Intel Core 5 320 vs Intel Core i9-14900F Comparison

The database places the Intel Core 5 320 and the Intel Core i9-14900F in separate market segments: the Core 5 320 is a mobile part on Wildcat Lake with 6 cores and 6 threads, while the i9-14900F is a desktop part on Raptor Lake-R with 24 cores and 32 threads. Across 17 head-to-head benchmark entries, the i9-14900F wins all 17. The Core 5 320 records an average benchmark score of 18023 and sits at the 72nd percentile of all CPUs; the i9-14900F records 60008 and sits at the 92nd percentile.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher multi-core Cinebench R23 score?

A: The Intel Core i9-14900F scores 39551, while the Intel Core 5 320 scores 6197. The head-to-head delta is -84.3%, meaning the Core 5 320 trails the i9-14900F by 84.3% in this test.

Q: How close is single-thread performance?

A: In PassMark single-thread, the Core 5 320 scores 4045 and the i9-14900F scores 4506, a gap of 10.2%. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Core 5 320 scores 1926 and the i9-14900F scores 5583, a gap of 65.5%.

Q: What memory support does each processor offer?

A: The Core 5 320 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a single-channel memory bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The i9-14900F supports DDR4 and DDR5 over a dual-channel memory bus; its memory bandwidth is not recorded in the database.

Q: Do the two processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The i9-14900F has ECC memory support, while the Core 5 320 does not.

Q: What are the cache configurations?

A: The Core 5 320 lists 192 KB L1, 2.5 MB L2, and 6 MB shared L3. The i9-14900F lists 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 36 MB shared L3.

Q: Which processor includes integrated graphics?

A: The Core 5 320 includes Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The i9-14900F lists N/A for integrated graphics.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is one-sided. The i9-14900F wins all 17 head-to-head tests and has the higher average benchmark score, 60008 versus 18023, as well as the higher CPU percentile, 92 versus 72. The Core 5 320's closest result is PassMark single-thread, where it is 10.2% behind; its largest deficit is Cinebench R23 multi-core, where it is 84.3% behind.

The aggregate scores place the Core 5 320 within 0.7% of the AMD Ryzen 5 1600, Intel Core 5 120U, Intel Core i5-1334U, and AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT. The i9-14900F sits within 0.9% of the AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX, AMD Ryzen 7 8745HX, AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX3D, and Intel Xeon Gold 6338T. These clusters confirm that the two processors occupy different performance tiers in the database.

The appropriate selection depends on platform constraints recorded in the database. The Core 5 320 is the only one of the two with integrated graphics, a mobile socket (Intel BGA 1516), a 15 TDP, and single-channel memory. The i9-14900F is the only one with a desktop socket (Intel Socket 1700), a 65 TDP, dual-channel memory, 36 MB shared L3, ECC support, and Gen 5 PCIe. For workloads represented by Cinebench and PassMark, the i9-14900F delivers the higher scores across every recorded test.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

All 17 head-to-head entries list the i9-14900F as the winner; winsA is 0 and winsB is 17. The largest margin is in Cinebench R23 multi-core, with the Core 5 320 at 6197 and the i9-14900F at 39551, a delta of -84.3%. PassMark integer math is next: 32323 versus 177066, a delta of -81.7%. Cinebench R15 multi-core and PassMark data compression both record -73.6%: 1054 versus 3986 and 148779 versus 564207 respectively. PassMark random string sorting shows -71.7% with 18038 versus 63728. PassMark data encryption shows -68.3% with 10984 versus 34644. PassMark multithread shows -66.8% with 15450 versus 46532. Cinebench R20 multi-core and single-core both record -67.1%: 5462 versus 16611 and 771 versus 2344. Cinebench R23 single-core records -65.5% with 1926 versus 5583. PassMark floating point math records -64.5% with 42440 versus 119550.

