Intel Core i5-14400 vs Intel Core Ultra 9 386H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a clear split between these two processors. Out of 17 recorded head-to-head comparisons, the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H takes 15 wins, while the Intel Core i5-14400 manages only 2. The margin of victory varies dramatically depending on the workload type.

The most lopsided result comes from the PassMark prime number search test. The Core Ultra 9 386H scores 341, against 80 for the Core i5-14400, a 76.5% advantage. This particular test highlights the massive difference in integer-heavy computational throughput. Physics calculations tell a similar story, with the Ultra 9 386H scoring 3028 against 1396, a 53.9% lead. Floating-point math also favors the mobile chip decisively: 108527 versus 61549, a 43.3% gap.

Data encryption shows a 38.4% advantage for the Ultra 9 386H (27150 versus 16731), and extended instruction workloads deliver a 32% lead (29138 versus 19816). The Cinebench R20 multicore test reinforces this pattern, with the Ultra 9 386H scoring 12820 versus 8952, a 30.2% gap. The same delta appears in R20 single-core, where the Ultra 9 386H reaches 1809 versus 1263.

Cinebench R15 multicore delivers a 33.4% lead for the Ultra 9 386H (3223 versus 2148), while R15 single-core is nearly tied at 303.5 versus 303, a 0.2% edge. PassMark multithread shows a 29.2% advantage (35399 versus 25080), and random string sorting favors the Ultra 9 386H by 23.2% (42135 versus 32346). Single-thread performance in PassMark gives the Ultra 9 386H an 11.3% lead (4218 versus 3741), while integer math is closer at 6% (87284 versus 82017). Data compression rounds out the Ultra 9 386H wins with a 10.6% margin (352365 versus 314995).

The Core i5-14400 claims its first victory in Cinebench R23 single-core with a commanding 45.3% lead (3009 versus 2071.5). It also wins Cinebench R23 multicore, scoring 21315 against 20547, a 3.7% margin. These two results show that in certain rendering workloads, the desktop chip retains a clear edge.

Where Each One Wins

The Core Ultra 9 386H dominates in compute-heavy workloads that stress multiple execution units. The PassMark physics, floating-point, encryption, and prime number tests all show substantial wins, which indicates strong parallel throughput capabilities. The 16-core configuration, even without extra threads, appears well-suited to sustained computational tasks. The 30.2% lead in both Cinebench R20 multicore and single-core suggests the Panther Lake architecture handles both threaded and single-threaded rendering efficiently.

The Core i5-14400 wins in Cinebench R23, which is notable because this test typically reflects both core count and clock behavior. The 45.3% single-core advantage points to a higher sustained boost clock in that workload, while the 3.7% multicore win suggests the 10-core, 16-thread setup with hyper-threading can outperform the 16-thread mobile chip in certain rendering scenarios. The i5-14400 also carries a 65 W TDP versus 25 W for the Ultra 9 386H, which may explain its ability to maintain higher clocks under load.

For everyday productivity tasks like data compression and integer math, the Ultra 9 386H leads but by smaller margins (10.6% and 6% respectively). This suggests the i5-14400 remains competitive in lighter workloads, while the Ultra 9 386H pulls ahead as intensity increases. The single-thread PassMark result (11.3% lead for Ultra 9 386H) indicates that the mobile chip also handles typical office and web workloads faster, but the gap is modest compared to the specialized compute tests.

The Verdict

The data points to the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H as the stronger overall performer in most measured categories. Its average benchmark score of 43210 places it in the 88th percentile of all CPUs, while the Core i5-14400 sits at 32115 and the 82nd percentile. The nearest rivals for the Ultra 9 386H include the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 (0.3% delta) and AMD Ryzen AI 9 465 (0.5% delta), which shows it competes at a higher performance tier. The i5-14400's nearest rivals, such as the Intel Core i7-12800H and Core i7-13705H, sit within 0.2% of its average score, confirming it occupies a mid-range position.

For workloads that rely on Cinebench R23 rendering, the Core i5-14400 is the better choice, delivering a 45.3% single-core advantage and a 3.7% multicore win. This makes it suitable for applications that use that specific rendering engine or similar single-threaded performance profiles. The i5-14400 also supports ECC memory and uses the Intel Socket 1700 platform, which may factor into system design decisions.

