产品系列示意图。
什么是最好的选择 Intel Processor N100 或 Intel Core Ultra 9 285H? 哪种处理器更快?
Compare the available specifications of these models.
Intel Processor N100 has a base frequency of 1.80 GHz. 4 / 4 CPU Cores / Threads. Stated TDP / base power 6 W. 发布于 Q1/2023.
Intel Core Ultra 9 285H has a base frequency of 2.9 GHz. 16 / 16 CPU Cores / Threads. Stated TDP / base power 45 W. 发布于 Q1/2025.
需要考虑的原因 在总排名中的位置
(基于几个基准)
Lower stated TDP / base power
Power limits alone do not measure performance per watt.
共同立场 Intel Processor N100 在流行的基准测试中的CPU,用于与其他型号进行比较.
需要考虑的原因 更高的时钟速度
左右 61% 更好的时钟速度
更多的核心数量
12 more cores
更高的涡轮增压时钟速度
左右 59 % higher specified turbo frequency
Intel Processor N100
有关被比较的处理器、系列、代数和细分市场的背景信息。
Core counts, threads, cache and clock modes describe the CPU configuration. Performance depends on the workload and comparable measured results.
内部图形不影响CPU的性能,在没有显卡或在移动设备上执行显卡的工作。
用于编码和解码内容的内置编解码器。大大地加快了所需的操作。
支持的RAM的类型、通道数量 Intel Core Ultra 9 285H 和 Intel Processor N100. 根据主板的不同,可能支持更高或更低的内存频率。
比较TDP的要求 Intel Processor N100 和 Intel Core Ultra 9 285H Power specifications describe different manufacturer limits. TDP, base power and maximum turbo power are separate values; they do not establish measured system consumption.
架构、接口、所支持的额外指令 Intel Processor N100 和 Intel Core Ultra 9 285H, 虚拟机技术和工艺技术。
These results have no shared test of both models with the same version and settings. They are shown separately without a percentage difference.
Results were obtained on the reported systems. Test versions and settings remain separate; incomplete conditions do not support calculated model performance differences.
| Model | Result | Reported conditions |
|---|---|---|
| Intel Core Ultra 9 285H | 3937 points | System: GMK EVO-T1 CPU / power label: Ultra 9 285H 80 W / 70 W Graphics: Arc 140T 2350 MHz RAM: 64 GB Exact test build and complete conditions are unreported; no ranking position. |
| Model | Result | Reported conditions |
|---|---|---|
| Intel Core Ultra 9 285H | 489 points | System: GMK EVO-T1 CPU / power label: Ultra 9 285H 80 W / 70 W Graphics: Arc 140T 2350 MHz RAM: 64 GB Exact test build and complete conditions are unreported; no ranking position. |
| Model | Result | Reported conditions |
|---|---|---|
| Intel Core Ultra 9 285H | 1142 points | System: GMK EVO-T1 CPU / power label: Ultra 9 285H 80 W / 70 W Graphics: Arc 140T 2350 MHz RAM: 64 GB Exact test build and complete conditions are unreported; no ranking position. |
| Model | Result | Reported conditions |
|---|---|---|
| Intel Core Ultra 9 285H | 126 points | System: GMK EVO-T1 CPU / power label: Ultra 9 285H 80 W / 70 W Graphics: Arc 140T 2350 MHz RAM: 64 GB Exact test build and complete conditions are unreported; no ranking position. |
| Model | Result | Reported conditions |
|---|---|---|
| Intel Core Ultra 9 285H | 6410.87284 H/s | RandomX / XMRig 6.26.0 / 1M / 16 threads / windows System RAM: 48 GB OS: Windows NT 10.0 Duration: 155.985 s User-submitted run; tuning and power settings are incomplete. |
| Model | Result | Reported conditions |
|---|---|---|
| Intel Core Ultra 9 285H | 20681 points | System: GMK EVO-T1 CPU / power label: Ultra 9 285H 80 W / 70 W Graphics: Arc 140T 2350 MHz RAM: 64 GB Exact test build and complete conditions are unreported; no ranking position. |
| Model | Result | Reported conditions |
|---|---|---|
| Intel Core Ultra 9 285H | 2105 points | System: GMK EVO-T1 CPU / power label: Ultra 9 285H 80 W / 70 W Graphics: Arc 140T 2350 MHz RAM: 64 GB Exact test build and complete conditions are unreported; no ranking position. |
| Model | Result | Reported conditions |
|---|---|---|
| Intel Core Ultra 9 285H | 8068 points | System: GMK EVO-T1 CPU / power label: Ultra 9 285H 80 W / 70 W Graphics: Arc 140T 2350 MHz RAM: 64 GB Exact test build and complete conditions are unreported; no ranking position. |
| Model | Result | Reported conditions |
|---|---|---|
| Intel Core Ultra 9 285H | 809 points | System: GMK EVO-T1 CPU / power label: Ultra 9 285H 80 W / 70 W Graphics: Arc 140T 2350 MHz RAM: 64 GB Exact test build and complete conditions are unreported; no ranking position. |