Intel Core 5 221E vs Intel Core i9-14900KS Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the Intel Core i9-14900KS wins every single recorded head-to-head comparison, taking 17 of 17 tests. The Intel Core 5 221E does not record a single victory. The margins vary significantly depending on the workload type, ranging from a modest 13.9% gap in single-threaded tasks to a massive 60% deficit in extended instruction throughput.

Starting with multi-core performance, the i9-14900KS delivers 5,140 points in Cinebench R15 multi-core versus 2,613 for the Core 5 221E, a 49.2% advantage. The same pattern holds in Cinebench R20, where the i9 scores 21,417 against 10,891, and in Cinebench R23, where the gap is 50,995 versus 25,933. Each of these multi-core tests shows the i9 leading by roughly 49.1% to 49.2%. The PassMark multi-thread test confirms the trend, with the i9 at 60,012 and the Core 5 at 30,510, again a 49.2% lead.

Single-core results tell a similar story but with a smaller relative gap. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the i9-14900KS scores 7,199, while the Core 5 221E manages 3,661, a 49.1% difference. Cinebench R15 single-core shows 725 versus 368, and Cinebench R20 single-core shows 3,023 versus 1,537, both at 49.2%. However, the PassMark single-thread test narrows the margin considerably: 4,815 for the i9 versus 4,147 for the Core 5, a 13.9% gap. This indicates that the i9's core advantage is less pronounced in lightly threaded integer workloads than in heavily threaded or floating-point scenarios.

The largest deltas appear in data-intensive workloads. PassMark data compression shows the i9 at 803,368 versus 324,285, a 59.6% lead. Data encryption delivers 47,717 versus 19,205, a 59.8% gap. Extended instructions, a proxy for SIMD and AVX-heavy code, shows the biggest difference at 60%, with scores of 45,524 versus 18,216. Random string sorting also shows a 58% gap, at 89,789 versus 37,686.

Floating-point and integer math show smaller but still decisive margins. Floating-point math scores 153,975 for the i9 versus 79,028 for the Core 5, a 48.7% lead. Integer math is closer at 44.6%, with 212,644 versus 117,813. The physics test shows a 34% gap, 3,381 versus 2,230, while prime number finding is the closest multi-core test at 29.1%, 244 versus 173.

The i9-14900KS also holds a substantial overall benchmark advantage. Its average benchmark score is 81,127, placing it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs. The Core 5 221E averages 40,144, which sits in the 87th percentile. The i9's nearest rivals, the Intel Xeon w5-3535X and AMD Ryzen 9 8940HX, score nearly identically at 81,115 and 81,103 respectively, with deltas of 0% and 0%. The Core 5's closest competitor is the AMD Ryzen 9 270 at 40,246, a 0.3% difference, with the Intel Core i9-13905H at 40,313, 0.4% behind.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in multi-core workloads?

A: The Intel Core i9-14900KS is faster in every multi-core test recorded. Cinebench R23 multi-core shows 50,995 versus 25,933, a 49.1% advantage. PassMark multi-thread shows 60,012 versus 30,510, a 49.2% lead.

Q: How much of a single-thread performance gap exists?

A: The i9-14900KS leads in all single-core tests, but the margin shrinks in PassMark single-thread, where it scores 4,815 versus 4,147, a 13.9% gap. Cinebench R23 single-core shows a larger 49.1% difference, 7,199 versus 3,661.

Q: Which CPU has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core i9-14900KS has 24 cores and 32 threads. The Intel Core 5 221E has 14 cores and 20 threads.

Q: Do both CPUs support the same memory types?

A: Yes, both support DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration. The Core 5 221E has a recorded memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, while the i9-14900KS does not have a bandwidth figure listed.

Q: What is the difference in integrated graphics?

A: The Core 5 221E uses UHD Graphics 730, while the i9-14900KS uses UHD Graphics 770.

Q: Are both CPUs unlocked for overclocking?

A: No. The multiplier is unlocked on the i9-14900KS, but locked on the Core 5 221E.

Architecture Differences

The two processors share a common manufacturing foundation but differ in core configuration and cache layout. Both are built on a 10 nm process by Intel, and both use a 257 mm² die size. The Core 5 221E uses the Bartlett Lake codename, part of the Core 5 generation, while the i9-14900KS uses Raptor Lake-R, part of the Core 14th Gen Raptor Lake Refresh family.

The core count difference is substantial. The i9-14900KS packs 24 cores and 32 threads, while the Core 5 221E offers 14 cores and 20 threads. This 10-core and 12-thread gap explains much of the multi-core performance delta. Both CPUs use 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 2 MB of L2 cache per core, but the shared L3 cache differs: the i9 has 36 MB shared, while the Core 5 has 24 MB shared. The larger L3 pool on the i9 benefits workloads that repeatedly access a large working set.

