Intel Core i5-14490F vs Intel Core i9-14901TE Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons between the Intel Core i5-14490F and the Intel Core i9-14901TE. The recorded data shows a benchmark suite for the i5-14490F across multiple Cinebench and PassMark tests, while the i9-14901TE has no recorded benchmark scores in the database at all. This absence of comparative measurements means a direct performance analysis cannot be derived from the available facts.

What the data does show is a complete performance profile for the i5-14490F. In Cinebench R23, the processor records a multi-core score of 23000 and a single-core score of 3247. In Cinebench R20, it delivers 9660 multi-core and 1363 single-core, while Cinebench R15 shows 2318 multi-core and 327 single-core. PassMark results include a multi-thread score of 28662, a single-thread score of 3873, integer math at 87844, floating point math at 66558, data encryption at 18225, data compression at 340026, extended instructions at 21731, prime number finding at 122, physics at 2093, and random string sorting at 35608. The average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 38149, placing the i5-14490F at the 86th percentile among all CPUs tracked in the database.

For the i9-14901TE, the absence of benchmark entries means the database cannot confirm any performance level. The percentile ranking for this processor is recorded at 50, with an average benchmark score of 0, reflecting the lack of measured data rather than actual performance. The nearest rival data for the i5-14490F provides context: the Intel Core Ultra 5 245T scores 38194 on average, a delta of -0.1 percent relative to the i5-14490F; the Intel Core i5-13600KF scores 38103, a delta of +0.1 percent; the AMD Ryzen 7 250 scores 38221, a delta of -0.2 percent; and the Intel Core i5-13600HX scores 38261, a delta of -0.3 percent. These deltas indicate that the i5-14490F sits essentially at parity with these four competitors, within a range of roughly one-quarter of a percent in either direction.

Architecture Differences

Both processors belong to the Core 14th Gen series from Intel, share the Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-R codename, and are built on Intel's 10 nm process node at Intel's foundry. Both use the Intel Socket 1700, support DDR4 and DDR5 memory over a dual-channel memory bus, and provide PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU only. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

The core configurations differ substantially. The i5-14490F contains 10 cores and 16 threads, while the i9-14901TE contains 8 cores and 16 threads. Despite having fewer cores, the i9-14901TE carries the Core i9 designation within the same Raptor Lake Refresh generation. The i5-14490F has a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, whereas the i9-14901TE has a base clock of 2.30 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz. The higher boost clock on the i9-14901TE partially compensates for its lower core count in scenarios that rely on single-threaded performance, though the database does not provide measured confirmation.

Cache hierarchies also diverge. Both share the same L1 cache of 80 KB per core. The L2 cache is 1.25 MB per core on the i5-14490F and 2 MB per core on the i9-14901TE. The L3 cache is 24 MB shared on the i5-14490F versus 36 MB shared on the i9-14901TE. The die size differs as well: the i5-14490F measures 215 mm², while the i9-14901TE measures 257 mm². This larger die on the i9-14901TE aligns with its larger L3 cache allocation and the inclusion of integrated graphics.

Thermal design power presents a notable difference. The i5-14490F is rated at 65 watts TDP, while the i9-14901TE is rated at 45 watts TDP. The lower TDP on the i9-14901TE suggests a power-optimized design that prioritizes efficiency over raw throughput, even though it carries the higher-tier Core i9 branding. The i9-14901TE also includes integrated graphics in the form of UHD Graphics 770, while the i5-14490F has no integrated graphics (N/A). ECC memory support is another differentiator: the i9-14901TE supports ECC memory, while the i5-14490F does not.

Release dates place the two apart temporally. The i5-14490F has a release date of 2023-12-31, while the i9-14901TE has a release date of 2024-06-30. Both remain in active production status. Part numbers are recorded as SRN35 for the i5-14490F and Q49CSRNJJ for the i9-14901TE.

