Question Intel Core Ultra 7 365K - 42 Core Nova Lake CPU ?

[jnjnilson6]

A quick little post.

Well, do you believe that Nova Lake would completely overshadow Arrow Lake and provide unprecedented gains in rendering and gaming?

Is this the time of big changes? Bigger perhaps than the changes Sandy Bridge brought back in the day and Alder Lake provided in 2022?

I feel the difference between the Core Ultra 7 265K and the supposed Core Ultra 7 365K would be universally unmatched if what the sites newly inform us of today is true.

Do tell me your opinions. I have a friend who may transfer his Core Ultra 7 265K (CPU + CPU cooler + motherboard + RAM) into the box of his i7-6700 machine and purportedly upgrade to the Core Ultra 7 365K on his main machine when it comes out. He's an animator, so rendering speed is even more important to him than gaming.

If we are talking 20 cores (Ultra 7 265K) VS 42 cores (Ultra 7 365K): the difference should be extreme, especially for an animator.

Do write up and
Thank you!

 

[TerryLaze]

If we are talking 20 cores (Ultra 7 265K) VS 42 cores (Ultra 7 365K): the difference should be extreme, especially for an animator.

Do write up and
Thank you!

Rendering yes, gaming no.
And that's only if the rumors are true, but keep in mind that intel would have to double their cores while keeping the price the same and that part I see as pretty much impossible, especially since amd has nothing that would come close to it.
If they double, or even just increase by a bunch, their price then they will get into threadripper and xeon category and then what would be the point of that.

 

[jnjnilson6]

Rendering yes, gaming no.
And that's only if the rumors are true, but keep in mind that intel would have to double their cores while keeping the price the same and that part I see as pretty much impossible, especially since amd has nothing that would come close to it.
If they double, or even just increase by a bunch, their price then they will get into threadripper and xeon category and then what would be the point of that.

I know this is purely speculative. But do you believe the chances of a price over 500 EUR for the Core Ultra 7 365K are slim? The Core Ultra 7 265K he got for 349 EUR right when it was coming out, alongside the ASUS Z890-P for around 300 EUR (that was in December / January 2025 so there weren't many options other than the Z890 chipset).

--

His current PC:
Box: Pure Base 500
CPU: Core Ultra 7 265K
CPU Cooler: Noctua NH-U12S
Motherboard: ASUS Z890-P
RAM: Corsair 64 GB DDR5 (2x 32 GB)
GPU: Sapphire RX 7800 XT
SSD: Samsung 990 1 TB
PSU: Cooler Master 1200 Watt

His old PC:
Box: Cooler Master N400
CPU: Core i7-6700
CPU Cooler: Cooler Master Hyper 212
Motherboard: ASUS Z170-P
RAM: Corsair 16 GB DDR4 (2x 8 GB)
GPU: Sapphire RX 580
SSD: Samsung 500 GB
PSU: Cooler Master 750 Watt

The plan is this:
Step 1:

1. He puts the ASUS Z890-P motherboard in the Cooler Master N400 box and removes the ASUS Z170-P one.

2. He puts the Core Ultra 7 265K in the Cooler Master N400 box and removes the i7-6700.

2. He puts the Noctua NH-U12S cooler in the Cooler Master N400 box and removes the Cooler Master Hyper 212 one.

3. He puts 1x 32 GB DDR5 in the Cooler Master N400 and discards the 2x 8 GB DDR4 sticks.

4. He keeps the Sapphire Radeon RX 580, the 500 GB SSD and the 750 Watt Cooler Master PSU in the CM N400 box

Step 2:

1. He buys a motherboard supporting the Core Ultra 7 365K and puts in the Pure Base 500 box.

2. He retains the remaining 1x 32 GB in the Pure Base 500 box.

3. He buys a CPU cooler (either the Noctua NH-U12S or a synonymous one) that would support the new socket.

4. He buys the Core Ultra 7 365K and installs it on the new motherboard in the Pure Base 500 box.

5. The Sapphire Radeon RX 7800 XT, the 1 TB Samsung 990 Pro and the 1200 Watt Cooler Master PSU remain in the Pure Base 500 box.

