Deeper Dive: Our Top Tested Picks
EDITORS’ NOTE
April 27, 2026: With this update, we have replaced the Intel Core i7-14700K with the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus as our pick for Best Gaming CPU for Most Buyers (AMD or Intel). We’ve also slotted in the Intel Ultra 5 250K Plus as the Best Budget Intel Gaming CPU, replacing the Intel Core i5-13400F. Also, the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K bumps out the Intel Core i5-13600K as our pick for the Best Mainstream Intel Gaming CPU. The rest of our recommendations have been vetted for currency and availability. Since our previous update, we have tested and evaluated four desktop processors for possible inclusion across our related CPU buying guides. We currently have three CPUs from AMD and Intel in PC Labs for evaluation.
- Exceptionally low price for a 24-core CPU
- Potent raw CPU performance
- Boosted gaming speeds versus previous generation, when used with a discrete graphics card
- Powerful integrated graphics
- Low-resolution/high-frame-rate gaming still lags behind AMD’s Ryzen X3D chips
The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is arguably Intel’s best complement to a potent graphics card. It uses a tweaked version of the “Arrow Lake” architecture, modified to improve gaming performance, which was previously the chip line’s greatest weakness. It isn’t quite as fast in games as the AMD Ryzen 9 and 3D V-Cache competition, but in most scenarios, it performs more than quickly enough to drive a smooth gaming experience. It also performs exceptionally well outside of games, and its low asking price only helps.
Most average PC gamers: The 270K Plus drives the most processor performance, relative to price, of any CPU today. It sometimes even outpaced the Ryzen 9 9950X and 9950X3D outside of gaming, depending on the test in question. In games, the 270K Plus can lag behind them somewhat, particularly at higher refresh rates and lower resolutions. This minor shortcoming doesn’t create a meaningful bottleneck at higher resolutions, though, making it a smart choice for a powerful PC for tasks other than gaming that can also play extremely well with a robust GPU.
Gamers who also need lots of cores for content creation: A 24-core CPU for $299 MSRP is a hard deal to top, full stop.
Core Count
24
Thread Count
24
Base Clock Frequency
3.7 GHz
Maximum Boost Clock
5.5 GHz
Socket Compatibility
Intel LGA1851
Lithography
3 nm
L3 Cache Amount
36 MB
Thermal Design Power (TDP) Rating
250 watts
Integrated Graphics
Intel Xe LPG
Integrated Graphics Base Clock
2000 MHz
Bundled Cooler
None
Learn More
Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus
Review
- Potent CPU performance
- Impressive gaming performance
- Reasonably priced
- 128MB L3 cache
- Biggest gains are in niche scenarios
- Not much faster than 9950X in CPU workloads
The Ryzen 9 9950X3D is one of the fastest gaming processors you can buy today. In fact, the processor’s 16 simultaneously multithreaded (SMT) CPU cores and fast clock speed make the 9950X3D one of the quickest chips for any purpose, across the board. AMD’s 3D V-Cache technology makes the chip particularly well-suited for gaming, especially at low resolutions, to drive extreme frame rates and leverage monitors that support today’s fastest refresh rates. And the added 64MB of cache is great for data-hungry games.
AMD-loyal and competitive gamers: The 9950X3D far outpaces most competing processors from both AMD and Intel alike for gaming. This advantage is most notable while running games at lower resolutions or with reduced graphics settings, maximizing frame rates in competitive games. Regardless, if you want the most responsive and smoothest gaming experience currently possible, particularly with a top-end GPU, then the 9950X3D is the processor for you.
Gamers who are also content creators: 16 native cores of processing are the top of what’s on offer on the AM5 socket, so if you need it all from one AMD CPU, here’s your chip.
Core Count
16
Thread Count
32
Base Clock Frequency
4.3 GHz
Maximum Boost Clock
5.7 GHz
Socket Compatibility
AMD AM5
Lithography
4 nm
L3 Cache Amount
128 MB
Thermal Design Power (TDP) Rating
170 watts
Integrated Graphics
AMD Radeon Graphics
Integrated Graphics Base Clock
2200 MHz
Bundled Cooler
None
Learn More
AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D
Review
- Fast multi-threaded performance, and field-leading single-core performance
- 6GHz peak boost clock speed
- Capable integrated graphics
- Same launch price as Core i9-13900K
- Runs hot under load, at times hitting thermal limit
- Same design as last year’s 13900K, with only minor upticks to base and boost clock
- Power-hungry
The Core i9-14900K has effectively made way for Intel’s newer and faster Core Ultra 9 and Core Ultra 7 processors. However, those chips also have a few issues that hamper their gaming performance at higher refresh rates. The Core i9-14900K generally performs better when running games at higher refresh rates, which keeps it relevant as a gaming PC option even though it’s on yesterday’s socket (LGA 1700).
