Intel Core i5-14400F vs Intel Core Ultra 7 155H Comparison

The Intel Core Ultra 7 155H and Intel Core i5-14400F represent two distinct approaches in Intel's current lineup: a mobile Meteor Lake processor with 16 cores and 22 threads, and a desktop Raptor Lake chip with 10 cores and 16 threads. Benchmark data from the database shows the i5-14400F wins 12 of 17 head-to-head tests, while the Ultra 7 155H takes 5. The i5-14400F dominates in Cinebench R23 multi-core and single-core, while the Ultra 7 155H leads in several Passmark math and physics workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most decisive result in the comparison is Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the i5-14400F scores 21645 against the Ultra 7 155H's 15028, a 30.6% advantage. This is the largest margin in any test. The i5-14400F also wins Cinebench R20 multi-core (9090 vs 8754, a 3.7% lead) and R20 single-core (1283 vs 1235, also 3.7%). In single-core performance, the i5-14400F is consistently ahead: Cinebench R23 single-core shows 3055 vs 1743, a 42.9% gap, and R15 single-core shows 307 vs 255, a 16.9% lead.

The Ultra 7 155H, however, takes the Cinebench R15 multi-core test with 2450 vs 2181, a 12.3% margin. In Passmark workloads, the Ultra 7 155H wins integer math (86870 vs 81524, 6.6%), floating point math (63703 vs 61319, 3.9%), physics (1727 vs 1523, 13.4%), and find prime numbers (113 vs 86, 31.4%). The i5-14400F counters with wins in data compression (315521 vs 277353, 12.1%), data encryption (16949 vs 16358, 3.5%), extended instructions (19937 vs 16456, 17.5%), multithread (25470 vs 24873, 2.3%), random string sorting (32680 vs 31990, 2.1%), and single-thread Passmark (3701 vs 3468, 6.3%). The i5-14400F also wins the duplicate single-thread Passmark entry with the same scores.

Overall, the i5-14400F's wins are concentrated in the newer Cinebench versions and memory-intensive Passmark tests, while the Ultra 7 155H shows strength in arithmetic and physics simulations. The 12-to-5 win count favors the desktop part, but the margins in the Ultra 7's wins are often larger than the i5's narrow leads in several tests.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has higher multi-core performance in Cinebench R23?

A: The i5-14400F scores 21645 versus the Ultra 7 155H's 15028, a 30.6% advantage.

Q: Does the Ultra 7 155H have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, it features Arc Xe-LPG 128EU. The i5-14400F has no integrated graphics (listed as N/A).

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The i5-14400F supports ECC memory, while the Ultra 7 155H does not.

Q: What is the difference in PCIe lane count?

A: The i5-14400F provides 16 Gen 5 lanes (CPU only), while the Ultra 7 155H provides 8 Gen 5 lanes.

Q: Which has more cores and threads?

A: The Ultra 7 155H has 16 cores and 22 threads, while the i5-14400F has 10 cores and 16 threads.

Q: Which CPU wins in single-thread performance?

A: The i5-14400F leads in every single-thread test, including Cinebench R23 single-core (3055 vs 1743) and Passmark single-thread (3701 vs 3468).

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on different architectures and process nodes. The Ultra 7 155H uses Meteor Lake, fabricated on a 7 nm process, while the i5-14400F uses Raptor Lake (Raptor Lake-R) on a 10 nm process. The core counts differ significantly: the Ultra 7 155H has 16 cores and 22 threads, whereas the i5-14400F has 10 cores and 16 threads. Cache hierarchies also diverge. The Ultra 7 155H has 112 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. The i5-14400F has 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and 20 MB shared L3.

Memory support differs as well. The Ultra 7 155H supports DDR5 only, with the note "depends on motherboard," and has a listed memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The i5-14400F supports both DDR4 and DDR5, but no memory bandwidth figure is recorded. ECC memory is supported on the i5-14400F but not on the Ultra 7 155H. PCIe connectivity also differs: the i5-14400F offers 16 Gen 5 lanes (CPU only), while the Ultra 7 155H offers 8 Gen 5 lanes. The integrated graphics situation is stark: the Ultra 7 155H includes Arc Xe-LPG 128EU, while the i5-14400F has no integrated graphics.

The socket and market segment further separate them. The Ultra 7 155H uses Intel BGA 2049 and is a mobile part, while the i5-14400F uses Intel Socket 1700 and is a desktop part. The TDP values reflect this: 28 W for the Ultra 7 155H versus 65 W for the i5-14400F. Release dates are close, with the Ultra 7 155H launching on 2023-12-13 and the i5-14400F on 2024-01-07. Both are active production parts and have locked multipliers.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the two processors:

• Cores: 16 (Ultra 7 155H) vs 10 (i5-14400F)
• Threads: 22 vs 16
• Base clock: 3.80 GHz vs 2.50 GHz
• Boost clock: 4.80 GHz vs 4.70 GHz
• TDP: 28 W vs 65 W
• Socket: Intel BGA 2049 vs Intel Socket 1700
• Architecture: Meteor Lake vs Raptor Lake
• Process node: 7 nm vs 10 nm
• L1 cache (per core): 112 KB vs 80 KB
• L2 cache (per core): 2 MB vs 1.25 MB
• L3 cache (shared): 24 MB vs 20 MB
• Memory support: DDR5 (depends on motherboard) vs DDR4, DDR5
• Memory bandwidth: 89.6 GB/s vs not listed
• ECC memory: No vs Yes
• PCIe lanes: 8 Gen 5 (CPU only) vs 16 Gen 5 (CPU only)
• Integrated graphics: Arc Xe-LPG 128EU vs N/A
• Market segment: Mobile vs Desktop
• Release date: 2023-12-13 vs 2024-01-07
• Launch MSRP: $503 vs $196
• Part number: SRMZ1 vs SRN3RSRN47

Both processors share the same manufacturer (Intel), foundry (Intel), production status (Active), and have locked multipliers.

Where Each One Wins

The i5-14400F is the clear winner for heavy multi-threaded rendering and single-thread tasks. Its 30.6% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 42.9% lead in R23 single-core make it the stronger choice for workloads that scale with the latest Cinebench versions, such as 3D rendering and video encoding. It also wins in data compression, encryption, extended instructions, and multithread Passmark tests, indicating broad strength in general productivity and content creation. The i5-14400F's 16 PCIe Gen 5 lanes and ECC support further suit desktop workstation scenarios.

The Ultra 7 155H, despite losing the overall head-to-head count, shows specific advantages in arithmetic and physics-oriented workloads. It wins Passmark integer math by 6.6%, floating point math by 3.9%, physics by 13.4%, and find prime numbers by 31.4%. These results suggest a strong showing in scientific computing, financial modeling, and simulation tasks that rely on raw number crunching. Its 12.3% win in Cinebench R15 multi-core also indicates that in older rendering benchmarks, the mobile part can outperform the desktop chip. Additionally, the Ultra 7 155H includes integrated Arc graphics, making it a viable option for systems that do not require a discrete GPU, and its 28 W TDP positions it for power-constrained mobile designs.

In summary, the i5-14400F is the better all-round performer for desktop users who prioritize the latest Cinebench scores and single-thread responsiveness, while the Ultra 7 155H offers a compelling package for mobile platforms where integrated graphics, lower power, and specific math-heavy workloads matter. The choice depends on the target environment and the specific benchmark mix that reflects the intended use case.