultra 7 265K, whereas the temperatures were about 4% higher.
The price of the 7900X3D is about $65 more than the Core Ultra 7 265K as of late November 2024, though this is prone to change in the future.
The 7900X3D is better for people looking for great gaming performance and have the money to spare, whereas the 265K is better for people on a budget.
Core Count: The Ryzen 9 7900X3D has 12 cores and 24 threads, whereas the Core Ultra 7 265K has 20 cores and 20 threads, made from 8 P-cores and 12 E-cores.
Clock Speed: The Core Ultra 265K has a base clock of 3.9GHz and a boost clock of 5.4GHz. The 7900X3D has a base clock of 4.4GHz and a boost of up to 5.6GHz.
Process Node: The newer Intel chip has a 3nm fabrication process, whereas the 7900X3D has a 5nm manufacturing node.
TDP: AMD’s Ryzen 9 7900X3D has a TDP of 120 watts, whereas the Core Ultra 7 265K has a PL1 TDP of 125 watts.
Cache: The Ryzen 7900X3D has a whopping 128MB L3 cache, whereas the 265K has an L3 cache of around 30MB.
Intel’s new Core Ultra 7 265K has been a mixed bag. On the one hand, it does improve in power consumption compared to its last-gen counterpart, but it has a slightly worse performance. In the Core Ultra 7 265K Vs Ryzen 9 7900X3D comparison, we will see how these new chips stack up against something more tried and tested.
Gaming Benchmark – 1080p
We’ve got the specs out of the way, so the next thing to see about the Core Ultra 7 265K Vs Ryzen 9 7900X3D is how they perform against each other in games. To do this, we have made a test bench, the specs of which you can read below:
Star Wars Jedi: Survivor @1080p (Image By Tech4Gamers)
Acting out our Jedi fantasies in Star Wars Jedi: Survivor, we saw the Ryzen 9 7900X3D had an average of 200 FPS, which is about 37% higher than the 146 FPS of the 265K.
The 1% lows showed a difference of about 42%, where the 7900X3D had a performance of 182 FPS, whereas the 265K got a framerate closer to 128 FPS.
The Last Of Us Part 1
The Last Of Us @1080p (Image By Tech4Gamers)
The Ryzen 9 7900X3D had an average framerate of 176 FPS in our testing of The Last Of Us Part 1, whereas the Core Ultra 7 was about 9.6% faster with an average of 193 FPS.
The 265K won by around 11.5% in our testing, with a framerate of 136 FPS, whereas the Ryzen 9 7900X3D had a framerate of 122 FPS.
Cyberpunk 2077
Cyberpunk 2077 @1080p (Image By Tech4Gamers)
The 7900X3D swung back with full force in Cyberpunk, where it had a 20% lead with an average of 177 FPS, whereas the 265K got around 148 FPS on average.
There was an 18% difference in the minimum framerates, where the 7900X3D hovered around 133 FPS, while the 265K got around 113 FPS.
Hogwarts Legacy
Hogwarts Legacy @1080p (Image By Tech4Gamers)
In Hogwarts Legacy, the 7900X3D had a 19% higher average at 142 FPS, while the Core Ultra had a framerate of around 119 FPS on average in our testing.
The minimums were surprisingly a hair better on the Core Ultra at 83 FPS instead of the lower 82 FPS that the Ryzen 9 7900X3D scored.
Remnant 2
Remnant 2 @1080p (Image By Tech4Gamers)
The 7900X3D won by around 15% in this test with an average of 135 FPS, whereas the Core Ultra 7 hovered closer to an average of about 117 FPS.
The 1% lows were about 11% higher on the 7900X3D at about 115 FPS, whereas the 265K hovered closer to about 103 FPS in our testing.
Homeworld 3
Homeworld 3 @1080p (Image By Tech4Gamers)
The 7900X3D had an average framerate of 86 FPS, which was only about 2.38% faster than the 84 FPS that the Core Ultra 7 265K had in our test of Homeworld 3.
The 7900X3D was won by exactly 50% in the 1% lows of Homeworld 3, where it got a framerate of 42 FPS, whereas the 265K got a lower framerate of 28 FPS.
A Plague Tale: Requiem
A Plague Tale: Requiem @1080p (Image By Tech4Gamers)
The 7900X3D had an average framerate of around 144 FPS in our testing of A Plague Tale: Requiem, whereas the Core Ultra was about 19% behind with an average of 121 FPS.
The 1% lows went down to around 90 FPS in our testing, which was about 23% higher than the 73 FPS of the Core Ultra 7 265K.
Hitman 3
Hitman 3 @1080p (Image By Tech4Gamers)
The 7900X3D took a loss in the last game of our testing, with a framerate of 247 FPS on average, it was about 3.6% behind the 256 FPS that the 265K had.
The 1% lows told the same story, where the 7900X3D was 10% behind with its lows of 211 FPS, whereas the Core Ultra 7 265K hovered closer to about 232 FPS.
Productivity Benchmarks
Now that the gaming benchmarks are over, we will go over some productivity benchmarks with both of these chips. The test bench used for the following tests is the same one we used for our gaming benchmarks.
Cinebench R24
Cinebench R24 (Image By Tech4Gamers)
The Ryzen 9 7900X3D had a score of 121 points in the single-core Cinebench test, which was about 20% lower than the 145 points that the Core Ultra 7 265K had.
The multi-core score was about 35% higher on the Intel chip, which had a score of about 2165 points, while the Ryzen struggled to get around 1605 points.
7-Zip
7-Zip (Image By Tech4Gamers)
The compression score was a bit higher on the Intel chip at about 182 points, instead of the 6.43% lower 182 points that the Ryzen 9 7900X3D.
The decompression test ran better on the 7900X3D at about 199 points, whereas the Core Ultra 7 265K hovered about 13% lower at around 176 points.
Photoshop
Photoshop (Image By Tech4Gamers)
The Ryzen chip performed about 11% better when we tested Photoshop when compared to the Core Ultra 7 265K.
The 7900X3D gathered around 10276 points, whereas the Core Ultra 7 265K had about 9246 points in our testing.
The 7900X3D had a 10% better performance overall when it came to the average framerates in the games we tested. Only two games ran better on the Core Ultra, and even those did not have a huge margin. The 7900X3D is the clear winner when it comes to gaming performance.
1% Lows
There was only a 9% difference in the 1% lows of both chips. The Ryzen 9 7900X3D did better in some games, whereas the 265K took the lead in about 3 and with a substantial margin. However, the overall experience was noticeably smoother on the Ryzen in most games, so it got a win in this category, too.
Productivity
In Cinebench, the 265K performed better than the Ryzen chip. However, 7-zip and Photoshop ran better on the 7900X3D. The Intel chip won in 3 benchmarks and the 7900X3D won in the equivalent of 3 benchmarks in our testing, so it is safe to call this category a draw.
Power Consumption
Game
Ryzen 9 7900X3D
Core Ultra 7 265K
Star Wars Jedi: Survivor
80
123
The Last Of Us Part 1
72
117
Cyberpunk 2077
82
131
Hogwarts Legacy
78
115
Remnant 2
71
120
Homeworld 3
85
135
A Plague Tale: Requiem
72
122
Hitman 3
68
125
Average Power Draw
76⚡
123.5⚡
Winner: Ryzen 9 7900X3D
Though the Intel chip has made strides to improve its power efficiency, it does not come close to how the Ryzen 9 7900X3D handles its power management. The 7900X3D took about 39% less power than the Intel chip, making it the clear winner in this regard as well.