Intel-loyal competitive gamers: Now that the Core Ultra 200S Plus line has arrived, the Core i9-14900K represents a niche solution. Those refreshed processors are generally closer rivals to the 14900K than the original Core Ultra 9 and Ultra 7 chips were, but the 14900K still has the upper hand at ultra-fast refresh rates over Intel’s latest processors, which still lag a little behind AMD’s 3D V-Cache-equipped chips.
Upgraders with an LGA 1700-based motherboard/system: The 14900K is the fastest processor on Intel’s LGA 1700 platform, which is really its biggest strength now. It makes it a compelling upgrade option for older LGA 1700 systems.
Core Count
24
Thread Count
32
Base Clock Frequency
3.2 GHz
Maximum Boost Clock
6 GHz
Socket Compatibility
Intel LGA 1700
Lithography
7 nm
L3 Cache Amount
36 MB
Thermal Design Power (TDP) Rating
253 watts
Integrated Graphics
Intel UHD Graphics 770
Integrated Graphics Base Clock
1650 MHz
Bundled Cooler
None
Learn More
Intel Core i9-14900K
Review
- Significant improvements to efficiency versus Ryzen 7000 series
- Excellent operating temperatures, conducive to air cooling
- Mild performance improvements versus Ryzen 7700X series
- Reduced TDP suits this chip well for compact desktops
- Fewer cores than competing Intel chips
- Lesser multi-threaded performance than competition
- No bundled cooler
The Ryzen 7 9700X is a capable midrange processor that strikes a balance between cost and performance. While it isn’t the cheapest or the fastest, it produces relatively potent performance in many tasks that will satisfy most people. At the same time, its midrange price makes it friendlier to your wallet than a more expensive Ryzen 9 or a 3D V-Cache processor.
Average PC gamers: The 9700X is competent enough to pair with just about any graphics card. While it may hold back elite cards like the Nvidia GeForce RTX 5090 in some select scenarios, it shouldn’t seriously limit the performance of most lesser GPUs.
General PC users: As a competent midrange processor, the Ryzen 7 9700X fits almost any purpose. The chip strikes a strong balance between productivity strength and game-supporting muscle, making it appealing to a broad audience. Some people will want more oomph, others a lower price, but most will be satisfied with what the 9700X delivers for the money.
Core Count
8
Thread Count
16
Base Clock Frequency
3.8 GHz
Maximum Boost Clock
5.5 GHz
Socket Compatibility
AMD AM5
Lithography
4 nm
L3 Cache Amount
32 MB
Thermal Design Power (TDP) Rating
65 watts
Integrated Graphics
AMD Radeon Graphics
Integrated Graphics Base Clock
2200 MHz
Bundled Cooler
None
Learn More
AMD Ryzen 7 9700X
Review
- Potent raw CPU performance
- Speedy integrated graphics
- Competitively priced
- Improved thermal performance versus Intel’s 13th and 14th Gen (“Raptor Lake” and “Raptor Lake Refresh”) processors
- Trails competitors in gaming with a traditional GPU
The Core Ultra 7 265K is one of the better gaming processors in Intel’s Core Ultra 200S product line, which is built on the chip maker’s “Arrow Lake” architecture. Granted, the 265K has some issues that may hamper gaming performance at certain settings and hardware combinations. But they get less prominent at 1440p and all but vanish if you are gaming at 4K resolution.
Most, if not all, games will run perfectly fine on the 265K despite these issues. Gaming performance is really only affected if you aim to game at the fastest possible frame rates with low resolution/detail settings and a robust GPU, hoping to cash in on a recent gaming monitor’s sky-high refresh rate. And, hey, not everything’s fun and games, after all: The 265K is an excellent processor aside from its gaming speed—making it a smart option for, you know, work.