The narrowest margins are informative. PassMark single-thread and PassMark singlethread both record 4045 for the Core 5 320 and 4506 for the i9-14900F, a delta of -10.2%. PassMark find prime numbers is -47.4% with 110 versus 209. Cinebench R15 single-core is -50.9% with 276 versus 562. PassMark extended instructions is -57.3% with 13262 versus 31084. PassMark physics is -57.9% with 1221 versus 2899.

The aggregate benchmark scores place each processor in a distinct competitive cluster. The Core 5 320's average of 18023 is 0.2% above the AMD Ryzen 5 1600 (17994), 0.7% above the Intel Core 5 120U (17898) and AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT (17891), and 0.7% below the Intel Core i5-1334U (18154). The i9-14900F's average of 60008 is 0.2% below the AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX (60099), 0.2% below the AMD Ryzen 7 8745HX (60104), 0.6% above the AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX3D (59641), and 0.9% below the Intel Xeon Gold 6338T (60572).

Specification Differences

Only the fields where the two processors differ are listed below.

| Field | Intel Core 5 320 | Intel Core i9-14900F |

|---|---|---|

| Series | None recorded | Core 14th Gen |

| Cores | 6 | 24 |

| Threads | 6 | 32 |

| Base clock | 1.50 GHz | 2.00 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.60 GHz | 5.80 GHz |

| TDP | 15 W | 65 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1516 | Intel Socket 1700 |

| Architecture | None recorded | Raptor Lake |

| Codename | Wildcat Lake | Raptor Lake-R |

| Generation | Core 5 (Wildcat Lake) | Core i9 (Raptor Lake Refresh) |

| Process node | 3 nm | 10 nm |

| Die size | None recorded | 257 mm² |

| L1 cache | 192 KB | 80 KB (per core) |

| L2 cache | 2.5 MB | 2 MB (per core) |

| L3 cache | 6 MB (shared) | 36 MB (shared) |

| Memory support | DDR5, LPDDR5X | DDR4, DDR5 |

| Memory bus | Single-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory bandwidth | 59.7 GB/s | None recorded |

| ECC memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 6 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated graphics | Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) | N/A |

| Market segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Release date | 2026-04-15 | 2024-01-07 |

| Launch MSRP | $340 | $524 |

| Part number | SAE3H | SRN3W |

Fields not shown are identical: manufacturer Intel, foundry Intel, production status Active, and multiplier unlocked false.

Architecture Differences

The architecture fields in the database separate the two clearly. The Core 5 320 is recorded as generation Core 5 (Wildcat Lake) with no separate architecture entry, while the i9-14900F is recorded as generation Core i9 (Raptor Lake Refresh) with architecture Raptor Lake and codename Raptor Lake-R. The process nodes also differ: 3 nm for the Core 5 320 and 10 nm for the i9-14900F. The i9-14900F has a recorded die size of 257 mm²; the Core 5 320 has none recorded.

Core and thread counts are the largest structural difference. The Core 5 320 uses 6 cores and 6 threads; the i9-14900F uses 24 cores and 32 threads. Cache organization differs as well. The Core 5 320 lists 192 KB L1, 2.5 MB L2, and 6 MB shared L3. The i9-14900F lists 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 36 MB shared L3.

Memory and I/O features reinforce the split. The Core 5 320 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X on a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The i9-14900F supports DDR4 and DDR5 on a dual-channel bus, with no memory bandwidth recorded. PCIe support is Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes on the Core 5 320 and Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes on the i9-14900F. ECC memory is available only on the i9-14900F. Integrated graphics are available only on the Core 5 320, using Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores; the i9-14900F lists N/A.

The platform-level specifications align with these architecture choices. The Core 5 320 uses Intel BGA 1516, a 15 TDP, and the Mobile market segment. The i9-14900F uses Intel Socket 1700, a 65 TDP, and the Desktop market segment. The release dates are 2026-04-15 for the Core 5 320 and 2024-01-07 for the i9-14900F.