Temperatures
Game
Ryzen 9 7900X3D
Core Ultra 7 265K
Star Wars Jedi: Survivor
79
68
The Last Of Us Part 1
76
64
Cyberpunk 2077
72
66
Hogwarts Legacy
76
78
Remnant 2
65
67
Homeworld 3
63
65
A Plague Tale: Requiem
70
68
Hitman 3
75
76
Average Temperatures
72🌡️
69🌡️
Winner: Core Ultra 7 265K
The 7900X3D ran about 4% hotter in our gaming tests. This difference, though significant, still puts the 7900X3D well within safe thermal ranges. If you have a half-decent cooling solution with either processor, temperatures should not be an issue.
Price And Value
CPU
Ryzen 9 7900X3D
Core Ultra 7 265K
Price Difference
Launch MSRP
💲599
💲394
52.03%
Current Price
💲449
💲384
16.93%
As of late November 2024, the Ryzen 9 7900X3D is about $65 more expensive than the Core Ultra 7 265K. This reading uses the used price of the 7900X3D compared to a new 265K. This difference is due to change over time, so do your due diligence before locking into either option.
What We Recommend
Ryzen 9 7900X3D: Though it has better performance than the Core Ultra 7 265K, it also has a noticeably higher price tag. This difference might be made up by the fact that the Ryzen can save you some money over time in your power bills, though this difference is negligible for most consumers.
Core Ultra 7 265K: Though it lost overall, we were impressed that the Core Ultra 7 265K ran some games better than the Ryzen 9 7900X3D. Though its power consumption is nothing to brag about, it is completely adequate for most users and a huge improvement over the previous generation.
The difference between these two chips comes down to your budget. We would recommend you spring for the Ryzen 9 7900X3D if you have the capital for it, whereas the 265K is a slightly more affordable option.
FAQs
How many shading units does the GPU on the 265K have?
The iGPU on the Core Ultra 7 265K has 512 shading units.
How many shading units does the GPU on the Ryzen 9 7900X3D have?
The iGPU on the Ryzen 9 7900X3D has 128 shading units.
What PCIe version does the Core Ultra 7 265K use?
The Core Ultra 7 265K uses PCIe 5.0.
What is the base clock on the E-cores of the Core Ultra 7 265K?
The base clock on the E-cores of the Core Ultra 7 265K is about 3.3GHz.
What is the boost clock on the E-cores of the Core Ultra 7 265K?
The boost clock on the E-cores of the Core Ultra 265K is about 4.6GHz.
At Tech4Gamers, I mainly cover new gaming news, leaks, and rumours. Aside from that, I love to write features about my favourite games while inserting my opinion about their different aspects.
Story Highlights
Cult of the Lamb merges roguelike dungeon crawling with resource management, where success in one boosts the other.
It balances dark themes like rituals with cartoonish visuals, making grim actions strategic.
Recent updates added co-op and new content, enhancing variety and replayability.
PlayStation Plus subscribers were treated to an incredible selection of games in the Game Catalog this August, with The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt and Wild Hearts headlining the lineup. But alongside these blockbuster hits is an absolute gem that might not have as much mainstream attention: Cult of the Lamb.
The Witcher 3 Added In The PlayStation Plus Game Catalog This August – Image Credit (Tech4Gamers)
Cult of the Lamb may seem like another indie roguelike initially, but it quickly reveals a world of depth, charm, and humor. If you’re looking for something fresh, charming, and incredibly addictive, Cult of the Lamb absolutely deserves your attention.
Why It’s Not Just Another Roguelike
Cult of the Lamb could easily be overlooked with so many roguelikes out there. But its seamless combination of two distinct gameplay types sets it apart from the PlayStation Plus August lineup. It merges combat-heavy dungeon crawling with detailed resource management.
During dungeon runs, you slash through enemies, dodge attacks, and use abilities to overcome various bosses. Even if you fail during a dungeon run, you’re still rewarded with resources. It helps expand your cult, making every run meaningful.
At your camp, you manage followers by feeding them and keeping morale high. And yes, you even clean up after them because someone’s gotta handle the poop. The dark humor lies in how they worship you and follow commands, even sacrificing themselves for your benefit.
Build Your Flock – Image Credit (Cult Of The Lamb)
Unlike typical roguelikes focused purely on combat, Cult of the Lamb integrates these roguelike elements with a management sim. Your success in the dungeons boosts your cult’s growth, while the follower’s resources and powers you gain fuel your dungeon expeditions.
Essentially, the game’s two core mechanics feed into one another, creating a unique and addictive gameplay loop that makes players enjoy the game. Unlike other games, where you can focus solely on action or resource management, you must balance both, keeping the game fresh and exciting.
Dark Humor And Quirky Charm
One of the most surprising aspects of Cult of the Lamb is its sense of black comedy. While you might be running a cult, performing rituals, and sacrificing followers, the game presents all this in a lighthearted and humorous way rather than overtly grim.
The art style plays a huge role in this; it’s a vibrant, cartoonish aesthetic that contrasts with the macabre elements of the gameplay. This blend of dark humor and cute visuals makes it hard to stop playing.
Cult Of The Lamb Cartoonish Aesthetics – Image Credit (Tech4Gamers)
In one of my runs, I had a follower who was getting a bit too old, and resources were running thin. Instead of letting them peacefully retire, I decided to “sacrifice” them in a ritual to gain much-needed power for my next dungeon dive. Cruel? Maybe.
However, the way the game handles these moments with such tongue-in-cheek humor made it less about moral dilemmas and more about strategic decision-making. This balance of the dark and the humorous makes the game so addictive.
Co-Op And New Updates
Since its launch, Cult of the Lamb has only gotten better. A recent update introduced co-op play, allowing you to collaborate with a friend to manage your cult and explore dungeons together.
If you find the solo experience a bit overwhelming or just want to share the chaos of running a cult with a buddy, the co-op mode breathes new life into the game.
This update also introduced new spins on the cult management aspect and minigames. So, even if you’ve played this game before, there’s plenty of fresh content to explore.
It’s not just about slashing through dungeons. You and your friend can also engage in fun minigames, making the experience more varied and dynamic.
So, if browsing through the August Game Catalog, don’t just go straight for the AAA blockbusters. Take a chance on Cult of the Lamb; you might be surprised at how much fun you’ll have building (and sometimes exploiting) your very own cult.
At Tech4Gamers, I work as a guides expert. My role involves writing about solving different gaming and tech-related topics that pique my interest and that I believe more people should know about. This position allows me to share my insights and discoveries with a broader audience, enriching their gaming experiences with the unique perspectives I bring.
Story Highlights
A Minecraft Movie’s trailer just came out, and fans are disappointed.
The Trailer got over a million dislikes in just three days, and they keep increasing.
Making the movie realistic and the weird casting choices are some of the reasons why fans are upset.
A Minecraft Movie, out April 4 2025, is directed by Napoleon Dynamite director Jared Hess, and stars some of the most popular faces out there, such as Jason Momoa and Jack Black.
After almost a decade of speculation, the trailer finally came out on September 4, 2024. Instead of creating hype for a beloved game being adapted, however, the trailer only made fans of the game furious with how bad it was.