For everything else in the measured data, the Core Ultra 9 386H delivers superior results. The 76.5% lead in prime number searching, 53.9% in physics, and 43.3% in floating-point math indicate broad computational superiority. Its 16 cores on a 3 nm process, combined with 18 MB of shared L3 cache, provide a strong foundation for multi-threaded workloads. The 88th percentile ranking and nearest rivals at the Core i9-12900 level (0.7% delta) confirm that this mobile chip performs at a high desktop-class tier.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in Cinebench R23 multicore?

A: The Intel Core i5-14400 wins with a score of 21315, compared to 20547 for the Core Ultra 9 386H, a 3.7% margin.

Q: How large is the gap in single-core performance?

A: In Cinebench R23 single-core, the i5-14400 leads by 45.3% (3009 versus 2071.5). In PassMark single-thread, the Ultra 9 386H leads by 11.3% (4218 versus 3741).

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Core Ultra 9 386H has 16 cores, while the Core i5-14400 has 10 cores. Both have 16 threads.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference?

A: The Core Ultra 9 386H averages 43210, while the Core i5-14400 averages 32115. The Ultra 9 386H sits in the 88th percentile of all CPUs, versus the 82nd percentile for the i5-14400.

Q: Does the Core Ultra 9 386H support ECC memory?

A: No. The Core i5-14400 supports ECC memory, while the Core Ultra 9 386H does not.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Core Ultra 9 386H has a boost clock of 4.90 GHz, while the Core i5-14400 reaches 4.70 GHz.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural generations. The Core i5-14400 uses Raptor Lake, specifically the Raptor Lake-R refresh, built on a 10 nm process with a die size of 215 mm². The Core Ultra 9 386H uses Panther Lake, built on a 3 nm process. Both are manufactured by Intel, but the process node difference is substantial.

Core configuration differs significantly. The i5-14400 has 10 cores and 16 threads, indicating a hybrid arrangement with performance and efficiency cores. The Ultra 9 386H has 16 cores and 16 threads, which means no hyper-threading on any core, relying instead on raw core count. Cache layouts also differ: the i5-14400 has 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and 20 MB shared L3. The Ultra 9 386H has 192 KB L1 per core, 2.5 MB L2 per core, and 18 MB shared L3.

Memory support diverges as well. The i5-14400 supports DDR4 and DDR5 in dual-channel mode, while the Ultra 9 386H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X in dual-channel mode with a measured memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. The i5-14400 includes ECC memory support, while the Ultra 9 386H does not. PCIe lanes also differ: the i5-14400 provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the Ultra 9 386H provides Gen 5 with 12 lanes.

Integrated graphics differ as well. The i5-14400 uses UHD Graphics 730, while the Ultra 9 386H uses Intel Xe3 Graphics. The socket types are incompatible: the i5-14400 uses Intel Socket 1700 for desktop, and the Ultra 9 386H uses Intel BGA 2540 for mobile. The Ultra 9 386H has a TDP of 25 W, while the i5-14400 has a TDP of 65 W.

Specification Differences

The table below summarizes only the fields where the two processors differ:

| Specification | Intel Core i5-14400 | Intel Core Ultra 9 386H |

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

| Series | Core 14th Gen | Core Ultra Series 3 |

| Cores | 10 | 16 |

| Threads | 16 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 2.50 GHz | 2.10 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.70 GHz | 4.90 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 25 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel BGA 2540 |

| Architecture | Raptor Lake | Panther Lake |

| Generation | Core i5 (Raptor Lake Refresh) | Ultra 9 (Panther Lake-H) |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 3 nm |

| Die Size | 215 mm² | Not recorded |

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

| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core) | 2.5 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 20 MB (shared) | 18 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR5, LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bandwidth | Not recorded | 115.2 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 12 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 730 | Intel Xe3 Graphics |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Release Date | 2024-01-07 | 2026-01-04 |

| Launch MSRP | $221 | Not recorded |

| Part Number | SRN3QSRN46 | SA4R5Q9EH |