Mainstream PC gamers who also want processor oomph for non-gaming tasks: If you prefer to run games at 1080p and low detail to leverage really high display refresh rates, look elsewhere. But if you want to play at higher resolutions and with the highest graphics settings you can while maintaining a playable frame rate, then the 265K will work well. And it will also deliver very good raw CPU power.
Core Count
20
Thread Count
20
Base Clock Frequency
3.9 GHz
Maximum Boost Clock
5.5 GHz
Socket Compatibility
Intel LGA1851
Lithography
3 nm
L3 Cache Amount
30 MB
Thermal Design Power (TDP) Rating
250 watts
Integrated Graphics
Intel Xe LPG
Integrated Graphics Base Clock
300 MHz
Bundled Cooler
None
Learn More
Intel Core Ultra 7 265K
Review
- Strong performance
- Better value than Ryzen 7 5800X
- Compatible with most AM4 motherboards
- 65-watt TDP
- Falls behind the more affordable Core i5-12600K
The AMD Ryzen 7 5700X launched as a high-end processor. It can no longer compete with the latest high-end parts from AMD or Intel, but its potent performance has kept it relevant in the budget chip market as its price has fallen—in fact, it is one of the best CPUs available for AMD’s older AM4 platform.
The combination of price cuts on the 5700X itself and the availability of older AM4 motherboards helps to make the 5700X one of the more appealing options for building a cheap PC with a little muscle. It also helps that the 5700X and the AM4 platform support DDR4 RAM, which is more affordable and less impacted by today’s memory shortages than DDR5.
Gamers on a budget: The 5700X is a capable option for a gaming PC. It can’t keep up with the latest processors in games, and it would likely bottleneck high-end graphics cards like the Nvidia GeForce RTX 5080 or 5090, to some degree. However, if you buy a midrange graphics card like an AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT, the 5700X should be more than capable of keeping it fed with data.
AMD AM4 PC owners: Not having to re-buy a motherboard or RAM for an upgrade on an AM4-based platform gives this CPU extra appeal, especially if all an upgrade requires is a motherboard BIOS update.
Core Count
8
Thread Count
16
Base Clock Frequency
3.4 GHz
Maximum Boost Clock
3.6 GHz
Socket Compatibility
AMD AM4
Lithography
7 nm
L3 Cache Amount
32 MB
Thermal Design Power (TDP) Rating
65 watts
Integrated Graphics
None
Bundled Cooler
None
Learn More
AMD Ryzen 7 5700X
Review
- Highly competitive pricing for an 18-core CPU
- Exceptional productivity performance for the money
- Improved gaming speeds over original “Arrow Lake” when used with a discrete graphics card
- Potent integrated graphics
- Gaming performance still lags the competition
The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is the best budget processor that Intel has released in many a year. With 18 CPU cores and a peak clock speed of 5.3GHz, it serves up abundant processing performance for its low price. Part of Intel’s Core Ultra 200S Plus processor line, the Ultra 5 250K Plus also delivered improved gaming performance, in our tests, over most other Arrow Lake processors, despite its $199 price.
Mainstream PC gamers: It’s debatable which 200S Plus chip (the Ultra 5 250K Plus or the Ultra 7 270K Plus) is Intel’s better current-gen gaming processor. The answer really depends on which games you run, and how much you need the extra cores that the 270K Plus has. Either way, the 250K Plus is a highly capable gaming chip that’s suitable for any gaming PC.
Gamers without a GPU: The 250K Plus has a capable integrated graphics processor (IGP) that can run many older games quite well, as well as handle newer games at heavily reduced graphics settings. The 250K Plus’ IGP isn’t quite up to par with those on AMD’s Ryzen 8000G-series processors, but it makes up for this with far superior CPU performance. If you can’t afford a graphics card now but plan to buy one later, this chip is a sensible stopgap.
Most PC users who aren’t just gamers: Some people have specialized needs that the 250K Plus doesn’t meet, but for most users, it’s one of the best options. You won’t find many modern processors that cost less, and those that do serve up significantly less performance. The 250K Plus is a great go-to for home PCs: It’s useful for a little bit of everything.