The Story
The Minecraft Movie’s main cast (Captured by Tech4Gamers)
As four misfits – Garret “the garbage man” Garrison, Henry, Dawn and Natalie – struggle with their ordinary problems, a portal suddenly deposits them into the Overworld, a place where imagination rules.
A strange man with his own ambitions and goals, called Steve, is their only guide. With this surprisingly expert crafter, they must navigate their way through this strange world.
The only way back is to master this world and protect it, which “coincidentally” requires them to develop the very qualities they need to overcome their struggles in the real world.
One Million Dislikes
Pink Sheep in the Minecraft Movie (Captured by Tech4Gamers)
The trailer went viral fairly quickly, garnering views in the tens of millions. It’s usual for a game adaptation to have mixed views, however, of the game’s initial 20~ million views, one million of the people watching also disliked the movie.
This is unprecedented for a game or a movie trailer, showing that 5% of all viewers chose to click the dislike button.
This gets worse when compared with the amount of likes, a mere 500k. This means that of all people who decided to leave an opinion, 66% chose to send a dislike.
Why Are Fans Upset?
Jason Momoa in the Minecraft Movie (Captured by Tech4Gamers)
The plot of the movie is too old and used to be anything exciting. The movie should’ve followed the example of Minecraft Story Mode and used a plotline following the game.
Instead, it reused an already reused trope, seen many times in movies like Jumanji and Sonic.
After the release of the first trailer, all social media platforms flooded with fan reactions ranging from disappointed to enraged to horrified. From complaints about the actors to disbelief over the uncanny look of the animals, there is no lack of reasons to dislike this movie.
Live Action Doesn’t Fit Minecraft
Pigmen in A Minecraft Movie (Captured by Tech4Gamers)
I have no idea why this movie was made a live-action. This could have been so much better if it had a cartoony art style, like the game. The actors walking on the flat background look extremely awkward.
I understand these are supposed to be humans in the Minecraft world, but they do not fit in with the background at all. The characters could’ve worn blocky clothes or been animated to fit in better with the background.
There was no need to add realism to Minecraft. With the current blend of CGI and live-action, the movie feels cheap despite having some of the most expensive actors out there.
The animals also look deeply unsettling with the added realism. It does not feel like Minecraft. At least the over-the-top faces can give you a good laugh with how bad they look.
Steve Makes No Sense
Jack Black as Steve in the Minecraft Movie (Captured by Tech4Gamers)
Steve, the default character of Minecraft, is just Jack Black in a blue shirt. The blue shirt is all that shows it is Steve. It is like they put no effort into selecting the actor for the most important character.
For such an important character, everyone had great expectations about the casting but the actual casting did not live up to those expectations. This is by no fault of the actor but simply that he does not fit in the role of Steve.
The Target Demographic
A Minecraft Movie’s title card (Captured by Tech4Gamers)
The movie is targeted towards children, which feels unfair to the adults who still love Minecraft and play it regularly. For people who waited around a decade for this movie, this was a huge letdown.
The trailer lacks the soul of the game. Typically, trailers are supposed to make you excited for the movie but so far, this trailer has only done the opposite.
My deepest apologies to the once-hated Minecraft story mode. We did not value you enough. I understand my mistake now.
At Tech4Gamers, I began as a comparison writer, analyzing GPU and CPU performance. Now, I focus on writing reviews and contributing to the best-ofs section, sharing personal insights after hands-on testing.
AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D
Rated: 8/10
Intel Core Ultra 7 265K
Rated: 6.8/10
Pros And Cons
CPU
Pros
Cons
Ryzen 7 7800X3D
✅ Better in terms of performance
✅ Has 67 MB larger L3 cache size
❌ Slightly more expensive
Core Ultra 7 265K
✅ Has 12 more physical cores
✅ More powerful Intel Arc Xe2
❌ Worse in terms of performance
Key Takeaways
The Ryzen 7 7800X3D performed about 22% better in our gaming tests, though it was that much worse on average in our productivity benchmarks apart from Photoshop.
The Ryzen 7 7800X3D took around 42% less power than the Core Ultra 7 265K in our testing, while the temperatures were fairly equivalent between the two.
There is a $10 price reduction with the Core Ultra 7 265K over the 7800X3D as of late November 2024, though this is prone to change.
We would recommend the Ryzen 7 7800X3D to people looking for the best gaming performance, while the 265K is more suited to heavy multi-threaded workloads.
Core Count: The Core Ultra 7 265K has 20 cores and 20 threads made from 8 P-cores and 12 E-cores, while the 7800X3D only uses 8 cores and 16 threads.
Clock Speed: The 265K’s base clock speed is 3.9GHz, and it boosts up to 5.4GHz. However, the Ryzen has a base clock of 4.2GHz and a boost of up to 5GHz.
Cache: The 265K comes packed with 30MB of L3 cache, whereas the 7800X3D goes much further by bundling in 96MB of L3 cache with its design.
Process Node: Intel’s 265K uses very advanced 3nm processing nodes for its design, whereas the Ryzen 7 7800X3D uses 5nm.
TDP: The 265 K’s PL1 TDP is 125 watts, which is a hair higher than the 120 watts that the Ryzen 7 7800X3D requires.
Intel isn’t the only chip maker that has drastically changed its approach with its desktops over the past few years. AMD has also been shifting its strategy to the X3D line of chips. In this comparison of the Core Ultra 7 265K vs Ryzen 7 7800X3D, let us see how Intel’s innovation stands against AMD’s!
Gaming Benchmarks – 1080p
Like a lot of consumers, gaming is where the brunt of our concern lies with new CPU releases. To check the performance of these chips against one another, we have devised a test bench, the specs of which you can read below:
Star Wars Jedi: Survivor @1080p (Image By Tech4Gamers)
In the first game of our testing, we saw a 41% improvement with the 7800X3D, which played this game at an average of 206 FPS, while the Intel processor was struggling to get 146 FPS.
The minimum framerates were 44% higher on the Ryzen chip, with a framerate of 185 FPS, whereas the Core Ultra 7 265K went down to around 128 FPS.
The Last Of Us Part 1
The Last Of Us @1080p (Image By Tech4Gamers)
The difference died down to 2.07% in The Last Of Us Part 1, where the Ryzen had an average of 197 FPS, whereas the Core Ultra got around 193 FPS.
The minimums were the same on both the chips at around 136 FPS.
Cyberpunk 2077
Cyberpunk 2077 @1080p (Image By Tech4Gamers)
Testing Cyberpunk at 1080p got an average of 202 FPS on the 7800X3D, which was about 36% higher than the 148 FPS that the Core Ultra 7 265K could manage.
The 1% lows were around 143 FPS on the 7800X3D, about 26% greater than the 113 FPS we saw with the Intel chip.
Hogwarts Legacy
Hogwarts Legacy @1080p (Image By Tech4Gamers)
Playing this game yielded around 141 FPS on the Ryzen 7 7800X3D, about 18% higher than the 119 FPS the Core Ultra 7 265K had.
The Ryzen 7 7800X3D’s minimum framerate was about 103 FPS, which was about 25% higher than the Core Ultra 7 265K’s 83 FPS.
Remnant 2
Remnant 2 @1080p (Image By Tech4Gamers)
This game showed a difference of around 18%, favoring the Ryzen 7 7800X3D, which had a framerate of 138 FPS, while the Core Ultra 7 265K had a framerate of around 117 FPS.
