Which Intel processor for workstation in 2026
Posted by The_Will_to_Make@reddit | buildapc | View on Reddit | 21 comments
TL;DR Building a PC for the first time for a CAD/3D-Modelling workstation that can also handle some FPS and racing sim games. Looking at an i9-14900k paired with a 5070TI, but hoping for some feedback.
Hey all, my XPS15 (13th gen i9 with Quadro GPU and 32 gigs RAM) recently crapped out on me and I’m now in need of a new computer. I want to build a PC which will mainly function as my home computer and CAD/CAM/3D-modeling workstation, but I’d also like to do some gaming.
I’m having a hard time choosing a processor. I know I want Intel because of some compatibility requirements with the 3D Scanner I use. I’m leaning towards an i9-14900k over the newer Core Ultra 9 285k, but honestly I’m stumped on whether I should choose between those options or something else entirely.
I was planning on an i9-14900k and a 5070TI. I run a lot of Fusion360 and SolidWorks, but also some Blender and other odds-and-ends modeling software. Mostly modeling - not a lot of rendering. Game-wise, I’d just like to be able to comfortably play FPS and racing/flight sim games.
One of my biggest concerns is future-proofing. I’d really like to build a PC that won’t be completely outdated in 2-3 years, or can’t be upgraded with newer hardware.
Born_Bad_1294@reddit
Intel 250K or the 270K.
Very good in production and gaming.
gamers nexus compared both on his youtube channel
Born_Bad_1294@reddit
This is the latest model launched, so expect 1-2 generations more to upgrade on the same socket
eatingpotatochips@reddit
250K and 270K are the last of their generation on LGA 1851. Intel's next generation, Nova Lake-S, will be on LGA 1954.
Not that it really matters. Most people do not upgrade their CPUs every generation, contrary to popular belief on this sub.
Accomplished_Emu_658@reddit
This so true. whenever someone asks a question about cpu there is always people responding not to buy intel because intel is changing sockets. So? Most users don’t upgrade constantly or at all, especially ones asking questions like this. “You will have to change your motherboard to upgrade!” So? They will have to anyway because they hold on to their computers and parts for a long time.
eatingpotatochips@reddit
It's unfortunate there are so many AMD brand loyalists on this sub, because Intel has been offering really good price/performance options ever since the price drops due to microcode issues on the 13th and 14th gen CPUs. The 14600K, a handful of the first gen Core Ultras, and both second gen Core Ultras have been really good value, but every time Intel is mentioned a bunch of AMD fanboys come in and talk about socket longevity.
This sub has caused a lot of people to drop $500 on X3D CPUs when all they really need is a $200 250K.
borgie_83@reddit
Happens every single time. It actually makes me laugh because anyone who mentions a “dead-end platform” is usually a total noob just mimicking what they’ve heard their favourite fanboy YouTuber say. Intel has been doing roughly two generations of CPUs for decades, so it’s nothing new.
The majority of people also don’t upgrade until the five to seven year mark, sometimes longer, which makes platform longevity largely irrelevant. At that point, it would be stupid to spend money on an old, dated platform just to squeeze a few more years out of it, when for $150–$200 they could simply move to a more modern platform with better connectivity, faster Wi-Fi, and improved memory support.
It’s especially funny because most AMD users who brag about 3D V-Cache are actually on 7600X, 7700X, 9600X, and 9700X CPUs that don’t even have it. The X3D chips are in the minority due to cost. Plus, at 1440p and 4K, the difference is minimal in most games because they’re GPU-bound anyway. Then they bring up the “competitive gamer at 1080p” argument, but competitive gamers are a minority, and people with a good GPU don’t even consider 1080p an option. As if anyone with an expensive X3D CPU is gaming at 1080p anyway.
Drenlin@reddit
That's just the PC community in general. They did the same thing to AMD for years. Whoever has the gaming crown at the time can do no wrong, haha.
Accomplished_Emu_658@reddit
Yeah i just noticed they always give the upgradability argument like it is law and their only reasoning for people coming off a 10 year old cpu. I saw one user was coming off ddr3 pc, and person was arguing they should get amd because of upgradability. Nothing wrong with saying amd is typically on a socket for longer so it is an option.