Core Count
18
Thread Count
18
Base Clock Frequency
4.2 GHz
Maximum Boost Clock
5.3 GHz
Socket Compatibility
Intel LGA1851
Lithography
3 nm
L3 Cache Amount
30 MB
Thermal Design Power (TDP) Rating
159 watts
Integrated Graphics
Intel Xe LPG
Integrated Graphics Base Clock
1900 MHz
Bundled Cooler
None
Learn More
Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus
Review
- Exceptional integrated graphics performance
- Decent CPU speeds
- Low power consumption
- Overpriced
- Just 16MB of L3 cache
- Stability issues
The AMD Ryzen 7 8700G currently has the best integrated graphics available on a desktop platform. The chip’s CPU performance alone would place it roughly in the middle of the current market without excessively positive or negative scores in any tests. But its fast IGP makes this chip the best option for specialized PC builds.
Gamers with SFF PCs: The 8700G can be a truly awesome processor for a compact PC. Some PC cases are too small to support a graphics card, and the 8700G provides the most graphical horsepower you can install in such a system.
Budget-strapped gamers without a GPU: If you can’t afford a graphics card now but plan to buy one later, this chip can be a sensible stopgap, like Intel’s Core Ultra 5 250K Plus.
Core Count
8
Thread Count
16
Base Clock Frequency
4.2 GHz
Maximum Boost Clock
5.1 GHz
Socket Compatibility
AMD AM5
Lithography
4 nm
L3 Cache Amount
16 MB
Thermal Design Power (TDP) Rating
65 watts
Integrated Graphics
AMD Radeon 780M
Integrated Graphics Base Clock
2900 MHz
Bundled Cooler
AMD Wraith Spire
Learn More
AMD Ryzen 7 8700G
Review
Best Budget Processor for Gaming on Integrated Graphics (AMD or Intel)
AMD Ryzen 5 8600G
- Powerful integrated graphics
- Six Zen 4 CPU Cores
- Low power draw
- Budget price
- Lackluster CPU productivity performance
- Runs a bit hot
The AMD Ryzen 5 8600G fills a specific niche in today’s processor market. It features an integrated graphics processor (IGP) that is more powerful than anything Intel has in its desktop-CPU line, and it is also significantly faster than the IGP in most other AMD processors. The 8600G isn’t quite as fast as the Ryzen 7 8700G in CPU or IGP performance, but it makes up for that with a lower price.
Gamers with SFF PCs: The 8600G can be a powerful option for a compact PC that doesn’t have space for a graphics card—second only to the Ryzen 7 8700G, which has a more powerful IGP. The 8600G’s lower price gives it a boost, though, and its IGP performance is still adequate to run many games at moderate graphics settings.
Ultra-budget gamers: The 8600G’s budget price makes it an interesting option for a budget gaming PC. The 8600G’s IGP performance, while the second-best among desktop CPUs, doesn’t compare with the frame rates you’d get from any current-generation graphics card. But if you simply can’t afford a GPU, the 8600G’s value proposition makes it one of the better combined CPU/GPU options to consider.
Core Count
6
Thread Count
12
Base Clock Frequency
4.3 GHz
Maximum Boost Clock
5 GHz
Socket Compatibility
AMD AM5
Lithography
4 nm
L3 Cache Amount
16 MB
Thermal Design Power (TDP) Rating
65 watts
Integrated Graphics
AMD Radeon 760M
Integrated Graphics Base Clock
2800 MHz
Bundled Cooler
AMD Wraith Stealth
Learn More
AMD Ryzen 5 8600G
Review
The Best CPUs for Gaming in 2026
Compare Specs
Buying Guide: The Best CPUs for Gaming in 2026
The Basics of CPUs for Gaming
Before continuing, if you are relatively new to PC building and aren’t familiar with the specifics of what makes up a processor, we’d recommend you read our general-purpose best CPUs article first. We will proceed from here under the assumption that you understand the basics of processors.
(Credit: Molly Flores)
When it comes to gaming, you’ll see lots of debate online about what is most important in a processor. Some argue that clock speed is everything, and the highest-clocked CPU will invariably perform best. (Occasionally, that is correct.) Others argue that having more cores will net you a greater advantage. (Sometimes that helps, too.) Some say the cache is all-important. (Again: Sometimes yes, sometimes no.)
In reality, you need the right combination of all three. Having a balanced mix of cores, clock speed, and cache will get you the best results in the widest sense. Beyond that, the results you get can vary quite a bit from game to game, or from game genre to game genre. You’ll find no magic-bullet solution that will work for all users, all budgets, and all games. Let’s get into why below.
