Intel Core i5-14400F vs Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has 18 cores and 18 threads, while the Intel Core i5-14400F has 10 cores and 16 threads. The Ultra 5 uses a 1:1 core-to-thread ratio, whereas the i5-14400F uses hyper-threading to reach 16 threads from 10 cores.

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

A: In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus scores 42718 against 21645 for the Core i5-14400F, a 49.3% advantage. The PassMark multithread test shows a similar pattern: 50146 versus 25470, a 49.2% lead.

Q: Does the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus also win in single-core tests?

A: Yes. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Ultra 5 scores 6030 versus 3055, a 49.3% delta. PassMark single-thread shows 4698 versus 3701, a 21.2% advantage. The single-core gap is smaller than the multi-core gap, but still substantial.

Q: What is the difference in average benchmark score?

A: The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has an average benchmark score of 66159, placing it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs. The Core i5-14400F averages 32279, placing it in the 83rd percentile. The Ultra 5's average score is roughly double that of the i5-14400F.

Q: Which processor uses a newer manufacturing process?

A: The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus is built on a 3 nm process by TSMC, while the Core i5-14400F uses Intel's 10 nm process. The Ultra 5 also integrates 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die, compared to the i5-14400F's 215 mm² die with no transistor count recorded.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Intel Core i5-14400F and the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus support ECC memory. However, the i5-14400F supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the Ultra 5 supports only DDR5.

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a clear hierarchy. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus wins every single recorded head-to-head benchmark, 17 out of 17 contests. No test in the database shows the Core i5-14400F ahead, even by a narrow margin. The smallest gap is in PassMark integer math, where the Ultra 5 leads by 33.7%, and the largest is in PassMark find prime numbers, where it leads by 81%.

For workloads that stress all cores, the Ultra 5 is the decisive choice. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 42718 is nearly double the i5-14400F's 21645. Rendering, compilation, and scientific computing tasks will see the largest benefit from the 18-core, 18-thread configuration. The i5-14400F, with its 10 cores and 16 threads, delivers roughly half the multi-threaded throughput.

For single-threaded tasks, the Ultra 5 still holds a solid advantage. A 21.2% lead in PassMark single-thread and a 49.3% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core indicate faster per-core execution across the board. The i5-14400F's 4.70 GHz boost clock cannot compensate for the Ultra 5's higher 5.30 GHz boost and newer architecture.

The Core i5-14400F retains relevance in one specific context: platform continuity. It uses Intel Socket 1700 and supports DDR4 memory, making it a drop-in option for existing LGA1700 systems. The Ultra 5 requires Intel Socket 1851 and DDR5 exclusively. Users upgrading an older platform with DDR4 memory already installed would face additional memory costs with the Ultra 5, though the database records no memory performance numbers for the i5-14400F to quantify that trade-off.

The data indicates the Ultra 5 is the stronger processor by every measured metric. The i5-14400F serves as a lower-throughput alternative for users constrained by socket or memory compatibility. The Ultra 5's 93rd percentile ranking versus the i5-14400F's 83rd percentile confirms its higher standing in the overall CPU landscape.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus dominates the Cinebench suite. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it scores 4305 against 2181, a 49.3% delta. The single-core R15 test shows 607 versus 307, a 49.4% delta. Cinebench R20 repeats the pattern: multi-core 17941 versus 9090, single-core 2532 versus 1283, both at 49.3% deltas. Cinebench R23 multi-core delivers 42718 versus 21645, and single-core delivers 6030 versus 3055, again 49.3% deltas. The consistency of these percentages across all Cinebench versions indicates a uniform architectural advantage rather than a workload-specific quirk.

PassMark results show more variance. The largest margin is in find prime numbers: 452 versus 86, an 81% delta. This test heavily favors the Ultra 5's higher core count and faster per-core execution. Floating point math shows a 61.6% delta (159824 versus 61319). Data encryption shows a 59% delta (41292 versus 16949). Extended instructions show a 53.5% delta (42880 versus 19937). Physics tests show a 52.2% delta (3183 versus 1523). Random string sorting shows a 51.4% delta (67209 versus 32680).

The smallest deltas appear in integer math and single-threaded tests. PassMark integer math records 123030 versus 81524, a 33.7% delta. PassMark single-thread and singlethread both record 4698 versus 3701, a 21.2% delta. Data compression shows 553155 versus 315521, a 43% delta. PassMark multithread shows 50146 versus 25470, a 49.2% delta.

The single-thread gap of 21.2% is the least severe for the i5-14400F, but it remains a clear loss. The near-uniform 49.3% delta across all Cinebench tests suggests that the Ultra 5's advantage scales evenly from one core to many. The PassMark suite, with its wider range of deltas, reveals that the Ultra 5 is especially strong in encryption, prime number calculation, and floating-point workloads, where its lead exceeds 55%.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every core specification. The Core i5-14400F has 10 cores and 16 threads; the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has 18 cores and 18 threads. Base clocks are 2.50 GHz for the i5-14400F and 4.20 GHz for the Ultra 5. Boost clocks are 4.70 GHz and 5.30 GHz respectively.

Thermal design power differs substantially: 65 watts for the i5-14400F versus 125 watts for the Ultra 5. The i5-14400F uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Ultra 5 requires Intel Socket 1851. The i5-14400F supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory; the Ultra 5 supports only DDR5. The Ultra 5 records a memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s; no memory bandwidth figure is recorded for the i5-14400F.

PCIe connectivity differs as well. The i5-14400F provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the Ultra 5 provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU. Neither processor includes integrated graphics. The i5-14400F has a locked multiplier; the Ultra 5 has an unlocked multiplier. Launch MSRP for the i5-14400F is $196, and launch MSRP for the Ultra 5 is $184.

Architecture Differences

The Core i5-14400F belongs to the Core 14th Gen series and uses the Raptor Lake architecture, specifically Raptor Lake-R. It is built on a 10 nm process by Intel and has a die size of 215 mm². Its cache hierarchy consists of 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 20 MB of shared L3 cache.

The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2 and uses the Arrow Lake Refresh architecture. It is built on a 3 nm process by TSMC, with 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. Its cache hierarchy is larger at every level: 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3 cache.

The generation labels confirm the separation: the i5-14400F is listed as Core i5 (Raptor Lake Refresh), while the Ultra 5 is listed as Ultra 5 (Arrow Lake). The process node difference from 10 nm to 3 nm, combined with the foundry shift from Intel to TSMC, explains the Ultra 5's ability to pack 18 cores into a similar die area while maintaining higher clock speeds.

Both processors support ECC memory and target the desktop market segment, and both are listed as active in production. The Ultra 5's release date is later, recorded as 2026-03-10, compared to the i5-14400F's 2024-01-07. The part numbers differ: SRN3RSRN47 for the i5-14400F and SA4V3 for the Ultra 5. The Ultra 5's larger L2 and L3 caches, higher core count, and newer manufacturing process collectively account for its consistent benchmark superiority.