Intel Core i3-14100F vs Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus Comparison

The Intel Core i3-14100F and the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus serve completely different segments of the desktop market. The database records the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus winning all 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, with the Core i3-14100F securing zero wins. The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus sits in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, while the Core i3-14100F sits in the 72nd percentile. This is not a close contest; it is a generational and structural gap that shows up in every single recorded workload.

The Verdict

The Intel Core i3-14100F is a 4-core, 8-thread processor built for basic desktop use, light productivity, and entry-level gaming. Its average benchmark score of 18519 places it nearly identical to the Intel Core i5-13420H (18511) and the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300GE (18505). It is a capable little chip for its intended role, but the data shows it is firmly in the lower tier of the current CPU landscape.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus is a different beast entirely. With 18 cores, 18 threads, and an average benchmark score of 66159, it ranks alongside the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D (65914) and the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus (66855). Its percentile ranking of 93 puts it in the top tier of desktop processors. The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus is for workloads that demand heavy multi-threading, content creation, and serious compute throughput. Anyone building a workstation or a high-end gaming rig with future-proofing in mind should look at the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus, while the Core i3-14100F is strictly for budget-oriented builds where the workload is light.

Architecture Differences

The two chips come from entirely different design eras. The Core i3-14100F uses Intel's Raptor Lake architecture, specifically the Raptor Lake-R refresh, built on Intel's 10 nm process node. It is a monolithic die measuring 163 mm². The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus uses the Arrow Lake Refresh codename, built on a 3 nm process node at TSMC, with a die size of 243 mm² and 17,800 million transistors.

The core configuration is radically different. The Core i3-14100F has 4 cores and 8 threads, meaning it uses Hyper-Threading. The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has 18 cores and 18 threads, with no Hyper-Threading. The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus compensates with sheer core count, which is why its multi-threaded scores are so much higher.

Cache hierarchies also differ substantially. The Core i3-14100F has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3. The larger caches on the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus contribute to its better single-thread performance, which is already aided by a higher base clock of 4.20 GHz and boost clock of 5.30 GHz versus 3.50 GHz and 4.70 GHz on the Core i3-14100F.

Memory support also diverges. The Core i3-14100F supports both DDR4 and DDR5, which is a flexibility advantage for builders reusing older memory. The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus supports only DDR5, but the recorded memory bandwidth is 115.2 GB/s, which is a significant throughput advantage for memory-heavy workloads. Both chips support ECC memory and have no integrated graphics. The Core i3-14100F uses PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU, offering more expansion bandwidth.

The sockets are incompatible: the Core i3-14100F uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus uses Intel Socket 1851. This means a platform change is required to move between them. The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus also has an unlocked multiplier, while the Core i3-14100F is locked. The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has a TDP of 125 watts, more than double the 58 watts of the Core i3-14100F, which is expected given the core count difference.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark record shows a consistent and decisive advantage for the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus across every single test. The smallest gap is in PassMark single-thread tests, where the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus scores 4698 against 3778 for the Core i3-14100F, a delta of -19.6%. That is still a meaningful single-thread lead, but it is the closest the Core i3-14100F comes to its rival.

The largest gap appears in PassMark find prime numbers, where the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus scores 452 against 61, a delta of -86.5%. This test is highly sensitive to core count and integer throughput, and the 18-core part simply overwhelms the 4-core part. Similarly, PassMark data encryption shows a -78.4% delta (41292 vs 8922), and PassMark floating point math shows a -77.9% delta (159824 vs 35370).

In the Cinebench suite, the results are consistent across all versions. In Cinebench R23, the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus scores 42718 in multi-core and 6030 in single-core, while the Core i3-14100F scores 13084 and 1847 respectively. The delta is -69.4% across all Cinebench tests, both multi-core and single-core. Cinebench R20 shows the same pattern: 17941 vs 5495 in multi-core, 2532 vs 775 in single-core. Cinebench R15 follows with 4305 vs 1318 in multi-core and 607 vs 186 in single-core.