Clock Speed: Not the Only Spec That Matters for Games
As everyone knows, higher clock speeds enable a processor to perform better—if everything else is equal. But everything seldom is, and so “clock speed” as a single number or overarching concept is far too simplistic. Imagine a processor as an engine in a car. The clock speed, in this case, would not be the speed the car is traveling, but the speed that the engine is turning (in revolutions per minute, or RPMs). Different engines deliver different amounts of horsepower at the same RPM; likewise, different processors will give you different amounts of performance at the same clock speed unless they share the same architecture (and all else is equal, too).
(Credit: Joseph Maldonado)
Clock speed, like RPMs, goes up and down as the CPU or engine calls upon more work; performance and power consumption rise and fall in concert. However, we should never rely solely on clock speed when deciding on processors, and we can say the same about core count.
Core Count in Gaming CPUs: More Cores Aren’t Always Better
When it comes to cores, processor architecture has a huge impact on performance, but we sometimes see processors with more cores running at slower clock speeds than processors with fewer cores. This slowdown is often necessary when running large numbers of cores, as you’ll have only so much power to go around. Also, more cores typically generate more heat, forcing the processor to run at lower clock speeds to stay within power and thermal limits (again, all else being equal).
It’s often been argued that games, especially older ones, aren’t capable of using more than just a few cores and that having additional cores delivers no benefit. These arguments are flawed. First, even if some games use only a few cores, other games (especially newer ones) tend to use far more.
What’s more, a PC is never doing just one thing. If you have more cores than a game can use, you’ll still improve performance by offloading background tasks to the extra cores. You get even more benefits if you like watching videos on a second monitor while gaming, streaming your games while playing, or recording game footage for later use. So, the argument against extra cores is, at the very least, shortsighted.
Clock Speed and Cores: It Takes Both!
Let’s get down to the key points. Don’t overly focus on having the most cores or the very highest clock speed; instead, look for a chip that is strong in both regards.
(Credit: Joseph Maldonado)
Testing data suggests that you get diminishing returns from adding more cores. Most graphics cards are able to operate at close to their full potential with a CPU at the level of an Intel Core Ultra 5 or an AMD Ryzen 5; beyond that, most graphics cards only gain a modest benefit from having faster CPUs, if they benefit at all. The very highest-end graphics cards (such as the Nvidia GeForce RTX 5090) unequivocally do benefit from faster processors, though, especially at lower resolutions, and it’s likely that newer games will benefit from faster processors down the road, as well.
Considering all that, the absolute best gaming processor we can buy today and tomorrow will likely be the one with the most cores and the highest clock speed. But most folks’ budgets are limited, and, as we said, there’s a point of diminishing returns. To determine which CPU will be the best for your specific gaming PC, we need to dive into your specific system goals.
Gaming CPUs and the Importance of Cache
Admittedly, the topic of cache gets us deep in the weeds. But it’s still important—generally, the bigger the cache you have, the better the game performance you get. We mean cache in general, be it L1, L2, L3, or some other form of last-level cache (LLC). But AMD has brought this aspect of processors to the forefront in recent years with its 3D V-Cache processors.
(Credit: Michael Justin Allen Sexton)
Though large cache pools can benefit gaming, cache consumes a lot of transistors and a relatively large amount of space on a processor die. This makes it relatively expensive to implement, and adding excess cache can quickly drive up costs. Cache also gobbles up power and throws off a lot of heat. So, using too much cache can hurt battery life (in laptops) or power consumption (in desktops), and the added heat can force the rest of the chip to be clocked lower to prevent CPU cores from overheating.
Still, cache is absolutely essential. Without it, modern processors would be far slower, and adding extra cache has brought about major performance gains in the past. Again, though, how much cache a processor needs comes down to a balancing act, which is why AMD and Intel typically provide about the same amount of cache per CPU core.
The notable modern exceptions to this are AMD’s processors with 3D V-Cache, such as the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D, the AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D, the AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D, and the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D. Each of these processors has an extra element inside comprising 64MB of cache. This gets counted as part of the L3 cache, but it’s really an LLC that’s physically separate, with slightly different performance characteristics from the L3.
(Credit: Michael Justin Allen Sexton)
With AMD’s first-generation 3D V-Cache technology, this added cache portion was placed on top of the CPU cores, which meant some compromises. These chips have reduced clock speeds to handle the extra heat generated by the cache chip, so their peak raw CPU performance, in most applications, is typically lower than that of their near-identical counterparts without the 3D V-Cache. These processors do have a slight edge in games, but mostly at lower graphics settings and resolutions, like 1080p or 1200p. The advantage disappears in many games at higher resolutions, where the limits of frame rates are bound to the graphics card.