When am5 first dropped people were saying amd going to stick with this socket for “x” years. You don’t know that. They did it once that doesn’t mean they will always. You can hope.
itsforathing@reddit
When I finally upgraded, it was after 3 generations of Intel platforms had come and gone and they were already onto the core ultra line. That little i5 6600 was a trooper.
borgie_83@reddit
Correct. Even those who purchase the 270K will most likely still be using that CPU throughout the entirety of Intel’s next socket. And when they do upgrade to another Intel platform, it won’t be on LGA1954 but the platform after that, rendering the “dead-end platform” argument largely irrelevant. A simple GPU upgrade during that time would be all someone needs for a performance boost in gaming, as the CPU is more than capable of carrying them through the next five to seven years.
Born_Bad_1294@reddit
Ahh, I was confused
CodeRoyal@reddit
The socket is dead. Intel will release something new this year.
Muah_dib@reddit
Yes, I agree. I have an Ultra 7 265K and I was amazed by its performance in AI applications and video games. It doesn't strain at all (well, I'm not a hardcore gamer, I tested it on Hogwarts Legacy, Tainted Grail, Inzoi, and Expedition 33, all with max graphics and DLSS quality settings) with a 5070 (so a less powerful machine than the one you're going to build), but it didn't exceed 40% load with temperatures below 50°C with a simple 360mm AIO cooler.
ecktt@reddit
I "tweaked" a couple 265K. They kick ass, giving AMD X3D chips a run for less money while being excellent for productivity apps.
AceLamina@reddit
Get the latest intel chips that's going to release soon, I forgot the name because I ain't remembering all that, but it has similar or better gaming performance but better productivity performance
And the most important part, a lot cheaper
Tgrove88@reddit
FYI
https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/intel-arrow-lake-processors-bottleneck-pcie-5-0-nvme-ssds-by-16-percent-limiting-peak-speeds-to-12gb-s-instead-of-14gb-s
FrequentWay@reddit
The cpu is already on a dead motherboard same with Intel Core 2 Ultras. FPS do benefit from Intel's high core clock but the true benefits would be on Intel Core 3 Ultras i think. I think OP will have to wait until those get released.
Cerebral_Zero@reddit
250K and 270K are probably better value then a 265K new, but you just might be able to score a used 265K.
You can't future proof right now. Even if you wait for next gen Intel Nova Lake, the motherboard you get for it will likely be planned around how many PCIe lanes the Ultra 300 series has so you could upgrade to an Ultra 600 series in the future but that 300 series motherboard wouldn't be able to utilize all the connectivity the newer gen has.
This is already a thing if you got the earlier AM4 motherboards and upgrade to a 5800x3d or 5950x. You get the general CPU performance gain but not the connectivity that comes with it limiting your PCIe x16 and M.2 slots to 3.0 instead of reaping 4.0. This doesn't affect gamers but for a workstation this can matter. I consider a platform with multiple years of support nice can be a deciding factor when all else is even but it's not what I build a system around.
Current z890 boards for the Ultra 200 series are pretty good for connectivity. I can use all my PCIe and M.2 slots with nothing deactivating or throttling bandwidth in half while an x870 wouldn't, and x870e using 2 chipsets to compensate but costing more and eating more idle power. In a way, the Ultra 200 series is pretty decent as a workstation.
For gaming. The iGPU on Ultra 200 series is able to do Lossless Scaling frame generation 60>120 at 1440p. This is useful when Oblivion Remastered where DLSS frame gen left me below 114fps maximum. Locking FPS to 60 was stuttering despite perfect flatline frame times. But Lossless Scaling LSFG I could do 120fps perfect frametimes and play super smooth. There's not many games I utilize LSFG for but it's useful to have this option that wouldn't be possible on any other platform right now.
b-maacc@reddit
I’d look at the Intel 270K plus.
eatingpotatochips@reddit
This is heavily overemphasized, especially on this sub. It is realistically impossible to "future-proof", since nobody can predict the future. Besides, the worst that happens is you buy another motherboard several years down the line. That level of price optimization is comical, considering the amount of money people waste on aesthetics for a PC.
persondude27@reddit
My understanding is that the 285k is something like 10% faster than the 14900k in Blender are similar workloads. Pair that with the fact that hopefully it should be supported for another few years longer than the 14900k, and the degradation issues on the 14th gen, and I think 285k is the no-brainer.
That's the case for either Intel generation right now. Both 14th gen and 285k are the last gen on their respective motherboards.
The good news is that any modern PC, especially a high end one like this, will be serviceable for 5-7 years and before it really starts to show age. Many people use their systems for 10+ years but you'd probably want to upgrade along the way since you're a professional.