Intel Core 7 350 vs Intel Core i5-14400T Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a clear split between these two Intel parts. The Intel Core i5-14400T dominates the multicore and throughput-oriented tests, while the Intel Core 7 350 wins every single-threaded matchup by a wide margin. Out of 17 recorded comparisons, the Core i5-14400T takes 13 wins, with the Core 7 350 claiming only 4.

The largest single gap appears in Cinebench R23 multicore. The Core i5-14400T scores 17189 versus 8030 for the Core 7 350, a delta of -53.3% from the Core 7 350's perspective. That is more than double the render score. A similar pattern shows in PassMark integer math, where the Core i5-14400T hits 65667 against 33734, a -48.6% gap. Data compression also heavily favors the desktop chip: 235636 versus 143123, a -39.3% difference. Random string sorting goes to the Core i5-14400T at 25181 versus 17238, a -31.5% gap.

The Core 7 350's wins are concentrated in single-thread and prime-number workloads. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the Core 7 350 scores 292 versus 244, a +19.7% advantage. PassMark single-thread shows 4100 versus 3512, a +16.7% lead. The most striking result is PassMark find prime numbers, where the Core 7 350 scores 107 against 73, a +46.6% advantage. That workload appears to favor the newer architecture's per-core efficiency.

The remaining wins for the Core i5-14400T are consistent but vary in magnitude. Cinebench R15 multicore shows 1732 versus 1220 (-29.6%), while R20 multicore shows 7219 versus 5373 (-25.6%). The R20 single-core result is notable: the Core i5-14400T wins 1018 versus 758, a -25.5% gap, which contrasts with the R15 and PassMark single-thread results where the Core 7 350 wins. This suggests the two chips trade blows depending on the workload and instruction mix.

PassMark extended instructions goes to the Core i5-14400T at 14562 versus 12045 (-17.3%), and data encryption goes to it at 13244 versus 10933 (-17.4%). Floating-point math shows a narrower margin: 49139 versus 42809 (-12.9%). Multithreaded PassMark gives the Core i5-14400T a 20223 to 15170 result (-25%). Physics simulation is close: 1244 versus 1173, a -5.7% edge for the Core i5-14400T.

Looking at the average benchmark scores, the Core i5-14400T posts 27166, while the Core 7 350 sits at 17779. That places the Core i5-14400T in the 79th percentile of all CPUs in the database, versus the 71st percentile for the Core 7 350. The nearest rivals for the Core 7 350 include the Intel Core 5 221TE with an average score of 17860 (-0.5% delta), the AMD EPYC 9374F at 17693 (+0.5%), the AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT at 17891 (-0.6%), and the Intel Core 5 120U at 17898 (-0.7%). The Core i5-14400T's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i9-9900K at 27097 (+0.3%), the AMD Ryzen 7 5700G at 27051 (+0.4%), the Intel Core i7-13700H at 27355 (-0.7%), and the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5355G at 27382 (-0.8%).

FAQ

Q: Which CPU wins more benchmarks in the head-to-head comparison?

A: The Intel Core i5-14400T wins 13 of the 17 recorded tests, while the Intel Core 7 350 wins 4. The Core i5-14400T also has a higher average benchmark score of 27166 versus 17779.

Q: What is the biggest single-benchmark margin between the two?

A: The largest gap is in Cinebench R23 multicore, where the Core i5-14400T scores 17189 versus 8030, a delta of -53.3% for the Core 7 350. The second-largest is PassMark integer math at -48.6%.

Q: Does the Core 7 350 win any multicore tests?

A: No. The Core 7 350's four wins are all in single-thread or prime-number workloads: Cinebench R15 single-core, PassMark find prime numbers, and the two PassMark single-thread entries (both scored 4100).

Q: How do the two compare in the 79th and 71st percentiles?

A: The Core i5-14400T ranks in the 79th percentile of all CPUs in the database, while the Core 7 350 ranks in the 71st. The Core i5-14400T's nearest rival, the Intel Core i9-9900K, has an average score of 27097, which is only 0.3% away.