The multi-threaded workload in PassMark shows a -69.2% delta (50146 vs 15420). PassMark integer math shows -63.1% (123030 vs 45357), and PassMark extended instructions show -72.1% (42880 vs 11984). PassMark random string sorting shows -73.8% (67209 vs 17596). PassMark physics shows -66.2% (3183 vs 1077). PassMark data compression shows -68.2% (553155 vs 176106). In every recorded workload, the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus delivers at least a 19.6% advantage, and in most cases the advantage is well over 60%.

Specification Differences

The key specification differences between the two processors are as follows:

• Cores: 4 (Core i3-14100F) vs 18 (Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus)
• Threads: 8 (Core i3-14100F) vs 18 (Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus)
• Base Clock: 3.50 GHz vs 4.20 GHz
• Boost Clock: 4.70 GHz vs 5.30 GHz
• TDP: 58 W vs 125 W
• Socket: Intel Socket 1700 vs Intel Socket 1851
• Process Node: 10 nm (Intel) vs 3 nm (TSMC)
• Die Size: 163 mm² vs 243 mm²
• Transistors: Not recorded vs 17,800 million
• L1 Cache: 80 KB per core vs 192 KB per core
• L2 Cache: 1.25 MB per core vs 3 MB per core
• L3 Cache: 12 MB shared vs 30 MB shared
• Memory Support: DDR4 and DDR5 vs DDR5 only
• Memory Bandwidth: Not recorded vs 115.2 GB/s
• PCIe Lanes: 16 vs 20 (both Gen 5)
• Multiplier Unlocked: No vs Yes
• Release Date: 2024-01-07 vs 2026-03-10
• Launch MSRP: $109 vs $184

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in single-threaded workloads?

A: The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus is faster. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 6030 against 1847 for the Core i3-14100F, a -69.4% delta. In PassMark single-thread, it scores 4698 against 3778, a -19.6% delta.

Q: How much faster is the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus in multi-core workloads?

A: The advantage is substantial. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus scores 42718 against 13084, a -69.4% delta. In PassMark multithread, it scores 50146 against 15420, a -69.2% delta. The 18-core configuration dominates the 4-core part in all parallel tasks.

Q: Can I use the same motherboard for both processors?

A: No. The Core i3-14100F uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus uses Intel Socket 1851. They are not compatible with the same motherboard.

Q: Does the Core i3-14100F support DDR5 memory?

A: Yes, it supports both DDR4 and DDR5. The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus supports DDR5 only, but with a recorded memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s.

Q: Which processor has better cache for gaming?

A: The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has much larger caches: 192 KB L1 per core, 3 MB L2 per core, and 30 MB shared L3, versus 80 KB L1, 1.25 MB L2, and 12 MB L3 on the Core i3-14100F. Larger caches typically help with game data locality.

Q: Is the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus unlocked for overclocking?

A: Yes, the multiplier is unlocked. The Core i3-14100F is locked.

Where Each One Wins

The Core i3-14100F wins in platform flexibility. It supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, allowing builders to reuse older memory modules. Its lower TDP of 58 watts makes it suitable for compact or low-power builds where cooling and power delivery are less demanding. It also has a lower launch MSRP of $109, making it an accessible entry point. However, it does not win a single benchmark in the recorded data.

The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus wins in every performance category. It is the clear choice for multi-threaded rendering, video encoding, data compression, encryption, scientific computing, and any workload that scales with core count. Its single-thread advantage also makes it the better choice for high-refresh gaming, despite the lack of integrated graphics. The 18 cores and 30 MB of L3 cache provide a massive throughput advantage in all recorded tests. The unlocked multiplier and 5.30 GHz boost clock offer headroom for enthusiasts, and the 20 PCIe Gen 5 lanes provide more expansion capability.

For a builder deciding between these two, the choice is simple. If the workload is light and the budget is tight, the Core i3-14100F is a functional 4-core processor that handles everyday tasks. If the workload is heavy, the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus is the only one of the two that delivers high-end desktop performance, as confirmed by its 93rd percentile ranking and its dominance in all 17 head-to-head comparisons.