Intel Core i5-14400F vs Intel Core Ultra 7 366H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark comparison between the Intel Core i5-14400F and the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H shows a decisive advantage for the Ultra 7 across all 17 recorded tests. The Core i5-14400F does not secure a single win, while the Ultra 7 366H wins every head-to-head matchup. The most substantial gaps appear in multi-core rendering, physics simulation, and prime number calculations.

In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Ultra 7 366H scores 28,477 against the i5-14400F's 21,645, a 24% advantage. The single-core result shows a similar pattern: 4,020 versus 3,055, again a 24% lead. Cinebench R20 reinforces this trend with the Ultra 7 at 11,960 versus 9,090 in multi-core (24% ahead), and 1,688 versus 1,283 in single-core (24% ahead). Cinebench R15 multi-core delivers 2,870 versus 2,181 (24% ahead), while single-core posts 405 versus 307 (24.2% ahead).

PassMark physics shows the largest relative gap. The Ultra 7 366H records 2,880 versus 1,523, a 47.1% advantage. Floating point math follows closely: 103,615 versus 61,319, a 40.8% lead. The find prime numbers test reveals a 73.6% difference, with 326 points for the Ultra 7 versus 86 for the i5-14400F. Data encryption also favors the Ultra 7 by 34.4%, scoring 25,845 versus 16,949.

Smaller but consistent gaps appear in integer math, where the Ultra 7 leads by 2.6% (83,695 versus 81,524). Random string sorting shows a 17.9% edge for the Ultra 7 (39,814 versus 32,680). Data compression delivers a 3.6% advantage (327,455 versus 315,521). Extended instructions favor the Ultra 7 by 25.9% (26,901 versus 19,937). The multithread score shows a 23.8% lead (33,429 versus 25,470). Single-thread performance sits 8.5% higher for the Ultra 7 at 4,043 versus 3,701.

The average benchmark score tells the same story. The Ultra 7 366H averages 41,263, placing it in the 87th percentile of all CPUs. The i5-14400F averages 32,279, in the 83rd percentile. That is a 27.8% difference in average score. Notably, the i5-14400F's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U at 32,233 (0.1% behind) and the Intel Core i9-11900 at 32,226 (0.2% behind), indicating it sits in a tight cluster. The Ultra 7's nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H at 41,215 (0.1% behind) and the AMD Ryzen 9 5900X at 41,376 (0.3% ahead), showing it competes with desktop-class silicon.

Where Each One Wins

The Core Ultra 7 366H wins in every measured category, but the scale of its advantage varies by workload type. The largest wins cluster in computationally intensive, highly parallel tasks. Physics simulation, floating point math, and prime number finding all show gaps exceeding 35%. These workloads benefit from the Ultra 7's higher core count and newer process node.

Multi-core rendering shows a consistent 24% advantage across all three Cinebench versions (R15, R20, R23). This suggests the Ultra 7's architecture scales better with thread count. The i5-14400F does have 10 cores and 16 threads, but the Ultra 7 matches that thread count with 16 cores and 16 threads. The extra physical cores provide a measurable benefit in sustained multi-threaded loads.

Single-core performance shows a smaller but still clear gap. The Ultra 7 leads by 8.5% in PassMark single-thread and by 24% in Cinebench single-core tests. The Cinebench single-core gap appears larger than the PassMark gap, likely due to different workload characteristics. The Ultra 7's boost clock of 4.80 GHz exceeds the i5-14400F's 4.70 GHz, and its 3 nm process node provides a per-core efficiency advantage.

Memory-sensitive workloads show modest differences. Data compression (3.6%) and integer math (2.6%) are the closest matchups. Data encryption (34.4%) and extended instructions (25.9%) show larger gaps, indicating that the Ultra 7's newer instruction set and memory bandwidth (115.2 GB/s versus unspecified for the i5) help in these tasks. The i5-14400F supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the Ultra 7 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, which explains some of the bandwidth advantage.

The i5-14400F does hold advantages in platform flexibility. It uses Intel Socket 1700 and supports ECC memory, features absent from the Ultra 7. The i5 also supports 16 PCIe Gen 5 lanes versus the Ultra 7's 12 lanes. These are not benchmark wins, but they define where each processor fits in a system.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H is the stronger processor in every benchmark category. It wins all 17 head-to-head tests, with margins ranging from 2.6% in integer math to 73.6% in prime number calculation. The average benchmark score of 41,263 places it at the 87th percentile, while the i5-14400F sits at the 83rd percentile with 32,279.