Remnant 2 had a difference of 16% when it came to the 1% lows, with the X3D chip getting down to a framerate of 120 FPS, whereas the 265K hovered closer to a minimum of 103 FPS.
Homeworld 3
Homeworld 3 @1080p (Image By Tech4Gamers)
There was a huge difference in perceiving smoothness in Homeworld 3, where the Ryzen 7 7800X3D had an average framerate of around 117 FPS, about 40% higher than the Core Ultra’s 84 FPS.
Minimums were a world apart, with the Ryzen 7’s lows of 52 FPS overshining Intel’s meagre 28 FPS 1% lows by around 85%.
A Plague Tale: Requiem
A Plague Tale: Requiem @1080p (Image By Tech4Gamers)
The 7800X3D had a framerate of around 178 FPS on average in A Plague Tale: Requiem, which was around 47% higher than the 121 FPS of the Core Ultra 7 265K.
The minimum framerates were about 74% apart, with the Ryzen 7 7800X3D going down to around 127 FPS, while the Core Ultra 7 265K hovered closer to 73 FPS.
Hitman 3
Hitman 3 @1080p (Image By Tech4Gamers)
Finally, Hitman 3 ran only 4.7% better on the Ryzen 7 7800X3D, with an average framerate of around 268 FPS, whereas the Core Ultra 7 265K had a framerate of around 256 FPS.
1% lows were only 2.6% apart in our testing, where the Ryzen 7 7800X3D hovered closer to 238 FPS, whereas the Core Ultra 7 265K stuck closer to 232 FPS on average.
Productivity Benchmarks
People use their computers for so much more than just gaming, and we strive to emulate that use using our productivity benchmarks. The following tests have been conducted using the test bench mentioned with the gaming benchmarks.
Cinebench R24
Cinebench R24 @1080p (Image By Tech4Gamers)
The Core Ultra 7 265K was ahead by around 21% in the single-core portion of this test, with a score of 145 points instead of the 120 points of the Ryzen 7 7800X3D.
There was a huge 94% difference in the multi-core section, where the Ryzen 7 7800X3D had a score of 1116 points, whereas the Core Ultra 7 265K scored 2165 points.
7-Zip
7-Zip @1080p (Image By Tech4Gamers)
The compression portion of this test ran about 46% better on the Core Ultra processor, with a score of about 182 points, whereas the Ryzen had a score of around 124 points.
The decompression test was also much better on the Core Ultra 7, which had a score of 176 points, 31% higher than the 134 points that the Ryzen mustered.
Photoshop
Photoshop @1080p (Image By Tech4Gamers)
Lastly, the tables were flipped when we tested Photoshop using the Pudget systems benchmark. It ran about 19% better on the Ryzen chip.
The Ryzen 7 7800X3D had a score of 10984 points, whereas the Core Ultra 7 265K had a score of around 9246 points.
We saw an average 22% difference in performance with the gaming tests. The Ryzen 7 7800X3D consistently came out ahead of the Core Ultra 7 265K in all of our games, with some having a larger margin than others. Overall, the Ryzen 7 7800X3D is a much more capable chip for gaming than its rival.
1% Lows
The difference between these two processors in terms of the 1% lows was also around 23%, with the 7800X3D being in the clear lead. Some games saw huge improvements on the Ryzen, like Homeworld 3, which was a slog to run on the Intel chip.
Productivity
The Ryzen 7 7800X3D got its head served on a platter in our productivity section, at least with the compute-heavy tests. The Core Ultra’s multicore performance was much higher than the Ryzen. However, the 7800X3D did succeed in performing better in Photoshop.
Power Consumption
Game
Ryzen 7 7800X3D
Core Ultra 7 265K
Star Wars Jedi: Survivor
75
123
The Last Of Us Part 1
71
117
Cyberpunk 2077
77
131
Hogwarts Legacy
67
115
Remnant 2
78
123
Homeworld 3
66
135
A Plague Tale: Requiem
68
122
Hitman 3
66
104
Average Power Draw
71⚡
121.25⚡
Winner: Ryzen 7 7800X3D
The Ryzen took a massive lead in power consumption. It consumed around 42% less power than the Core Ultra 7 265K. Though the Core Ultra chips have made huge improvements in power efficiency, they are no where near as efficient as the X3D chips.
Temperatures
Game
Ryzen 7 7800X3D
Core Ultra 7 265K
Star Wars Jedi: Survivor
77
68
The Last Of Us Part 1
68
64
Cyberpunk 2077
74
66
Hogwarts Legacy
79
78
Remnant 2
64
67
Homeworld 3
63
65
A Plague Tale: Requiem
67
68
Hitman 3
76
76
Average Temperatures
71🌡️
69🌡️
Winner: Core Ultra 7 265K
Temperatures were a non-issue on either chip. The Ryzen 7 7800X3D was a bit warmer than the Core Ultra 7 265K, but not by a margin where it would be concerning for either. We saw a small difference of around 3% with the Ryzen being a hair hotter.
Price And Value
CPU
Ryzen 7 7800X3D
Core Ultra 7 265K
Price Difference
Launch MSRP
💲449
💲394
13.96%
Current Price
💲399
💲384
3.91%
The price of the Ryzen 7 7800X3D and the Core Ultra 7 265K is about the same as of late November 2024. There is a small $10 difference in price, with the 7800X3D being a bit more pricey, but it is negligible considering its MSRP.
What We Recommend
Ryzen 7 7800X3D: This processor was excellent in all the facets we tested it in, except for productivity performance. Gaming, power consumption, and pricing are excellent on this chip, and the casual user prioritizes these attributes.
Core Ultra 7 265K: This chip’s performance in our gaming tests was disappointing compared to the faster 7800X3D chip. However, this processor’s performance is good for multi-core productivity workloads.
After all this discussion, we recommend the Ryzen 7 7800X3D to people who want to get the most performance possible for gaming, whereas the Core Ultra 7 265K is more suitable for people with heavy multi-threaded processing workloads.
FAQs
Do the Ryzen 7 7800X3D and Core Ultra 7 265K support DDR4 RAM?
No, these chips only support higher-speed DDR5 RAM.
Does the Ryzen 7 7800X3D have support for integrated graphics?
Yes, the Ryzen 7 7800X3D supports Radeon Graphics for the Ryzen 7000.
Does the Core Ultra 7 265K have support for faster memory?
Yes, the Core Ultra 7 265K supports DDR5 memory up to 6400MHz, which is a bit faster than the 5200MHz memory that the Ryzen 7 7800X3D supports.
Does the Core Ultra 7 265K have support for more memory than the Ryzen 7 7800X3D?
Yes, the Ryzen 7 7800X3D can support only 128 GB of DDR5 memory, whereas the Core Ultra 7 265K has support for up to 192 GB of DDR5 memory.
Do both of these processors support PCIe 5.0?
Yes, the Core Ultra 7 265K and Ryzen 7 7800X3D support PCIe 5.0.
At Tech4Gamers, I began as a comparison writer, analyzing GPU and CPU performance. Now, I focus on writing reviews and contributing to the best-ofs section, sharing personal insights after hands-on testing.
AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D
Rated: 8/10
Intel Core Ultra 7 265K
Rated: 7.6/10
Pros And Cons
CPU
Pros
Cons
Core Ultra 7 265K
✅ Has 4 more physical cores
✅ More modern manufacturing process
❌ Worse in terms of performance
Ryzen 9 7950X3D
✅ Has 100 MB larger L3 cache size
✅ Better in terms of performance
❌ Much more expensive
Key Takeaways
The Ryzen 9 7950X3D was about 17% better when it came to gaming performance, and it performed favourably in our productivity testing as well.
The 7950X3D took about 32% less power in our gaming tests, while the temperatures were fairly similar with only a small 3% difference.
The price of the 9950X3D is substantially higher than the 265K. As of late November 2024, this difference is about 30% or $115.
We would recommend the 265K to people who can’t spare the cash for the Ryzen 9 7950X3D, though the Ryzen is the clearly superior chip.
Core Count: The 7950X3D has 16 cores and 32 threads, which is higher than the 20 cores and 20 threads, which are comprised of 8 P-cores and 12 E-cores.
Clock Speed: Our Ryzen 9 7950X3D has a base clock of 4.2GHz with a boost of up to 5.7GHz, whereas the 265K has a base clock of 3.9GHz and a boost of up to 5.4GHz.
Process Node: The Ryzen processor has a manufacturing process of 5nm, whereas the 265K has a 3nm fabrication process.
TDP: The 7950X3D has a PL1 TDP of 120 watts, which is a bit lower than the 125-watt TDP of the 265K.
Cache: The Ryzen 7950X3D has a huge 128MB L3 cache buffer, whereas the 265K has an L3 cache of around 30MB.
The X3D chips have made a name for themselves as being one the most powerful gaming processors on the market. Intel has tried to catch up with AMD with their new Core Ultra chips. In the Core Ultra 7 265K vs Ryzen 9 7950X3D comparison, let’s see how these two powerhouses compared to each other.
Gaming Benchmarks – 1080p
Now that we have the specs of these processors out of the way, let us see how these processors compare against each other in gaming benchmarks at 1080p. To test this out, we have used a test bench, the specs of which are written below:
Star Wars Jedi: Survivor @1080p (Image By Tech4Gamers)
In terms of average framerates, the Ryzen 9 7950X3D was about 40% faster with an average of 204 FPS, whereas the Core Ultra 7 265K had an average of 146 FPS.
The 1% lows were about 44% higher on the AMD chip at about 184 FPS in our testing, whereas the Core Ultra 7 265K got down to around 128 FPS in our testing.
The Last Of Us Part 1
The Last Of Us @1080p (Image By Tech4Gamers)
There was a very small 1.5% difference between the 196 FPS of the Ryzen 9 and the 193 FPS of the Core Ultra in our testing of The Last Of Us Part 1.
The minimum framerates were about 5.5% higher on the Intel chip at about 136 FPS, whereas the 7950X3D had lows of about 129 FPS.
Cyberpunk 2077
Cyberpunk 2077 @1080p (Image By Tech4Gamers)
The 7950X3D was exactly 25% faster in our testing of Cyberpunk 2077, where it had an average framerate of 185 FPS, whereas the Core Ultra 7 265K hovered closer to about 148 FPS.
The difference shrank to 20% when it came to the 1% lows, where the 7950X3D got a framerate of around 136 FPS, whereas the 265K had a performance of about 113 FPS.
Hogwarts Legacy
Hogwarts Legacy @1080p (Image By Tech4Gamers)
AMD’s 7950X3D managed an impressive 26% lead in this game, where it had an average framerate of about 150 FPS, whereas the Core Ultra 7 265K hovered closer to about 119 FPS.
The minimum framerates were about 98 FPS on the Ryzen processor, whereas the Core Ultra had a performance about 18% lower at about 83 FPS.
Remnant 2
Remnant 2 @1080p (Image By Tech4Gamers)
The Ryzen kept a 17% lead in our Remnant 2 test. It had an average framerate of about 137 FPS in our testing, whereas the Core Ultra 7 265K hovered closer to an average of 117 FPS.
The difference became a hair smaller at about 15.5%, with the 7950X3D getting lows of about 119 FPS, whereas the Core Ultra 7 265K hovered at about 103 FPS.
Homeworld 3
Homeworld 3 @1080p (Image By Tech4Gamers)
The 7950X3D was only faster by about 4.8% in this game, where it had an average framerate of 88 FPS in our testing, whereas the 265K was nipping at its heels with a framerate of 84 FPS.
The 1% lows were vastly different between the two chips, with the 7950X3D getting a framerate of 43 FPS, a whole 53.5% higher than the 28 FPS of the 265K.
A Plague Tale: Requiem
A Plague Tale: Requiem @1080p (Image By Tech4Gamers)
We measured a 39% advantage to using the Ryzen in our testing, where it had a framerate of about 168 FPS, whereas the Core Ultra 7 265K hovered closer to about 121 FPS in A Plague Tale: Requiem.
The minimum framerates also had a similar difference of about 38%, where the 7950X3D got a framerate of about 101 FPS, whereas the Core Ultra 7 265K had lows of about 73 FPS.
Hitman 3
Hitman 3 @1080p (Image By Tech4Gamers)
Finally, there was a very small difference in the averages of Hitman 3, where the 7950X3D hovered at about 257 FPS, whereas the 265K stuck closer to 256 FPS.
The minimums flipped the table, with the 7950X3D sticking to about 231 FPS, whereas the Core Ultra 7 265K hovered closer to 232 FPS.
Productivity Benchmarks
Now that the gaming benchmarks are over, we will cover the performance of these chips in a couple of productivity tests. If you are wondering about the test bench for this section, it is the same one we’ve mentioned above for the gaming tests.
Cinebench R24
Cinebench R24 (Image By Tech4Gamers)
The single-core score of the 265K was about 18% higher than the 7950X3D at about 123 points and 145 points, respectively.
As for the multicore score, the 7950X3D hovered around 2119 points, which was very close to the 2165 points that the Core Ultra 7 got in our testing.
7-Zip
7-Zip (Image By Tech4Gamers)
The Ryzen won by about 12.5% in our 7-Zip compression test, in which it had a score of about 205 points, while the 265K hovered closer to about 182 points.
The Core Ultra 7 265K scored about 176 points in our 7-Zip decompression test, which was about 50% behind the 265 points that the 7950X3D produced.
Photoshop
Photoshop (Image By Tech4Gamers)
In the Pudget Systems benchmark, the 7950X3D performed around 12.5% better than the Core Ultra 7 in our testing.
The 7950X3D had a performance of about 10399 points, while the 265K hovered closer to about 9246 points.
On average, our testing showed that the Ryzen 9 7950X3D was about 17% faster than the Core Ultra 265K in gaming. As you can imagine, this is a very significant difference, though the delta would shrink if we did these tests at higher resolutions.
1% Lows
The average difference was about 16% in the 1% lows of the games we tested, with the 7950X3D being the obvious advantage. It performed much better in our testing, and the games we ran on it were like butter. A small number of games came close to matching the power of 7950X3D on the Core Ultra 7 265K.
Productivity
All benchmarks except the Cinebench R23 single-core test ran substantially worse on the Core Ultra 7 265K. Not only did the Ryzen beat the Intel processor in gaming, it also took the cake when it came to productivity performance. The 7950X3D takes the cake in overall performance because of its victories.
