Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus benchmarks reveal why Intel may have cancelled its unreleased flagship CPU
Intel’s unreleased Core Ultra 9 290K Plus has finally appeared in benchmark testing, giving PC hardware fans a rare look at a processor that was expected to sit at the top of the Core Ultra 200S Plus “Arrow Lake Refresh” lineup. The results suggest one clear reason it never reached retail shelves: it simply did not offer enough performance over the much cheaper Core Ultra 7 270K Plus.
The Core Ultra 9 290K Plus was reportedly designed as a flagship desktop CPU with 24 cores and 24 threads, using an 8 P-core and 16 E-core configuration. On paper, it looked very close to the Core Ultra 9 285K, but with higher memory support and slightly improved clock speeds. The chip was said to feature a 3.7 GHz base clock, up to 5.8 GHz boost, 36 MB of L3 cache, 40 MB of L2 cache, DDR5-7200 support, and a 125W base power rating with a 250W maximum turbo power limit.
A Chinese hardware tester recently obtained access to two prototype samples of the Core Ultra 9 290K Plus. To confirm authenticity, the CPU was first checked in BIOS, where the “290K Plus” name appeared. It was also tested with Intel’s newer Binary Optimization Tool, better known as Intel BOT. Since BOT support is only available for newer Intel Core Ultra 200S Plus processors, this helped confirm that the sample was a real unreleased chip rather than a mislabeled existing CPU.
Once the processor was verified, it was tested across productivity workloads, rendering benchmarks, and several games. The Core Ultra 9 290K Plus did run at higher clocks than the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus. During multi-threaded workloads such as Cinebench, the prototype reportedly reached up to 5.5 GHz on the P-cores and 4.8 GHz on the E-cores.
However, the performance gains were surprisingly small.
In application benchmarks, the Core Ultra 9 290K Plus was only around 2% to 3% faster than the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus. Rendering workloads showed a slightly better result, with the unreleased flagship averaging about 4% faster. That is technically an improvement, but not enough to justify a major product separation, especially if the chip was going to carry a premium price tag.
The same pattern appeared in gaming. In some titles, the Core Ultra 9 290K Plus delivered up to an 8% improvement over the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus, but the average uplift was much smaller, typically around 2% to 3%. At both 1080p and 1440p, the difference between the two Intel processors was minor.
1080p gaming results showed the Core Ultra 9 290K Plus slightly ahead in every tested title. In CS2, it reached 401 FPS on average with 211 FPS for the 1% low, compared to 392 FPS and 205 FPS on the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus. In PUBG, the 290K Plus delivered 312 FPS average and 176 FPS 1% low, while the 270K Plus produced 305 FPS and 171 FPS. Delta Force ran at 198 FPS average on the 290K Plus versus 192 FPS on the 270K Plus. Black Myth: Wukong showed 142 FPS versus 138 FPS, Resident Evil 9 showed 189 FPS versus 183 FPS, and Cyberpunk 2077 showed 162 FPS versus 158 FPS.
At 1440p, the gap remained similarly narrow. CS2 posted 298 FPS average on the Core Ultra 9 290K Plus compared to 291 FPS on the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus. PUBG reached 241 FPS versus 236 FPS. Delta Force showed 152 FPS versus 148 FPS. Black Myth: Wukong landed at 108 FPS versus 105 FPS. Resident Evil 9 showed 144 FPS versus 140 FPS, while Cyberpunk 2077 reached 121 FPS versus 118 FPS.
These numbers make the issue obvious: the Core Ultra 9 290K Plus was faster, but not by enough to feel like a true flagship upgrade.
The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus appears to be the more important product in Intel’s Arrow Lake Refresh stack. It offers the same 24-core and 24-thread configuration as the unreleased Core Ultra 9 290K Plus, with 8 performance cores and 16 efficiency cores. It also supports DDR5-7200 memory, carries the same 125W and 250W power ratings, and has the same 36 MB L3 cache and 40 MB L2 cache layout.
Its main disadvantage is slightly lower boost clocks. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus reaches up to 5.5 GHz on P-cores and 4.7 GHz on E-cores, compared to the reported 5.8 GHz P-core and 4.8 GHz E-core targets of the Core Ultra 9 290K Plus. But real-world testing suggests those higher clocks did not translate into a meaningful enough performance jump.
Pricing may have been the deciding factor. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has an MSRP of $299 and can reportedly be found around $280. That makes it a strong value option for users looking for a high-core-count Intel desktop processor. The Core Ultra 9 290K Plus, on the other hand, would likely have landed somewhere around $399 to $499. At that price, it would have been difficult to recommend when the cheaper 270K Plus could get so close in performance.
The benchmarker also claimed that with a small amount of overclocking, the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus could match or even surpass the Core Ultra 9 290K Plus in some scenarios. If true, that would make a retail launch even harder to justify.
Here is how the key Intel Core Ultra 200S and Core Ultra 200S Plus desktop chips compare:
The cancelled Core Ultra 9 290K Plus was expected to feature 24 cores and 24 threads, 3.7 GHz P-core and 3.2 GHz E-core base clocks, up to 5.8 GHz P-core and 4.8 GHz E-core boost clocks, 36 MB L3 cache, 40 MB L2 cache, DDR5-7200 support, and a 125W to 250W power range.
The Core Ultra 9 285K offers 24 cores and 24 threads, up to 5.7 GHz P-core and 4.6 GHz E-core boost clocks, DDR5-6400 support, and a launch price of $589.
The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus offers 24 cores and 24 threads, up to 5.5 GHz P-core and 4.7 GHz E-core boost clocks, DDR5-7200 support, and a $299 MSRP.
The Core Ultra 7 265K and 265KF feature 20 cores and 20 threads, with 8 P-cores and 12 E-cores, up to 5.5 GHz P-core and 4.6 GHz E-core boost clocks, DDR5-6400 support, and pricing around $394 and $379.
The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is listed with 18 cores and 18 threads, using 6 P-cores and 12 E-cores, up to 5.3 GHz P-core and 4.7 GHz E-core boost clocks, DDR5-7200 support, and a $199 price point.
The Core Ultra 5 245K and 245KF offer 14 cores and 14 threads, with 6 P-cores and 8 E-cores, up to 5.2 GHz P-core and 4.6 GHz E-core boost clocks, DDR5-6400 support, and pricing around $309 and $294.
The leaked Core Ultra 9 290K Plus benchmarks paint a clear picture. Intel had a higher-clocked flagship ready, but the real-world gains over the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus were too small to create a compelling product. With only modest improvements in applications, rendering, and gaming, the unreleased chip likely would have struggled to stand out.
For gamers and PC builders, the takeaway is simple: the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus may be the more attractive Arrow Lake Refresh processor, especially if pricing remains aggressive. The cancelled Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is now an interesting piece of Intel CPU history, but based on these results, its absence from store shelves makes a lot of sense.
