Intel Core 3 201E vs Intel Core i5-14400F Comparison

FAQ

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between the Intel Core 3 201E and the Intel Core i5-14400F?

A: The Intel Core i5-14400F records an average benchmark score of 32,279, while the Intel Core 3 201E scores 19,056. The i5-14400F sits in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs, compared to the 73rd percentile for the Core 3 201E.

Q: How much faster is the Intel Core i5-14400F in multi-core Cinebench tests?

A: In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the i5-14400F scores 21,645 versus 12,613 for the Core 3 201E, a 41.7% advantage. The same 41.7% delta appears in Cinebench R15 and R20 multi-core tests.

Q: Which processor has higher single-thread performance?

A: The Intel Core i5-14400F wins all single-core tests. Its Cinebench R23 single-core score is 3,055 against 1,780, and in PassMark single-thread it leads 3,701 to 3,482, a smaller 5.9% margin.

Q: What is the core and thread configuration for each CPU?

A: The Intel Core 3 201E has 4 cores and 8 threads. The Intel Core i5-14400F has 10 cores and 16 threads. Both support dual-channel DDR4 and DDR5 memory and use Intel Socket 1700.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory and PCIe Gen 5?

A: Yes. Both the Core 3 201E and the i5-14400F list ECC memory support and PCIe Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes. The Core 3 201E includes integrated UHD Graphics 730, while the i5-14400F has no integrated graphics.

Q: What is the release date and launch MSRP for each?

A: The Intel Core 3 201E launched on 2025-01-12 with a launch MSRP of $134. The Intel Core i5-14400F launched on 2024-01-07 with a launch MSRP of $196.

Architecture Differences

The two processors share the same Intel Socket 1700 platform and 10 nm process node from Intel, but they diverge significantly in core layout and cache structure. The Intel Core 3 201E is built on the Bartlett Lake codename and provides 4 physical cores with 8 threads. The Intel Core i5-14400F uses the Raptor Lake-R codename within the Raptor Lake architecture and delivers 10 cores with 16 threads, meaning it has 6 additional cores and 8 additional threads for parallel workloads.

Cache allocation differs as well. Both processors use an 80 KB L1 cache per core and a 1.25 MB L2 cache per core, which is consistent across the core count. The shared L3 cache, however, favors the i5-14400F: it has 20 MB shared L3, while the Core 3 201E has only 12 MB shared L3. This 8 MB difference in last-level cache can influence performance in workloads that repeatedly access large datasets.

Clock speeds present another contrast. The Core 3 201E has a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The i5-14400F has a lower base clock of 2.50 GHz, but its boost clock reaches 4.70 GHz, only 0.10 GHz below the Core 3. The higher base clock of the Core 3 does not compensate for its lower core count in multi-threaded scenarios. Thermal design power differs modestly: the Core 3 201E is rated at 60 W TDP, and the i5-14400F at 65 W TDP. Both are locked multipliers, so overclocking is not supported for either part.

Die size also varies. The Core 3 201E has a die size of 163 mm², while the i5-14400F has a larger die at 215 mm². The larger die reflects the additional cores and cache. Memory bandwidth is specified only for the Core 3 201E at 76.8 GB/s; the i5-14400F does not have a recorded memory bandwidth figure in the database. Both support DDR4 and DDR5 across a dual-channel memory bus. The Core 3 201E includes integrated UHD Graphics 730, whereas the i5-14400F has no integrated graphics, requiring a discrete GPU for display output.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded head-to-head data shows a clean sweep: the Intel Core i5-14400F wins all 17 benchmark comparisons, with no wins for the Core 3 201E. The largest margins appear in memory-sensitive and integer-heavy workloads. In PassMark data compression, the i5-14400F scores 315,521 versus 164,160, a 48% advantage. Integer math shows a 46.2% lead (81,524 vs. 43,894), and floating-point math delivers a 45.8% edge (61,319 vs. 33,260). Random string sorting follows closely at 45.6% (32,680 vs. 17,783). Extended instruction tests produce a 44.7% delta (19,937 vs. 11,035), and data encryption shows a 47.3% gap (16,949 vs. 8,931).

The Cinebench suite consistently reports a 41.7% lead for the i5-14400F in both multi-core and single-core tests. Cinebench R15 multi-core scores are 2,181 versus 1,271, and single-core scores are 307 versus 179. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows 9,090 versus 5,297, with single-core at 1,283 versus 747. Cinebench R23 multi-core records 21,645 versus 12,613, and single-core records 3,055 versus 1,780. The uniformity of the delta across Cinebench generations indicates that the performance gap is consistent across different rendering engines and instruction mixes.