Power
Game
Ryzen 9 7950X3D
Core Ultra 7 265K
Star Wars Jedi: Survivor
85
123
The Last Of Us Part 1
88
117
Cyberpunk 2077
82
131
Hogwarts Legacy
80
115
Remnant 2
89
120
Homeworld 3
85
135
A Plague Tale: Requiem
82
122
Hitman 3
85
125
Average Power Draw
84.5⚡
123.5⚡
Winner: Ryzen 9 7950X3D
In addition to the improved gaming and productivity performance, the Ryzen 9 7950X3D also took about 32% less power than its competition in our testing. This means that the Ryzen has a much better performance-per-watt than the Core Ultra 7 265K.
Temperature
Game
Ryzen 9 7950X3D
Core Ultra 7 265K
Star Wars Jedi: Survivor
74
68
The Last Of Us Part 1
67
64
Cyberpunk 2077
68
66
Hogwarts Legacy
77
78
Remnant 2
71
67
Homeworld 3
68
65
A Plague Tale: Requiem
72
68
Hitman 3
75
76
Average Temperatures
71.5🌡️
69🌡️
Winner: Core Ultra 7 265K
Temperatures were about the same on both processors, though the Ryzen 9 7950X3D ran about only 3.6% hotter. This difference is not any means of concern because both processors stayed well within safe temperature ranges in our testing, though both did get a bit toasty.
Price
CPU
Ryzen 9 7950X3D
Core Ultra 7 265K
Price Difference
Launch MSRP
💲699
💲394
77.41%
Current Price
💲499
💲384
29.95%
The 7950X3D was released for a much higher launch price than the Core Ultra 7 265K did, though this difference has gone from almost double the price to about 30% in the last year. Still, the 7950X3D is quite a bit pricier than the 265K, with our research indicating a $115 price difference.
What We Recommend
Ryzen 9 7950X3D: The 7950X3D beat the Intel chip by a substantial margin in all the tests we did. It had a lower power consumption, performed better in the gaming tests, and outpaced the 265K in terms of productivity, too. However, the price tag of this chip is significantly higher.
Core Ultra 7 265K: This chip performed adequately in our testing. Though it did not beat the 7950X3D, some people might not benefit from the gain in performance it makes. Additionally, the delta between these two in gaming would disappear to your game at higher resolutions like 1440p or 4K.
The Ryzen 9 7950X3D outperforms gaming, productivity, and efficiency but costs more. The Core Ultra 7 265K offers good value, especially for high-resolution gaming.
FAQs
What kind of iGPU does the Ryzen 9 7950X3D have?
The Ryzen 9 7950X3D has basic Radeon Graphics.
What is the peak temperature of the Ryzen 9 7950X3D?
The peak temperature of the Ryzen 9 7950X3D is 89°C.
What is the peak temperature of the Core Ultra 7 265K?
The peak temperature of the Core Ultra 7 265K is 105°C.
What graphics does the Core Ultra 7 265K?
The Core Ultra 7 265K has Intel Arx Xe2 graphics.
What is the bus frequency of these chips?
The Core Ultra 7 265K and the Ryzen 9 7950X3D have a bus frequency of about 100MHz.
At Tech4Gamers, I contribute as a Senior News Reporter, combining my skills and gaming enthusiasm to keep our audience updated on the latest developments.
Story Highlight
CDPR has finally announced The Witcher 4, and fans are more excited than ever.
Thousands of gamers have returned to The Witcher 3 following this announcement.
The RPG reached its highest concurrent player count in nearly two years after the announcement.
The Witcher 4 has become all the rage since its reveal trailer was shown off at The Game Awards. CDPR’s latest RPG promises an all-new adventure for all sorts of fans, featuring Ciri as the main character.
With excitement at an all-time high, some may be disappointed to learn that The Witcher 4 is still a few years away. Fortunately for them, The Witcher 3 has aged like fine wine, and the RPG is going through a major resurgence on Steam, making this the perfect time to jump in.
Why it matters: The Witcher 3 is nearly a decade old, making its current relevance in the industry nothing short of remarkable.
Fans Are Flocking To Geralt’s Last Adventure | Image via SteamDB
According to SteamDB, The Witcher 3 has reached 44,179 concurrent players within the last 24 hours on Steam alone. For context, this peak concurrent player count marks a new high in 2024. In fact, the RPG last saw similar player counts in early 2023.
The Witcher 3 is currently discounted by 80%, which, combined with the excitement created by CDPR’s first showing of The Witcher 4, has enticed players to return to Geralt’s final adventure in the series.
Moreover, fans have pushed the game quite high up on Steam’s best-sellers list.
The Witcher 4 Will See Geralt Returning In Some Capacity
Looking at the recent Steam reviews, it’s clear that many gamers have purchased the RPG for the first time. Most also seem to be loving their first experience with The Witcher 3, resulting in 95% of the recent reviews being positive.
As the wait for The Witcher 4 continues, the entry’s latest installment remains worth revisiting. Whether it be for newcomers or returning fans, the title stands out as one of the shining examples of the RPG genre’s strengths, making it worth your attention today.
At Tech4Gamers, I mainly cover new gaming news, leaks, and rumours. Aside from that, I love to write features about my favourite games while inserting my opinion about their different aspects.
Story Highlight
Intergalactic: The Heretic Prophet was shadow-dropped at TGA 2024.
While it is the highly anticipated new IP from Naughty Dog, it received a lot of backlash due to DEI.
That caused the developer to turn off the comments section on YouTube.
The developer has a legendary legacy in the video games industry, so it might be digging its own grave with its new IP.
Naughty Dog is one of my favorite developers, and I have waited a long time for its new IP. The legacy it has built from its previous game is incredible, and I, among many other fans, am arguably hoping the studio will make a new game that lives up to its name.
However, it seems like the developer has taken a quite controversial turn. If you have watched the trailer of Intergalactic: The Heretic Prophet, you know exactly what I am talking about.
Why it matters: The protagonist in a video game should be pleasing to the eye, whether it is a man or a woman. While Naughty Dog has managed to implement this idea in its previous games, it failed to do so in the upcoming one.
The Legendary Legacy of Naughty Dog
The Last of Us Is One of The Best Gaming Series Ever
Naughty Dog is behind legendary franchises like Uncharted, Crash Bandicoot, and The Last of Us. You must have played at least one game among these franchises, as they are insanely good.
I have loved almost every single game this developer has ever released. While I had mixed feelings about TLOU2, I ultimately loved it. The studio really didn’t think that it was unthinkable with The Last of Us franchise, especially the first entry.
This isn’t just my opinion, as the majority of the fandom loved the franchise. Not only that, but it is also the most-awarded video game series of all time, and it totally deserves that.
With this, we can conclude that Naughty Dog has worked on some bangers and can continue doing so without forcing a narrative into its game, right? Unfortunately, that isn’t the case, and I am afraid one of my favorite developers is losing track of what’s important.
Fans Are Upset, And The Developer Knows Why
Fans Are Criticizing The Protagonist of Naughty Dog’s New Game
It should be pretty clear by now that fans don’t appreciate forced inclusivity in games. That is a fact, and many recent games have failed because developers forced this narrative. Fans are now skeptical of any game that has Sweet Baby’s name attached to it.
So, that should be an eye-opener for everyone in the industry. They should now know who the actual fandom is and what it wants. The developer in question seems to have failed to realize this, and it will receive backlash for that; it is already receiving it.
Ever since Intergalactic: The Heretic Prophet was revealed to the public, it has been under constant fire. Gamers hate it due to its main character, and we all know why. The character, to be honest, doesn’t look feminine at all; it looks more like a man, and many other fans think so, too.