AMD’s second-gen 3D V-Cache technology improves on the original design by placing the cache beneath the CPU cores rather than on top. This helps maintain higher clock speeds and reduces heating issues. AMD introduced it with the AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D, but also uses it in other Ryzen 9000-series processors with 3D V-Cache.
There is an aspect of future-proofing here: These V-Cache-equipped CPUs may well be good for use with high-end graphics cards that have not yet been released. But, generally speaking, we think the ideal pairing among AMD’s 3D V-Cache processors is using the best one, the AMD Ryzen 9 9950X3D, together with a high-end graphics card like the Nvidia GeForce RTX 5090. To get the most out of this processor for gaming, you also need to play mostly at 1080p, aiming for extreme frame rates for competitive play on a high-refresh gaming monitor. Otherwise, at higher resolutions, the GPU, not the CPU, tends to set the performance ceiling. We would consider different processors for gaming at higher resolutions, especially as many faster equivalent-class processors are also priced lower.
How to Pick a Gaming CPU: Performance Goals vs. Long-Term Goals
To determine exactly what processor is best for you and your new gaming PC, you’ll need to answer a few questions about what you want from the system. Based on your goals, you’ll most likely fall into one of a handful of groups.
Advice for 4K Gamers
If you want to game at 4K resolution, likely your best option is to buy a midrange processor such as an AMD Ryzen 5, an Intel Core Ultra 5, a Ryzen 7, or a Core Ultra 7 if you’re looking for lots of cores for CPU-intensive work when you are not gaming. Gaming at 4K can actually be “easier,” in a sense, than at 1080p, as at 4K, the graphics card is more likely to reach its frame-pushing limit before the CPU does.
This is especially true since most people gaming at 4K today aim to run at 60 frames per second (fps), which has long been considered the ideal baseline refresh rate for gaming when the hardware going gets tough. Still, 4K gaming is a bit of a rarefied level for most shoppers; plus, high-refresh-rate monitors (above 60Hz) with 4K native resolution aren’t casual purchases. If you happen to buy a monitor that’s able to output a 4K signal above 60fps, and you are also buying a top-tier graphics card, such as an AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT or an Nvidia GeForce RTX 5080, you may want to consider stepping up the processor to an AMD Ryzen 9, an Intel Core i9, or an Intel Ultra 7 Plus just to be safe and to avoid any potential bottlenecks.
Advice for High-Refresh-Rate 1080p Gamers
If you want to run games with exceptionally fast refresh rates, you’ll want to opt for the absolute best processor that you can afford, so long as it doesn’t cut into your GPU budget. When you are gaming at 1080p, the processor is far more likely to bottleneck the graphics card and prevent it from reaching its peak performance. This is especially true if you have a high-end graphics card, so the graphics card you own or intend to buy has a significant impact on your CPU choice here.
(Credit: Joseph Maldonado)
More widely used, older mainstream graphics cards, like the AMD Radeon RX 7600 or the Nvidia GeForce RTX 4060, should be adequately fed by a modern AMD Ryzen 5 or Intel Core Ultra 5 processor. These mainstream processor solutions are quite capable, and the newer AMD Ryzen 5 9600X and Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus can go toe-to-toe with faster processors on gaming when paired with most graphics cards. You may see these processors start to perform differently with extremely powerful graphics cards like the Nvidia GeForce RTX 5080, but with most GPUs, the processor has a less-pronounced impact on performance, so long as you don’t buy a CPU that is exceptionally slow.
Recommended by Our Editors
Even an AMD Ryzen 9 or Intel Core Ultra 9 isn’t totally out of the realm of practicality for high-refresh gaming at 1080p, though you’ll likely only need to opt for such a high-end chip if you are purchasing a top-end GPU like the Nvidia GeForce RTX 5090.
Advice for 1440p (2K) Gamers
Gaming at 1440p will be more demanding on your GPU than at 1080p, but many 2K monitors also support higher refresh rates, with 120Hz and 144Hz models becoming increasingly common. Here again, higher refresh rates put more strain on the processor, as it needs to work faster to keep the GPU fed with data to generate those higher frame rates.
