Intel Core i5-14400T vs Intel Core Ultra 5 125H Comparison

The Intel Core Ultra 5 125H and the Intel Core i5-14400T present a compelling contrast in Intel’s modern lineup, pitting a mobile-first Meteor Lake design against a desktop-oriented Raptor Lake Refresh part. The benchmark data reveals a split decision: the Core Ultra 5 125H dominates in general processing workloads, while the Core i5-14400T delivers a decisive victory in the most demanding multi-threaded render tests. This analysis breaks down exactly where each processor excels, based solely on the collected benchmark results.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking divergence appears in the Cinebench suite, where the two CPUs trade blows with massive shifts in performance. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core i5-14400T posts a score of 17189, which is a commanding 25.5% ahead of the Core Ultra 5 125H’s 12804.5. This is the single largest performance gap in the entire head-to-head comparison. The single-core R23 test is even more lopsided, with the i5-14400T scoring 2426 versus 1647.5 for the Ultra 5, a 32.1% advantage. However, the older Cinebench R15 and R20 tests tell a different story. In R15 multi-core, the Core Ultra 5 125H wins with a score of 2021.5, beating the i5-14400T’s 1732 by a solid 16.7%. The R20 multi-core test is nearly a tie, with the i5-14400T edging out a 0.8% win (7219 vs 7161). Single-core results in R15 and R20 are similarly close, with the i5-14400T winning by 1.2% and 0.8%, respectively.

Moving to the PassMark suite, the Core Ultra 5 125H establishes a clear pattern of dominance. It wins 9 of the 17 total head-to-head benchmarks, while the i5-14400T takes 8. The Ultra 5’s wins are often substantial. In the `find_prime_numbers` test, it scores 88 versus 73, a 20.5% margin. The `physics` test shows a 15.7% advantage (1439 vs 1244). The `data_encryption` test is another clear win, with the Ultra 5 scoring 14251 against 13244, a 7.6% edge. It also wins `integer_math` (69986 vs 65667, +6.6%), `floating_point_math` (51670 vs 49139, +5.2%), and `multithread` (21100 vs 20223, +4.3%). The `random_string_sorting` test goes to the Ultra 5 by 9% (27435 vs 25181), and `data_compression` is a near-photo-finish with the Ultra 5 winning by a razor-thin 0.2% (236209 vs 235636).

The i5-14400T’s PassMark victories are fewer but include the critical single-threaded metrics. It wins `single_thread` with a score of 3512 versus 3399, a 3.2% advantage. It also performs better in `extended_instructions`, scoring 14562 against 13749 (+5.6%). Overall, the average benchmark score for the Core Ultra 5 125H is 27507, which is 1.3% higher than the Core i5-14400T’s 27166. Both processors sit at the 79th percentile when compared to all CPUs, but the Ultra 5’s higher average score and its performance in the PassMark suite indicate a more well-rounded processing profile.

Architecture Differences

The two chips are built on fundamentally different foundations. The Intel Core Ultra 5 125H uses the Meteor Lake architecture and is fabricated on Intel’s 7 nm process node. It is a mobile processor with a 28W TDP, designed for the Intel BGA 2049 socket. In contrast, the Intel Core i5-14400T is based on the Raptor Lake architecture (specifically Raptor Lake-R) and uses a 10 nm process node. It is a desktop part with a 35W TDP, fitting into the Intel Socket 1700. The die size for the i5-14400T is listed at 215 mm², while no die size is provided for the Ultra 5.

The core configurations are markedly different. The Core Ultra 5 125H packs 14 cores and 18 threads, while the Core i5-14400T has 10 cores and 16 threads. This gives the Ultra 5 a raw core count advantage. The cache hierarchy also differs. The Ultra 5 features a larger L1 cache at 112 KB per core and a larger L2 cache at 2 MB per core, but its shared L3 cache is 18 MB. The i5-14400T has a smaller L1 cache at 80 KB per core and an L2 cache of 1.25 MB per core, but it compensates with a larger 20 MB shared L3 cache. The base clocks diverge significantly, with the Ultra 5 running at 3.60 GHz compared to the i5-14400T’s 1.50 GHz. Both processors share the same 4.50 GHz boost clock.