The backlash from the fandom was so massive that the developer was forced to turn off the comments section. Why did this happen? Why did it have to prevent the very public from commenting on the game? Because it knows fans aren’t liking it.
I have nothing against DEI in video games unless and until it isn’t forced. Cyberpunk 2077 is my favorite open-world video game, and it has some DEI elements. However, that doesn’t seem forced to me that much.
In Intergalactic: The Heretic Prophet, the main character is causing a lot of controversy, and things are not going well.
In Development For 4 Years?
Naughty Dog has been developing this for 4 years, and it seems to have made some pretty bad decisions. I agree we haven’t seen much in-game, so it is too soon to judge anything, but isn’t the protagonist one of the core elements of a game?
This is why Japanese and Korean developers reach new heights after every game they release. Bayonetta, Eve, Tifa, Aerith, Ada, Leon, Clive, Cloud, Dante, and Vergil are all characters that are pleasing to look at.
Now, most gamers won’t say the same for the protagonist from Naughty Dog’s upcoming new game. I seriously hope the developer doesn’t follow this route with its other games, given how massive the anticipation is for The Last of Us Part 3.
It has already been criticized for releasing pointless remasters, so this new game won’t really paint a pretty picture.
At Tech4Gamers.com, I cover the latest news and rumours in the gaming industry, from new game releases to hidden gems and video game leaks. Furthermore, I occasionally write tech articles about video game consoles, providing insights into the hardware and software that powers our gaming experiences.
Story Highlight
Ciri is a strong character with a beautiful backstory, which makes her a suitable protagonist for exploring new narratives within the Witcher universe.
Geralt is confirmed to appear in The Witcher 4 in a smaller role, so he will maintain his presence in the series.
Focusing on Ciri’s story and the potential for new narratives is more important than criticizing her appearance.
Some fans argue this would be a poor choice, claiming it might ruin her story or disrupt the series’ lore. However, these criticisms seem misguided and overlook why Ciri could be a fantastic lead.
Many fans also hate Ciri in Witcher 4 purely for her appearance, totally ignoring the fact that she’s grown up and has aged perfectly. It seems like gamers these days feel so entitled to complain about every little thing in video games.
Why it matters: Instead of debating whether Ciri should be the protagonist, fans should think about how the new installment can push the series forward. People really are worrying about the wrong things.
Why Ciri Fits as a Protagonist
Ciri is a standout character with a strong backstory, emotional growth, and powers that make her different from other Witchers. In The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, her journey was super compelling, showing both her strengths and vulnerabilities.
As a protagonist, she brings new storytelling possibilities that complement Geralt’s story while staying true to the series.
In an interview with IGN, the director of The Witcher 4 revealed they’re going with the ending in which Ciri becomes a Witcher. So it appears CDPR is going with the cannon ending to The Witcher 3.
However, it’s also important to remember they left a hint in the game with a Zirael (swallow) sign so players won’t feel like they’ve been cheated on.
Anyhow, Ciri is known as a strong warrior who faces tough choices head-on. Her journey, from a frightened child escaping the Wild Hunt to a powerful, independent fighter, resonates with fans who admire her strength.
This makes her a perfect choice to lead the next chapter of the series, especially after the important role she played in The Witcher 3. Anyone who has read The Witcher novels should know she’s a key character in the lore, and it’s about time she took the role of the game’s protagonist.
A Legacy of Change
Geralt’s retired, and Ciri’s ready to lead. So why are fans sharpening their pitchforks?
The Witcher series has always been about change and embracing the unexpected. From the start, it defied expectations by focusing on a monster hunter with a complex moral code. Geralt’s story, though iconic, was never meant to be the final word on the Witcher universe.
Shifting the focus to Ciri fits perfectly with this spirit of evolution. A powerful monster hunter with a unique destiny, Ciri has always been a fascinating character.
Making her the lead in The Witcher 4 offers an exciting chance to explore new aspects of the Witcher world and explore themes of choices, fate, and responsibility.
It’s natural for fans to have a strong bond with Geralt. However, holding on to the past and resisting change can limit creativity and prevent a beloved franchise from growing.
The Witcher 4 is a chance to look forward, explore new possibilities, and build on the solid foundation set by previous games. Besides, making Ciri the protagonist doesn’t mean leaving Geralt or other fan-favorite characters behind.
Another wave of backlash against The Witcher 4 comes from Ciri’s appearance in the reveal trailer. Some fans have criticized her updated look, saying it doesn’t match how she was portrayed in previous games. However, this criticism is unfair and based on unrealistic expectations.
First, Ciri is no longer the same person she was in The Witcher 3. Years have passed, and it’s only natural that her appearance would evolve to reflect her growth and maturity.
Her transition into adulthood is not just physical but symbolic of her character’s journey. Criticizing her for looking “different” ignores the fact that she is growing into her own identity—separate from her mentor, Geralt, and the events that shaped her past.
Criticizing Ciri’s appearance in the reveal trailer misses the point. Instead of focusing on surface details, fans should pay attention to her story and the potential for The Witcher 4 to explore new aspects of her character.
The Witcher 4 is set to introduce the School of the Lynx, likely bringing in new characters and lore. This creates opportunities for world-building that will enhance Ciri’s role as the protagonist.
Regardless, the game has entered full production, and I’m already looking forward to it, despite it being years away from launch. Instead of being bothered by Ciri being the protagonist, I’m more worried about CDPR’s shift to Unreal Engine 5.
At Tech4Gamers.com, I cover the latest news and rumours in the gaming industry, from new game releases to hidden gems and video game leaks. Furthermore, I occasionally write tech articles about video game consoles, providing insights into the hardware and software that powers our gaming experiences.
Story Highlight
Astro Bot, while enjoyable and fun, did not deserve the Game of the Year award.
Stellar Blade and Space Marine 2, considered by many to be top-tier games, were absent from the GOTY nominations.
It appears game journalists have too much influence in the award selection process, especially at The Game Awards.
Astro Bot surprisingly winning the GOTY at The Game Awards 2024 has been a hot topic for a few days now. Don’t get me wrong, it’s a fantastic game and I enjoyed every second of my playthrough. But, its selection as the game of the year feels undeserved compared to other titles that came out this year.
Let’s talk about the nominees for a second. We all saw the internet meltdown when Shadow of the Erdtree got nominated for the GOTY award. But to imagine Stellar Blade and Space Marine 2 – two of the year’s best titles – not receiving a nomination for the award? Give me a break.
The whole award ceremony felt lackluster, and it was capped off by Astro Bot being awarded the Game of the Year.
Why it matters: The widespread disappointment strengthens the argument that, while Astro Bot is enjoyable, it wasn’t the most deserving winner of the GOTY award.
Taking Nothing Away From Astro Bot
PlayStation reportedly wants to focus on family entertainment from now on.
Astro Bot deserves credit for mastering classic platforming. The levels are well-designed, and full of creative challenges and hidden secrets. The controls are smooth and responsive, making every jump and move feel just right.
The variety of gadgets and power-ups keeps the game fresh and exciting. The charming visuals and lively soundtrack add to the fun, creating an enjoyable world to explore. It’s a game focused on pure fun, reminding us why we love video games.
It’s no surprise that Astro Bot also won the Best Family Game at the event. The game apparently appeals to a wider audience, as it’s easy for anyone to get into.