Q: Which CPU has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core 7 350 has a boost clock of 4.80 GHz, while the Intel Core i5-14400T boosts to 4.50 GHz. Both have the same 1.50 GHz base clock.

Q: In which test does the Core 7 350 show the largest percentage advantage?

A: The Core 7 350's biggest win is PassMark find prime numbers, scoring 107 versus 73, a +46.6% advantage. Its other wins are +19.7% in Cinebench R15 single-core and +16.7% in PassMark single-thread.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to a straightforward choice for different workloads. The Intel Core i5-14400T is the stronger processor for any multithreaded task, including rendering, compression, encryption, and integer-heavy computation. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 17189 is more than double the Core 7 350's 8030, and its PassMark multithread score of 20223 comfortably exceeds 15170. The Core i5-14400T also holds the higher percentile ranking at 79 versus 71, and its average benchmark score of 27166 is roughly 53% higher.

The Intel Core 7 350 is the pick for single-threaded responsiveness. Its PassMark single-thread score of 4100 beats the Core i5-14400T's 3512, and its Cinebench R15 single-core result of 292 beats 244. The prime-number finding is especially stark: 107 versus 73, a +46.6% lead. For workloads that depend on per-core speed rather than thread count, the Core 7 350 delivers better results.

The data does not support a universal winner. The Core i5-14400T is the higher-performing overall chip by average score, but the Core 7 350 outclasses it in specific single-thread scenarios. A user prioritizing render or batch workloads should select the Core i5-14400T. A user whose applications are latency-sensitive and single-threaded would see better scores from the Core 7 350.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every fundamental specification. The Intel Core 7 350 has 6 cores and 6 threads, while the Intel Core i5-14400T has 10 cores and 16 threads. Both have a base clock of 1.50 GHz, but the Core 7 350 boosts to 4.80 GHz versus 4.50 GHz for the Core i5-14400T.

Thermal design power differs substantially: the Core 7 350 is rated at 15 W, while the Core i5-14400T is rated at 35 W. The socket also differs, with the Core 7 350 using Intel BGA 1516 and the Core i5-14400T using Intel Socket 1700. The Core 7 350 is a mobile part, while the Core i5-14400T is a desktop part.

Cache configurations diverge significantly. The Core 7 350 has 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 6 MB of shared L3. The Core i5-14400T has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 20 MB of shared L3.

Memory support also differs. The Core 7 350 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a single-channel memory bus and 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Core i5-14400T supports DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel memory bus and no recorded bandwidth figure. ECC memory is supported on the Core i5-14400T but not on the Core 7 350.

PCIe connectivity favors the desktop chip: the Core i5-14400T offers Gen 5 with 16 lanes, while the Core 7 350 offers Gen 4 with 6 lanes. Integrated graphics differ as well: the Core 7 350 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores, while the Core i5-14400T uses UHD Graphics 730. The Core 7 350 is unlocked? No, both have multiplierUnlocked set to false.

The launch MSRP for the Core 7 350 is $469, while the Core i5-14400T has a launch MSRP of $221. The release dates show the Core i5-14400T released on 2024-01-07, while the Core 7 350 released on 2026-04-15. The Core i5-14400T has a die size of 215 mm², while the Core 7 350 has no recorded die size. Part numbers are SAE3F for the Core 7 350 and SRN3N for the Core i5-14400T.

Architecture Differences

The two chips come from different architectural generations. The Intel Core 7 350 uses the Wildcat Lake architecture on a 3 nm process node, while the Intel Core i5-14400T uses Raptor Lake on a 10 nm node. Both are manufactured by Intel, but the process technology difference is substantial: 3 nm versus 10 nm.