Memory support is another differentiator. The i5-14400T supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory and has ECC memory support enabled. The Ultra 5 supports DDR5 but its ECC capability is listed as false. The Ultra 5 has a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, while no bandwidth figure is listed for the i5-14400T. For PCIe, both support Gen 5, but the i5-14400T specifies 16 lanes (CPU only). The integrated graphics differ as well, with the Ultra 5 featuring the more powerful Arc Xe-LPG 96EU, while the i5-14400T is equipped with the more modest UHD Graphics 730.

Where Each One Wins

The performance data paints a clear picture of their respective strengths. The Intel Core Ultra 5 125H is the champion of the PassMark benchmark suite. Its wins in `integer_math`, `floating_point_math`, `data_encryption`, and `physics` suggest it is better suited for everyday productivity tasks, complex spreadsheet calculations, and general system responsiveness. The significant 20.5% lead in `find_prime_numbers` and the 4.3% lead in the `multithread` test indicate strong performance in parallel compute tasks that do not rely heavily on a single core. The Ultra 5’s 15.7% advantage in `physics` makes it a more capable option for simulation and physics-based workloads. Its win in `data_compression` and `random_string_sorting` points to efficiency in file archiving and data manipulation.

The Intel Core i5-14400T is the clear winner in sustained, heavily multi-threaded rendering workloads. Its massive 25.5% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core and its 32.1% lead in R23 single-core demonstrate a significant advantage in modern rendering engines that scale well with clock speed and cache. This makes it the superior choice for video encoding, 3D rendering, and compiling large software projects. The i5-14400T also wins the single-threaded PassMark test by 3.2%, indicating slightly better performance in lightly-threaded applications like web browsing or legacy software. Its 5.6% edge in `extended_instructions` suggests an advantage in workloads using advanced CPU instruction sets like AVX, which are common in scientific computing and media processing.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Intel Core i5-14400T is significantly faster, scoring 17189 compared to the Core Ultra 5 125H’s 12804.5, a 25.5% difference.

Q: Does the Core Ultra 5 125H win any major multi-threaded tests?

A: Yes, it wins the Cinebench R15 multi-core test with a score of 2021.5, which is 16.7% higher than the i5-14400T’s 1732. It also leads in the PassMark `multithread` test with a score of 21100 versus 20223.

Q: Which chip has a higher core count?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 125H has more cores, with 14 cores and 18 threads, while the Intel Core i5-14400T has 10 cores and 16 threads.

Q: What is the difference in their average benchmark scores?

A: The Core Ultra 5 125H has a higher average benchmark score of 27507, compared to the Core i5-14400T’s 27166, a difference of 1.3%.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The Intel Core i5-14400T has a larger shared L3 cache at 20 MB, while the Core Ultra 5 125H has 18 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: How do they compare in single-threaded PassMark performance?

A: The Intel Core i5-14400T wins the PassMark `single_thread` test with a score of 3512, which is 3.2% higher than the Core Ultra 5 125H’s score of 3399.

The Verdict

The data clearly defines two distinct use cases. The Intel Core Ultra 5 125H is the better all-rounder for a wide range of computing tasks. Its consistent wins across the PassMark suite, including `integer_math`, `floating_point_math`, `physics`, and `data_encryption`, make it a strong choice for users who need a responsive system for productivity, application development, and general multitasking. Its higher core count and lower TDP of 28W also make it an efficient option for a mobile platform.

The Intel Core i5-14400T is the specialist for heavy rendering workloads. The sheer magnitude of its wins in Cinebench R23, particularly the 25.5% multi-core advantage, establishes it as the superior processor for tasks that are optimized for modern multi-core rendering, such as video editing, 3D animation, and software compilation. Its larger 20 MB L3 cache and higher single-thread scores also give it an edge in applications that are sensitive to cache size and single-core frequency.

For a user prioritizing a balanced, high-performance mobile processor that excels in a variety of daily and professional tasks, the Core Ultra 5 125H is the data-backed choice. For a user whose primary workload is sustained, heavily-threaded rendering, the Core i5-14400T’s dominant Cinebench R23 performance makes it the clear winner, despite its lower overall average score. The decision ultimately comes down to whether you need a jack-of-all-trades or a render-specific specialist.