Intel Core 7 160UL vs Intel Core i5-14490F Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a one-sided contest. The Intel Core i5-14490F wins all 17 recorded head-to-head comparisons, with the Intel Core 7 160UL failing to secure a single victory. The most significant gaps appear in productivity and content creation workloads.

In Cinebench R23 multicore, the i5-14490F scores 23000 against the 160UL's 9386, a delta of -59.2%. The single-core R23 result shows the i5-14490F reaching 3247 versus 1325, also -59.2%. These results indicate the i5-14490F delivers roughly two and a half times the multi-threaded performance in this render test.

The data compression test shows the widest margin. The i5-14490F records 340026 in PassMark's data compression benchmark, while the 160UL manages 108953, a delta of -68%. Extended instruction workloads favor the i5-14490F even more, with 21731 against 5832, a -73.2% gap, the largest delta in the entire dataset.

Integer math performance shows the narrowest multi-threaded gap. The i5-14490F scores 87844 versus 47515 for the 160UL, a delta of -45.9%. Floating point math follows a similar pattern, with the i5-14490F at 66558 and the 160UL at 25670, a -61.4% difference.

The single-thread PassMark results are closest. The i5-14490F reaches 3873, while the 160UL posts 3391, a delta of -12.4%. This remains a clear win for the i5-14490F, but it shows the 160UL's single-core capability is comparatively stronger than its multi-thread showing.

Across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, both multicore and singlecore results consistently show the i5-14490F ahead by roughly 59%. The R15 multicore test records 2318 for the i5-14490F against 946 for the 160UL, while R15 singlecore shows 327 versus 133.

PassMark multithread results place the i5-14490F at 28662 and the 160UL at 11043, a -61.5% delta. The physics test shows 2093 for the i5-14490F and 819 for the 160UL, a -60.9% gap. Random string sorting records 35608 for the i5-14490F and 11843 for the 160UL, a -66.7% difference.

Data encryption shows the i5-14490F at 18225 and the 160UL at 7146, a -60.8% delta. Prime number finding records 122 for the i5-14490F against 50 for the 160UL, a -59% gap.

The average benchmark score reflects this disparity. The i5-14490F averages 38149 across the database, placing it in the 86th percentile of all CPUs. The 160UL averages 14232, sitting in the 69th percentile. The i5-14490F's nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 5 245T at 38194 (-0.1%), the Intel Core i5-13600KF at 38103 (0.1%), and the AMD Ryzen 7 250 at 38221 (-0.2%). The 160UL's closest competitors are the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C at 14277 (-0.3%), the Intel Core i5-10400F at 14185 (0.3%), and the Intel Xeon 6756E at 14163 (0.5%).

Architecture Differences

Both processors share the Raptor Lake architecture and are manufactured by Intel on a 10 nm process node. The 160UL uses the Raptor Lake-PS codename, while the i5-14490F uses Raptor Lake-R, part of the Raptor Lake Refresh generation. Both use the Intel Socket 1700 and support DDR4 and DDR5 memory in dual-channel configuration.

The core counts are identical at 10 cores each, but the thread counts differ. The 160UL supports 12 threads, while the i5-14490F supports 16 threads. This four-thread advantage contributes to the i5-14490F's multi-threaded benchmark dominance.

Clock speeds show a notable difference. The 160UL has a base clock of 1.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz. The i5-14490F runs a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The 160UL has a higher boost ceiling, but the i5-14490F starts from a much higher base frequency.

Thermal design power differs substantially. The 160UL is rated at 15 W TDP, while the i5-14490F carries a 65 W TDP. This power envelope difference explains much of the performance gap, as the i5-14490F has far more thermal headroom for sustained workloads.

Cache configuration shows a significant L3 difference. The 160UL has 12 MB of shared L3 cache, while the i5-14490F has 24 MB. Both processors have 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core.

The i5-14490F has a documented die size of 215 mm². The 160UL's die size is not recorded in the database. Neither processor supports ECC memory or has an unlocked multiplier.

PCIe support differs by generation and lane count. The 160UL provides PCIe Gen 4 with 8 lanes from the CPU. The i5-14490F offers PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes, a substantial expansion in both bandwidth and connectivity.

Integrated graphics also differ. The 160UL includes Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units. The i5-14490F has no integrated graphics, listed as N/A, requiring a discrete GPU for display output.