Now, I wonder if the parts that would need to be bought in step 2 (point 1, 3 and 4) would be able to be acquired for 900 EUR or less.

 

[Eximo]

Not sure they will increase costs that much with Novalake. They are going to be doing a node shrink for the SoC, and it may also be that the interposer also gets a node shrink that should reduces costs. Arrow Lake is a physically bigger chip than Raptor Lake, and yet.

I believe the launch price for the 265k was $430. It is only cheap now because of poor sales, even cheaper than the 14700k.

I would expect another ~$450 launch price for the 365k. Which would place it right between the 9900X and 9950X. If it is superior at gaming than the non-X3D chips, it should do well.

385k might be the one with silly pricing.

 

[TerryLaze]

I would expect another ~$450 launch price for the 365k. Which would place it right between the 9900X and 9950X. If it is superior at gaming than the non-X3D chips, it should do well.

385k might be the one with silly pricing.

Only if they stick with the same amount of cores, with the only perf changes coming from arch changes and possibly higher clocks, especially if they keep with the 50% gross margin there is no way for them to double cores and keep the same price, intel foundry will not be that much cheaper even for intel.
https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-i...ust-deliver-50-percent-to-get-the-green-light

 

[Eximo]

If they kept the same core count and did a process node shrink they should be able to effectively lower prices. Doesn't mean they would, but they could, but should grant them more margin. Given what they can sell Arrowlake for now, seems they have quite a bit of margin to spare.

I suspect they wouldn't hold hard and fast to that 50% rule for their flagship consumer product either. That likely applies more to all the other Intel products vying for internal funding. Call it a loss leader for Xeon.

My understanding is AMD is moving to a 12 core chiplet. Which would make 24c/48t 'P-core' chips available from them. Makes sense for the 385k and 365k to have that much on paper for marketing purposes, and it would be very bad if they were priced out of a match up to AMD.

 

[TerryLaze]

If they kept the same core count and did a process node shrink they should be able to effectively lower prices. Doesn't mean they would, but they could, but should grant them more margin. Given what they can sell Arrowlake for now, seems they have quite a bit of margin to spare.

Completely agree.

My understanding is AMD is moving to a 12 core chiplet. Which would make 24c/48t 'P-core' chips available from them. Makes sense for the 385k and 365k to have that much on paper for marketing purposes, and it would be very bad if they were priced out of a match up to AMD.

24 p-core is a day and night difference to 54 mixed cores, intel could increase cores by a few to match them.

Also you think AMD can pull off an increase in core count without increasing prices?! They already are working at 10% margin, granted that's for all divisions together but still, and TSMC is constantly increasing prices and zen 6 supposedly is going to be on one of the newest nodes.

 

[Eximo]

24 p-core is a day and night difference to 54 mixed cores, intel could increase cores by a few to match them.

Also you think AMD can pull off an increase in core count without increasing prices?! They already are working at 10% margin, granted that's for all divisions together but still, and TSMC is constantly increasing prices and zen 6 supposedly is going to be on one of the newest nodes.

It will come down to the benchmarks and use case. A 24 core AMD chip isn't better at gaming that is for sure. But Zen 6 could have impressive workstation performance. Even if you count SMT as 50% that would still get you '32' cores. 16P cores plus 32 E cores will likely pull ahead though. 14P cores and 24E cores if it is close will be quite the bargain. Comes down to the clock speeds available to either TSMC 2nm or Intel 18A really.

It will give AMD new products. The single CCD 12 core should be an interesting option, and a 10 core would become very feasible. Would let them drop the dual 6-core CCD for the same money, increasing margins for that class of CPU.

Unless yields are bad, it would be curious if they could even get down to 6 cores to keep that market segment going. Or if the bottom spec will become 8 core.

 

[uWebb429]

https://videocardz.com/newz/intel-n...claims-10-single-and-60-multi-threaded-uplift

 

[Eximo]

10% on single thread, and 60% on multithread.

9950X and 285K have very similar multithread scores.