The Ultra 7 366H is the clear choice for workloads that demand multi-core throughput. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 28,477 is 31.6% higher than the i5-14400F's 21,645. Physics simulation shows a 47.1% advantage. Floating point math shows a 40.8% advantage. These results indicate it handles rendering, simulation, and scientific computing significantly better.

The i5-14400F posts competitive scores in integer math and data compression, where the gap narrows to under 4%. It also carries the advantage of ECC memory support and more PCIe lanes, making it suitable for specific server or workstation configurations. Its launch MSRP is $196, though pricing comparisons are not part of this analysis.

For users who prioritize single-thread performance, the Ultra 7 leads by 8.5% in PassMark single-thread and by 24% in Cinebench single-core. The 3 nm process node and higher boost clock deliver measurable gains in lightly threaded applications.

The Core Ultra 7 366H is a mobile processor with a 25 W TDP, while the i5-14400F is a desktop part with a 65 W TDP. Despite the lower power envelope, the Ultra 7 outperforms the i5 in every test. This indicates the architecture efficiency of the Panther Lake design is substantial.

The i5-14400F remains competitive within its own class. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U (0.1% behind) and the Intel Core i9-11900 (0.2% behind). It does not fall far behind those processors, but it cannot match the Ultra 7 366H.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher multi-core performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H outperforms the i5-14400F in every multi-core test. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 28,477 versus 21,645, a 24% advantage. PassMark multithread shows 33,429 versus 25,470, a 23.8% lead.

Q: How does single-core performance compare?

A: The Ultra 7 366H leads in all single-core tests. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 4,020 versus 3,055 (24% ahead). PassMark single-thread shows 4,043 versus 3,701 (8.5% ahead).

Q: What is the biggest performance gap between the two?

A: The largest gap is in PassMark find prime numbers, where the Ultra 7 366H scores 326 versus 86, a 73.6% advantage. Physics simulation shows the second-largest gap at 47.1% (2,880 versus 1,523).

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Core i5-14400F supports ECC memory. The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H does not support ECC memory.

Q: What are the core and thread counts?

A: The i5-14400F has 10 cores and 16 threads. The Ultra 7 366H has 16 cores and 16 threads. Despite having fewer cores, the i5 matches the thread count due to hyperthreading, while the Ultra 7 uses one thread per core.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Ultra 7 366H has an average benchmark score of 41,263, placing it in the 87th percentile. The i5-14400F has an average score of 32,279, placing it in the 83rd percentile.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel generations and target different market segments. The i5-14400F belongs to the Core 14th Gen series, built on Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-R codename. It uses a 10 nm process node and has a die size of 215 mm². The Ultra 7 366H belongs to the Core Ultra Series 3, built on Panther Lake architecture with the Panther Lake codename. It uses a 3 nm process node, and its die size is not recorded in the database.

The i5-14400F is a desktop processor on Intel Socket 1700 with a 65 W TDP. The Ultra 7 366H is a mobile processor on Intel BGA 2540 with a 25 W TDP. The Ultra 7 achieves higher performance despite a lower power envelope, reflecting the efficiency of the 3 nm process.

Core configuration differs substantially. The i5-14400F has 10 cores and 16 threads. The Ultra 7 has 16 cores and 16 threads. Cache layouts differ as well. The i5 has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 20 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ultra 7 has 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ultra 7 has more L1 and L2 per core, while the i5 has more total L3.

Clock speeds are close but favor the Ultra 7. The i5 has a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz. The Ultra 7 has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The lower base clock of the Ultra 7 is offset by a higher boost clock and the efficiency of the 3 nm node.

Memory support differs. The i5-14400F supports DDR4 and DDR5 in dual-channel mode, with ECC memory support. The Ultra 7 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X in dual-channel mode with a recorded memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s, and no ECC support. The i5's memory bandwidth is not recorded in the database.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The i5-14400F provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The Ultra 7 provides Gen 5 with 12 lanes (CPU only). The i5 offers more PCIe lanes, which matters for desktop expansion.

Integrated graphics separate the two clearly. The i5-14400F has no integrated graphics (N/A). The Ultra 7 includes Intel Xe3 Graphics. This makes the Ultra 7 a complete system-on-chip for mobile devices, while the i5 requires a discrete GPU.

The i5-14400F was released on 2024-01-07 with a launch MSRP of $196. The Ultra 7 366H has a release date of 2026-01-04, and no launch MSRP is recorded. Production status is Active for both.

The i5-14400F's part number is SRN3RSRN47. The Ultra 7's part number is SA4R9Q9EL. Neither has an unlocked multiplier. The i5 uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Ultra 7 uses Intel BGA 2540, meaning they are not interchangeable in any system.