Did It Really Deserve The GOTY Award?
2024 was a year of some of the most ambitious games, yet GOTY felt… meh.
I’ve seen many people say Astro Bot deserved the award because it’s just pure fun. I can confirm it’s good fun – it’s fascinating even.
But “fun” isn’t the sole criterion for Game of the Year. GOTY should highlight the best in game development, offering new ideas, great stories, or unique gameplay.
While Astro Bot does a great job at what it aims to do, it doesn’t push boundaries. It improves on existing formulas, but it doesn’t reinvent the genre. This is where it begins to fall short.
The game’s fun aspect is undeniable, but this alone doesn’t make it worthy of gaming’s top award. Compared to the depth, ambition, and cultural impact of other nominees, Astro Bot feels more like a crowd-pleaser than the “best game of 2024.”
Let’s Begin The Journey To The West
Black Myth: Wukong deserved the spotlight at TGA 2024, not a snub.
Now you’re thinking what other game deserved the GOTY award? This shouldn’t even be a question. Black Myth: Wukong is hands down the best game of 2024 and it shouldn’t even be a debate, provided you actually played the game from start to finish, unlike certain people.
Black Myth: Wukong is a visually stunning action RPG that blew my mind with its incredible graphics, smooth combat, and rich mythological world. The game’s ambition and scale made it a strong contender for GOTY.
Before you come at me saying it doesn’t redefine the genre and it’s just another “soulslike” game – it’s not. I’m sick and tired of people complaining about the game’s difficulty when in reality, it’s much much easier than any soulslike game.
It’s more similar to God of War than Sekiro or Elden Ring, and we all love God of War, right? I can assure you, that anybody can get into Black Myth: Wukong and have an absolute blast playing it. However, most people just give up after struggling against the first boss, which is a shame honestly.
We had game journalists giving Black Myth: Wukong lower ratings for absurd reasons, including its “difficulty” and, more embarrassingly, its “lack of diversity.” Are we going to judge games based on how politically relevant they are? Games are supposed to help us escape reality, not remind us of it.
Let’s address the elephant in the room: Wukong’s low ratings. Check the game’s Steam page; it has nearly a million reviews, with 96% of them being overwhelmingly positive.
It’s absurd that the GOTY award was determined by how some game journalists perceived a game. Let’s put it like this: Black Myth: Wukong won the Player’s Voice GOTY while Astro Bot won the “Journalists’ Darling” award.
A Weak Year for Game Awards Nominations
It’s still unbelievable Stellar Blade wasn’t nominated for the Game of the Year award.
This year’s Game Awards nominations just didn’t feel right. Titles like Stellar Blade and Warhammer 40,000: Space Marine 2 didn’t even get nominated for GOTY, which is baffling given their quality and positive reception.
The absence of such games raises serious concerns about how these nominations were decided. The fact that these games were overlooked while Astro Bot got a nomination says a lot about the overall quality of this year’s awards.
While it’s important to recognize all types of games, GOTY should honor the most influential title of the year—one that pushes the boundaries or sets a new standard.
As charming as Astro Bot is, it doesn’t meet that criteria. It’s not even available to everyone as it’s locked behind PlayStation’s exclusivity, for crying out loud.
With snubs like Black Myth: Wukong and Stellar Blade, and questionable nominees lowering the event’s prestige, The Game Awards 2024 fell short. Hopefully, future years will offer a more balanced approach to honoring games, but I won’t get my hopes up.
At Tech4Gamers, I mainly cover new gaming news, leaks, and rumours. Aside from that, I love to write features about my favourite games while inserting my opinion about their different aspects.
Story Highlight
Black Myth: Wukong is the biggest release of this year, and its success will go down in history.
However, despite achieving these tremendous milestones, it couldn’t win Game of The Year 2024.
Despite that, The Game Awards jury thought Astro Bot is deserving of the most prestigious award of 2024.
Black Myth: Wukong surprised everyone with its launch. No one could have seen it literally destroying the record of almost every single game. This title launched to nearly 2.5 million players on Steam, which is just straight-up absurd for a single-player game.
Be honest, could you have expected this game to destroy records like this? I didn’t. It received a lot of unfair reviews, with some even claiming that it doesn’t have enough diversity and inclusivity.
However, if you look up Steam’s user reviews, you can clearly see what those who actually played the game and weren’t just stuck at Wandering Wight and thought it had no exploration think about it. Despite having overwhelmingly positive reviews and such an outstanding, it couldn’t win the Game of the Year award, which is the biggest upset of 2024.
Why it matters: Game Science curated a masterpiece despite having no prior experience shipping a game on such a massive scale. It is a miracle how the studio not only met the fans’ expectations but exceeded them completely.
Black Myth: Wukong Was The Right Answer For GOTY
The Hit Chinese RPG Deserved To Win Game of The Year 2024
Before Sony fans jump me without thinking, let me tell you I have played Astro Bot, and I thoroughly enjoyed it. However, do I think it is a game that would give me chills, make me want to play it again and again and be something I am really excited about? No, not even close.
I just played it for 30 minutes or, at most, an hour, and that was the best I could do. The experience was good but wasn’t close to being the GOTY. I get it; the team really worked hard to make different features that complement the PlayStation 5 and its controller.
Astro Bot is a game that different age groups of people can play; it is a family game. However, does making a family game should be something extraordinary? If it is good enough, then sure, but is Astro Bot really good enough?
I have seen countless Sony fans just claiming that Astro Bot is better than Black Myth: Wukong without ever playing the game. I am a huge FromSoftware fan, and even I am ready to accept that the Chinese RPG has bosses cooler and better than a lot of the games from the said developer (well, not better than Messmer, Sister Friede, Bayle, and Gael).
Astro Bot Is The GOTY?
Astro Bot Does Not Deserve The GOTY Award
Believe it or not, Astro Bot is the Game of the Year 2024. How could games like Shadow of the Erdtree, Black Myth: Wukong, and Metaphor ReFantazio lose to a game like Astro Bot? No offence.
I used to take The Game Awards seriously, but now it just appears to be an advertising event. Still, I suppose I can’t ignore such a blatant injustice happening right in front of me. Game journalists have more of a say in selecting the winner than the actual gamers, which is baffling to me.
I have played all of the GOTY nominees except Balatro (I didn’t finish FF7 Rebirth due to how they massacred the story).
So, having played all of the nominees except one, the GOTY was clear to me. While I am more biased toward Shadow of the Erdtree, which I surely enjoyed the most this year, the award belongs to none other than Wukong. I’ll explain why.
Biggest Upset of 2024
First, the studio had no experience shipping such a massive game before, not to mention that it was developed on Unreal Engine 5. Second, it managed to curate a masterpiece that destroyed almost every record on Steam.
Third, it has a solid rating on Steam, which can only be given to those who have only played the game. Fourth, despite having over a million reviews, it managed to retain an overwhelmingly positive rating of nearly 96%.
Swen Vincke, the CEO of Larian Studios, made an interesting statement before announcing the winner. I couldn’t agree more with him. A Chinese Studio made a game with a Chinese background and rich lore from history that they would love to play themselves (which was quite obvious). So how did it lose?
Unravelling the beautiful lore and fighting my way through some of the toughest enemies was a great experience for me, and I still cherish it. While I am not happy with the GOTY winner at TGA 2024, I hope the industry starts appreciating games that are actually good.