PassMark multi-thread performance shows a 41.7% difference (25,470 vs. 14,839), matching the Cinebench multi-core delta. The PassMark physics test has the smallest multi-core margin at 25.1%, with scores of 1,523 versus 1,141. Find prime numbers shows a 33.7% gap (86 vs. 57). The narrowest overall margin is in PassMark single-thread performance: 3,701 versus 3,482, a 5.9% difference. This indicates that the single-core architecture of the i5-14400F is only slightly faster than the Core 3 201E, despite the much larger core count advantage.

The data shows that the i5-14400F's advantage grows as workloads scale with core count and memory bandwidth. Compression, encryption, and integer math all show deficits of 44.7% to 48% for the Core 3 201E, while single-thread tasks show a much smaller deficit. This pattern points to the core count and L3 cache size as the primary differentiators, not clock speed or per-core efficiency.

Specification Differences

The specification table reveals several fields where the two processors differ. Core count: the Core 3 201E has 4 cores, the i5-14400F has 10 cores. Thread count: 8 versus 16. Base clock: 3.60 GHz versus 2.50 GHz. Boost clock: 4.80 GHz versus 4.70 GHz. TDP: 60 W versus 65 W. Codename: Bartlett Lake versus Raptor Lake-R. Architecture: the Core 3 201E has no listed architecture, while the i5-14400F is listed as Raptor Lake. Generation: Core 3 (Bartlett Lake) versus Core i5 (Raptor Lake Refresh).

Die size: 163 mm² versus 215 mm². L3 cache: 12 MB shared versus 20 MB shared. Memory bandwidth: 76.8 GB/s for the Core 3 201E, with no recorded value for the i5-14400F. Integrated graphics: UHD Graphics 730 for the Core 3 201E, N/A for the i5-14400F. Release date: 2025-01-12 versus 2024-01-07. Launch MSRP: $134 versus $196. Part number: SRVTR versus SRN3RSRN47.

Fields that are identical include manufacturer (Intel), socket (Intel Socket 1700), process node (10 nm), foundry (Intel), L1 cache (80 KB per core), L2 cache (1.25 MB per core), memory support (DDR4, DDR5), memory bus (dual-channel), ECC memory support (true), PCIe (Gen 5, 16 lanes CPU only), market segment (desktop), production status (active), and multiplier unlocked (false). The i5-14400F also has a series designation of Core 14th Gen, which the Core 3 201E lacks.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the benchmark data, the Intel Core i5-14400F wins in every measured category. There are no benchmark wins for the Intel Core 3 201E in the recorded head-to-head tests. The i5-14400F is the superior choice for multi-threaded workloads such as video rendering, data compression, integer math, and encryption, where it leads by 41.7% to 48%. Its 10-core, 16-thread configuration and 20 MB L3 cache provide a substantial advantage in parallel processing scenarios.

The Core 3 201E does hold advantages in specific specification areas, though not in performance benchmarks. It has a higher base clock of 3.60 GHz versus 2.50 GHz, a higher boost clock of 4.80 GHz versus 4.70 GHz, and a lower TDP of 60 W versus 65 W. It also includes integrated UHD Graphics 730, allowing for system operation without a discrete GPU. For users requiring integrated graphics capability, the Core 3 201E is the only option between the two, as the i5-14400F has no integrated graphics.

The i5-14400F also wins on platform longevity in terms of release timing, having launched earlier on 2024-01-07, while the Core 3 201E launched on 2025-01-12. The i5-14400F carries a higher launch MSRP of $196 compared to $134 for the Core 3 201E, reflecting its higher core count and cache capacity. For single-thread performance, the i5-14400F leads by a modest 5.9% in PassMark, which is the closest margin in the entire dataset. This suggests that for lightly threaded applications, the two processors are comparable, with the i5-14400F still ahead.

The Core 3 201E may be suitable for basic desktop tasks where integrated graphics are required and power draw is a consideration, given its lower TDP and higher base clock. The i5-14400F is the clear choice for compute-intensive workloads, multi-threaded applications, and any scenario where the 83rd percentile ranking versus the 73rd percentile ranking matters. The database shows no scenario where the Core 3 201E outperforms the i5-14400F in actual benchmark scores.