Both processors support DDR4 and DDR5 memory through a dual-channel memory bus. ECC memory support is enabled on both. PCIe connectivity is identical: Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes. The integrated graphics differ, with the Core 5 using UHD Graphics 730 and the i9 using UHD Graphics 770.

The production status for both is listed as active. The Core 5 221E has a release date of January 12, 2025, while the i9-14900KS was released earlier, on March 13, 2024. The Core 5 has a locked multiplier, whereas the i9 is multiplier-unlocked, which allows user-controlled frequency adjustment on supported motherboards.

Specification Differences

The recorded specifications show several clear differences between the two CPUs.

Clock speeds differ notably. The Core 5 221E has a base clock of 2.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz. The i9-14900KS starts with a base clock of 3.20 GHz and boosts to 6.20 GHz. The i9's higher base and boost clocks contribute to its single-thread advantage.

Power draw is also different. The Core 5 221E has a TDP of 65 watts, while the i9-14900KS has a TDP of 150 watts. The i9 consumes more than twice the thermal budget, which is consistent with its higher core count and clock speeds.

Cache configurations diverge at the L3 level. Both share 80 KB L1 per core and 2 MB L2 per core, but the shared L3 is 24 MB on the Core 5 and 36 MB on the i9.

Memory bandwidth is listed for the Core 5 at 89.6 GB/s, but no figure is recorded for the i9-14900KS in the database.

Integrated graphics differ: UHD Graphics 730 on the Core 5 versus UHD Graphics 770 on the i9.

The multiplier is locked on the Core 5 and unlocked on the i9. Part numbers also differ, with the Core 5 using SRQDVQ659 and the i9 using SRN7R.

The launch MSRP is $232 for the Core 5 221E and $689 for the i9-14900KS.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear performance hierarchy. The Intel Core i9-14900KS is decisively faster across every benchmark category, with average benchmark scores of 81,127 versus 40,144 for the Core 5 221E. The i9 sits in the 96th percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 5 sits in the 87th percentile.

The i9-14900KS wins all 17 head-to-head tests. Its smallest margin is 13.9% in PassMark single-thread, and its largest is 60% in extended instructions. Multi-core tests consistently show a roughly 49% advantage, while data compression and encryption tests show near-60% leads.

The Core 5 221E does not win a single recorded comparison. Its performance profile places it close to the AMD Ryzen 7 7700 and Ryzen AI 9 365, which score within 0.2% of its average. The i9-14900KS, by contrast, sits alongside workstation-class parts like the Intel Xeon w5-3535X and AMD Ryzen 9 8940HX, with deltas of 0% in either direction.

For builders who need maximum multi-threaded throughput, the i9-14900KS is the clear choice based on the numbers. Its 24 cores, 32 threads, 36 MB of L3 cache, and 6.20 GHz boost clock deliver results that the Core 5 221E cannot approach. The i9 also provides an unlocked multiplier for users who want frequency tuning.

The Core 5 221E, with its 65-watt TDP, 14 cores, and 5.20 GHz boost, occupies a different position. Its benchmark results are competitive with mid-range Ryzen parts, and it offers the same DDR4/DDR5 memory flexibility and ECC support as the i9. The locked multiplier and lower core count limit its ceiling, but its power draw is far lower.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i9-14900KS wins in every recorded workload category. Its largest advantages come in data compression, where it leads by 59.6%, and data encryption, where it leads by 59.8%. Extended instruction workloads show a 60% gap, making this the strongest area for the i9. These results suggest the i9 is particularly well suited to compression, encryption, and SIMD-heavy computation.

The i9 also dominates in general multi-core rendering. Cinebench R23 multi-core shows a 49.1% lead, and PassMark multi-thread shows 49.2%. Floating-point math trails slightly behind at 48.7%, while integer math shows a smaller 44.6% gap. Physics simulation shows a 34% lead, and prime number finding shows the closest multi-core margin at 29.1%.

The Core 5 221E does not win any benchmark, but its relative competitiveness varies. Its best showing is in PassMark single-thread, where the i9 leads by only 13.9%. This means the Core 5 is less disadvantaged in lightly threaded integer tasks. Its worst results are in extended instructions and data encryption, where the i9 leads by 60% and 59.8% respectively.

For users selecting between these two, the choice depends on workload priority. The i9-14900KS is the stronger part for every measured task, with particularly large margins in data-heavy and multi-threaded work. The Core 5 221E is the lower-power option, with a 65-watt TDP versus 150 watts, and its performance is closest to the i9 in single-threaded PassMark tests. Neither the Core 5 nor the i9 shows a weakness in any recorded benchmark category; the difference is purely the magnitude of the i9's lead.