AMD is potentially looking at a 50% multithread gain, with zero IPC improvement. Might be pretty darn close if Zen 6 also gets 10% or more.

 

[jnjnilson6]

Not sure they will increase costs that much with Novalake. They are going to be doing a node shrink for the SoC, and it may also be that the interposer also gets a node shrink that should reduces costs. Arrow Lake is a physically bigger chip than Raptor Lake, and yet.

I believe the launch price for the 265k was $430. It is only cheap now because of poor sales, even cheaper than the 14700k.

I would expect another ~$450 launch price for the 365k. Which would place it right between the 9900X and 9950X. If it is superior at gaming than the non-X3D chips, it should do well.

385k might be the one with silly pricing.

What do you think would be better? An i5-12600K (if it will never be overclocked) or an i5-13400? There may be a little change of plans and my friend could upgrade his i7-6700 machine directly to one of the aforementioned CPUs.

The i5-12600K is faster, yet a little bit hotter and one generation older than the i5-13400. They are similarly priced. If it was up to you, which one would you choose?

Thank you!

 

[Eximo]

12600K can always have a power limit set if you need to on a cheaper motherboard. But there is not real difference between the cores, I think the 13400 is still Alder Lake, so the performance difference is the clock speed. Only the higher end chips got the Raptor Lake cores with the small increase to cache and the IPC jump.

I am going to hold out for Bartlett Lake or make the jump to AMD. I still like the idea of an AMD CPU and Intel GPU just for giggles.

 

[jnjnilson6]

12600K can always have a power limit set if you need to on a cheaper motherboard. But there is not real difference between the cores, I think the 13400 is still Alder Lake, so the performance difference is the clock speed. Only the higher end chips got the Raptor Lake cores with the small increase to cache and the IPC jump.

I am going to hold out for Bartlett Lake or make the jump to AMD. I still like the idea of an AMD CPU and Intel GPU just for giggles.

For a system with a Cooler Master 750 Watt PSU, a Sapphire RX 9060 XT 16 GB, 32 GB DDR5 Corsair, a 1 TB Samsung 990 Pro, a Noctua NH-U12S CPU Cooler and the Cooler Master N400 box (he'll be buying the GPU, RAM, SSD and cooler), do you think the lower power use of the i5-13400 would be more worthwhile than that of the i5-12600K (on the aforementioned Power Supply)? Do you think the heat may factor-in? Or, perhaps, the fact that the i5-13400 is one generation newer could retain usability over the i5-12600K further into time (like being supported by Windows 12 or any other software, which is purely speculative, but something to think about)? And is the 10% rendering difference between both CPUs something to ponder?

My friend wants to upgrade now and since he's an animator and we are both huge Intel fans and both CPUs are close as close in terms of performance it would be good to hear another's experienced opinion. Otherwise he's very happy animating on his new machine with the Ultra 7 265K; the difference from the i7-6700 is tremendous.

PS. Forgot he'll be buying the ASUS Prime B760-PLUS motherboard as well.

 

[Eximo]

As far as I know, there may be no difference at all in the silicon between the 12600K and the 13400, just binning. So compatibility with future OS should be the same.

That cooler should handle either with ease.

750W is more than enough for that CPU/GPU combo.

Can't say I approve of a 1TB SSD these days, but if that is in budget I suppose it is okay. Probably better off getting a lesser drive with 2TB. Plenty out there with DRAM cache and similar MTBF of the Samsung.

 

[jnjnilson6]

As far as I know, there may be no difference at all in the silicon between the 12600K and the 13400, just binning. So compatibility with future OS should be the same.

That cooler should handle either with ease.

750W is more than enough for that CPU/GPU combo.

Can't say I approve of a 1TB SSD these days, but if that is in budget I suppose it is okay. Probably better off getting a lesser drive with 2TB. Plenty out there with DRAM cache and similar MTBF of the Samsung.

Thank you very much! 👍

Yeah, he uses very little SSD space. He was thinking of getting a 500 GB Samsung SSD, but even the 980 PRO (500 GB) was more expensive on Amazon (in France) than the 990 PRO 1 TB, so we decided he'd go with the latter.

Thanks again!