Realistically, we consider AMD’s Ryzen 7 and Intel’s Core Ultra 7 processors the ideal options for 2K gaming. They have the extra oomph to run higher refresh rates without costing nearly as much as the Ryzen 9 and Core Ultra 9 options.
Advice for Gamers on Budget
Gamers on a truly tight budget realistically don’t need to worry as much about what processor they buy. Buying a capable graphics card is far more important, and even an AMD Ryzen 3 or Intel Core i3 can handle many mainstream GPUs reasonably well. If you can fit an AMD Ryzen 5 or an Intel Core Ultra 5 into your budget, though, that would be ideal. (The $199-MSRP Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is a great option here.)
Advice for Intel ‘Arrow Lake’ Processors
One last thing we should mention is that Intel’s initial line of Arrow Lake processors is not an ideal solution for gaming at this time. They can run games just fine, but performance does lag a bit in several areas versus equivalent AMD Ryzen 9000-series chips and a few newer Intel “Arrow Lake Refresh” chips. If you are building a PC and want an Arrow Lake processor mainly for its strong CPU performance in other applications—with some gaming on the side—that’s fine. But, if you’re building a PC primarily for gaming, the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K and Intel Core Ultra 9 285K just aren’t today’s best options.
Significantly better are the “Arrow Lake Refresh” chips mentioned above. Intel tweaked these new Core Ultra 200S Plus processors to improve their gaming performance, and they generally deliver superior numbers compared with the original Intel Core Ultra 200S product line while still using the Arrow Lake architecture. Also, these debut chips, the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus and the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus, launched at substantially lower prices at each position. That combo—better gaming for a better price—makes these chips a much more appetizing choice for Intel-based gaming PCs. They can’t quite top AMD’s 3D V-Cache chips in all games, but they can rival them in some, and they are competitive in games with AMD’s Ryzen 9000-series processors that aren’t equipped with 3D V-Cache.
Notes for Buyers and Upgraders of All Levels
Regardless of which of these groups you fit into, if you’re building, upgrading, or buying a PC for serious gaming, always prioritize buying the best graphics card you can over buying the absolute best processor you can. Except in extreme-mismatch scenarios, or unless you game at 1080p with exceedingly high refresh rates, you are more likely to have your graphics card hit its performance limit before your CPU does. This doesn’t hold up, say, if you paired an Nvidia GeForce RTX 5090 with an Intel Core i3. But in most reasonably well-planned systems, with most games, the graphics card hits its limit first while gaming.
(Credit: Molly Flores)
Now, don’t toss all your money into a graphics card and forget about the CPU. But you would be better off, for example, with an Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus and an Nvidia GeForce RTX 5070 than with an AMD Ryzen 7 9850X3D and an Nvidia GeForce RTX 5060. Prioritize GPU selection first and get the best or most appropriate processor for it, within the budget you have left.
We should also make it clear that while we may recommend an AMD Ryzen 5 or an Intel Core Ultra 5 as sufficient for gaming above 1080p, we see no harm in buying a faster processor for your gaming PC so long as it doesn’t cut into your GPU budget. Buying a faster processor can be beneficial in many scenarios outside of gaming; it will enhance your PC’s multitasking ability, and getting a faster processor now could keep the door open to a GPU upgrade in a couple of years without having to build a whole new PC. Many gamers do just this: get a faster processor now, so they can use the chip and motherboard throughout the life of two GPUs before doing another full system upgrade or rebuild.
That’s also a valid strategy if you have the budget to “pay now to enjoy later.” But know that chip prices fall over time, and it’s possible that if you don’t buy the highest-end chip for the platform today, you might be able to upgrade in a few years’ time—say, to a Core Ultra 7 from a Core Ultra 5 for a lot less than the initial cost of the Ultra 7 today.
If you’re building a new system from scratch, you’ll also want to check out our recommendations for the best M.2 SSDs and PC tower cases. Or, if you’d rather buy a balanced off-the-shelf model, you can check out our favorite gaming desktops, too.
/https://i.s3.glbimg.com/v1/AUTH_08fbf48bc0524877943fe86e43087e7a/internal_photos/bs/2026/j/a/8G6Vp3R2uOiaJFD0sfHQ/high-on-life-2-fps-armas-squanch-guia.jpg?w=1024&resize=1024,1024&ssl=1 "High on Life 2: história, gameplay e requisitos do FPS cômico")