The Core 7 350 is part of the Core 5 (Wildcat Lake) generation, while the Core i5-14400T belongs to the Core i5 (Raptor Lake Refresh) generation. The codename for the Core 7 350 is Wildcat Lake, and for the Core i5-14400T it is Raptor Lake-R. The architecture field for the Core 7 350 is null in the database, while the Core i5-14400T explicitly lists Raptor Lake.

Threading capability differs directly from the core counts: the Core 7 350 has 6 threads for 6 cores, meaning no hyperthreading, while the Core i5-14400T has 16 threads for 10 cores, indicating hyperthreading is enabled. This explains much of the multicore performance gap.

Cache hierarchy reflects the architectural split. The Core 7 350's per-core L1 is 192 KB, which is larger than the Core i5-14400T's 80 KB per core. L2 per core is 2.5 MB on the Core 7 350 versus 1.25 MB on the Core i5-14400T. However, the shared L3 is much larger on the Core i5-14400T at 20 MB, versus 6 MB on the Core 7 350.

Memory architecture also differs. The Core 7 350 is limited to a single-channel memory bus, while the Core i5-14400T uses dual-channel. The Core 7 350 supports only DDR5 and LPDDR5X, while the Core i5-14400T supports both DDR4 and DDR5. The Core 7 350 has a recorded memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s, while the Core i5-14400T has no bandwidth figure recorded.

The integrated graphics differ by generation: the Core 7 350 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores, while the Core i5-14400T uses the older UHD Graphics 730. PCIe support also reflects the generation gap, with the Core i5-14400T offering Gen 5 and 16 lanes, while the Core 7 350 offers Gen 4 and 6 lanes.

The process node difference of 3 nm versus 10 nm likely contributes to the Core 7 350's lower 15 W TDP versus 35 W for the Core i5-14400T. The die size for the Core i5-14400T is 215 mm², while the Core 7 350 has no recorded die size, making direct physical comparison impossible from the available data.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i5-14400T wins in every multicore-heavy benchmark category. Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multicore all go to the desktop chip, with the R23 margin being the largest at -53.3%. PassMark workloads such as data compression, data encryption, extended instructions, floating-point math, integer math, multithread, physics, and random string sorting all favor the Core i5-14400T. The 10-core, 16-thread configuration with 20 MB of L3 provides a clear throughput advantage.

The Intel Core 7 350 wins in single-threaded workloads. PassMark single-thread and singlethread both score 4100, beating the Core i5-14400T's 3512. Cinebench R15 single-core goes to the Core 7 350 at 292 versus 244. The prime-number test is the outlier: the Core 7 350 scores 107 versus 73, a +46.6% lead, which is its largest win percentage.

The two CPUs also differ in form factor and platform. The Core 7 350 is a mobile part with a 15 W TDP and BGA 1516 socket, while the Core i5-14400T is a desktop part with a 35 W TDP and Socket 1700. That makes the Core 7 350 suitable for compact, low-power systems, while the Core i5-14400T requires a desktop motherboard and cooling solution.

For users running rendering, encoding, compression, or any parallel workload, the data strongly favors the Core i5-14400T. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 17189 is more than double, and its PassMark multithread score of 20223 is 33% higher. For users running single-threaded applications, the Core 7 350 delivers better per-core performance, as evidenced by its 4100 PassMark single-thread score and its 292 Cinebench R15 single-core result.

The prime-number result stands out as a unique data point. The Core 7 350's 107 score versus 73 for the Core i5-14400T suggests that the newer 3 nm process and Wildcat Lake architecture handle this specific workload with significantly better efficiency. This is the only test where the Core 7 350's advantage exceeds 20%, indicating that its architectural strengths are narrowly focused rather than general.

In summary, the Core i5-14400T is the higher-scoring chip overall, with an average benchmark score of 27166 and a 79th percentile ranking. The Core 7 350 sits at 17779 and the 71st percentile. The Core i5-14400T wins 13 of 17 head-to-head tests, but the Core 7 350 wins the single-thread and prime-number categories, which may matter more for specific application profiles.