Release dates place the 160UL in April 2024, while the i5-14490F appeared at the end of December 2023. Both processors remain in active production. The i5-14490F has a recorded part number of SRN35, while the 160UL's part number is listed as unknown.

The Verdict

The recorded data shows the Intel Core i5-14490F as the clear performance leader across every benchmark in the database. Its 16 threads, 24 MB of L3 cache, higher base clock, and 65 W TDP combine to deliver an average benchmark score of 38149, which is 168% higher than the 160UL's 14232 average.

The 160UL does offer advantages in specific areas. Its 15 W TDP makes it a far lower-power option, and its 5.20 GHz boost clock is the highest in this comparison. The integrated Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units provides display capability without a discrete GPU, and PCIe Gen 4 with 8 lanes could suffice for modest expansion needs.

The i5-14490F's 86th percentile ranking versus the 160UL's 69th percentile places the two processors in different performance tiers. The i5-14490F competes with processors like the Core Ultra 5 245T and Core i5-13600KF, while the 160UL sits alongside the Ryzen 3 7320C and Core i5-10400F.

For multi-threaded rendering, the i5-14490F delivers 23000 in Cinebench R23, nearly two and a half times the 160UL's 9386. For data compression, the i5-14490F's 340026 score is more than three times the 160UL's 108953. These are not marginal differences; they represent a different class of compute capability.

The 160UL's single-thread PassMark score of 3391 is within 12.4% of the i5-14490F's 3873. This suggests the 160UL can handle light, single-threaded tasks with reasonable competence, but its multi-threaded performance falls far behind.

Users requiring sustained multi-threaded throughput, large L3 cache, or PCIe Gen 5 connectivity should favor the i5-14490F. The data does not show any benchmark where the 160UL delivers superior compute performance. The 160UL's strengths lie in its low power envelope, integrated graphics, and higher boost clock, which are not reflected in the benchmark scores.

Specification Differences

The two processors share several specifications: both have 10 cores, use Intel Socket 1700, employ the Raptor Lake architecture, are built on a 10 nm process by Intel, support DDR4 and DDR5 memory, use dual-channel memory bus, have 80 KB L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB L2 cache per core, do not support ECC memory, have locked multipliers, target the desktop market segment, and remain in active production.

They differ in the following fields:

• Threads: 12 (160UL) versus 16 (i5-14490F)
• Base clock: 1.80 GHz (160UL) versus 2.50 GHz (i5-14490F)
• Boost clock: 5.20 GHz (160UL) versus 5.00 GHz (i5-14490F)
• TDP: 15 W (160UL) versus 65 W (i5-14490F)
• Codename: Raptor Lake-PS (160UL) versus Raptor Lake-R (i5-14490F)
• Generation: Core 7 (Raptor Lake-PS) versus Core i5 (Raptor Lake Refresh)
• Die size: Not recorded (160UL) versus 215 mm² (i5-14490F)
• L3 cache: 12 MB shared (160UL) versus 24 MB shared (i5-14490F)
• PCIe: Gen 4, 8 lanes (160UL) versus Gen 5, 16 lanes (i5-14490F)
• Integrated graphics: Iris Xe Graphics 96EU (160UL) versus N/A (i5-14490F)
• Release date: April 2024 (160UL) versus December 2023 (i5-14490F)
• Part number: Unknown (160UL) versus SRN35 (i5-14490F)

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more threads?

A: The Intel Core i5-14490F supports 16 threads, while the Intel Core 7 160UL supports 12 threads. Both have 10 cores.

Q: What is the thermal design power difference?

A: The Intel Core 7 160UL is rated at 15 W TDP, while the Intel Core i5-14490F is rated at 65 W TDP.

Q: Does either processor include integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Core 7 160UL includes Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units. The Intel Core i5-14490F has no integrated graphics, listed as N/A.

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: The Intel Core i5-14490F has 24 MB of shared L3 cache, double the 12 MB found on the Intel Core 7 160UL.

Q: What are the PCIe differences?

A: The Intel Core 7 160UL provides PCIe Gen 4 with 8 lanes from the CPU. The Intel Core i5-14490F provides PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core 7 160UL has a boost clock of 5.20 GHz, which is higher than the Intel Core i5-14490F's 5.00 GHz boost clock.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Intel Core i5-14490F averages 38149 across the database, placing in the 86th percentile. The Intel Core 7 160UL averages 14232, placing in the 69th percentile.