The Verdict

The recorded data supports a clear conclusion: the Intel Core i5-14490F is the only processor of the two with measurable performance evidence, and its benchmark results place it at the 86th percentile among all CPUs. The i9-14901TE lacks any benchmark entries, rendering its performance unquantifiable from the database. A user selecting between these two processors based on available data would be choosing between a verified performer and an unverified one.

That said, the architectural facts provide a qualitative picture. The i5-14490F offers more cores (10 versus 8) and a higher base clock (2.50 GHz versus 2.30 GHz), but the i9-14901TE counters with a higher boost clock (5.50 GHz versus 5.00 GHz), more L3 cache (36 MB versus 24 MB), more L2 cache per core (2 MB versus 1.25 MB), integrated graphics, ECC memory support, and a lower TDP (45 watts versus 65 watts). These differences suggest the i9-14901TE is designed for efficiency and reliability in constrained environments, while the i5-14490F targets raw multi-threaded throughput.

The i5-14490F also carries the desktop segment classification with no integrated graphics, meaning it requires a discrete GPU for display output. The i9-14901TE, with UHD Graphics 770, could operate without a discrete GPU, which might matter in specific system configurations. The absence of benchmark data for the i9-14901TE, however, means no performance verdict can be rendered for it. The only numerically grounded verdict favors the i5-14490F for multi-threaded workloads based on its recorded scores.

Specification Differences

| Field | Intel Core i5-14490F | Intel Core i9-14901TE |

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

| Cores | 10 | 8 |

| Threads | 16 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 2.50 GHz | 2.30 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.00 GHz | 5.50 GHz |

| TDP | 65 watts | 45 watts |

| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core) | 2 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 24 MB (shared) | 36 MB (shared) |

| Die Size | 215 mm² | 257 mm² |

| Integrated Graphics | N/A | UHD Graphics 770 |

| ECC Memory Support | No | Yes |

| Release Date | 2023-12-31 | 2024-06-30 |

| Part Number | SRN35 | Q49CSRNJJ |

Fields that are identical between the two include the L1 cache (80 KB per core), memory support (DDR4, DDR5), memory bus (dual-channel), PCIe (Gen 5, 16 lanes from CPU only), socket (Intel Socket 1700), architecture (Raptor Lake), codename (Raptor Lake-R), generation (Raptor Lake Refresh), process node (10 nm), foundry (Intel), market segment (Desktop), production status (Active), and multiplier lock status (locked).

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core i5-14490F has 10 cores, while the Intel Core i9-14901TE has 8 cores. Both have 16 threads.

Q: What is the boost clock difference between the two?

A: The i9-14901TE boosts to 5.50 GHz, which is 0.50 GHz higher than the i5-14490F's boost clock of 5.00 GHz.

Q: Does either processor include integrated graphics?

A: The i9-14901TE includes UHD Graphics 770, while the i5-14490F has no integrated graphics (N/A).

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The i9-14901TE supports ECC memory; the i5-14490F does not.

Q: What are the recorded benchmark scores for the i9-14901TE?

A: The database contains no benchmark entries for the i9-14901TE. Its average benchmark score is recorded as 0, and its percentile ranking is 50.

Q: How does the i5-14490F compare to its nearest rivals in average benchmark score?

A: The i5-14490F has an average benchmark score of 38149. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245T scores 38194 (delta -0.1 percent), the Intel Core i5-13600KF scores 38103 (delta +0.1 percent), the AMD Ryzen 7 250 scores 38221 (delta -0.2 percent), and the Intel Core i5-13600HX scores 38261 (delta -0.3 percent).

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i5-14490F wins in scenarios that demand multi-core throughput. Its 10 cores and 16 threads, combined with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, deliver recorded Cinebench R23 multi-core performance of 23000 and PassMark multi-thread performance of 28662. The 65-watt TDP suggests a design willing to consume more power for sustained compute. The absence of integrated graphics means a discrete GPU is mandatory, but this also implies the CPU die can dedicate resources to processing rather than display output. The 24 MB L3 cache, while smaller than the i9-14901TE's allocation, still provides substantial shared cache for workloads that benefit from it. The i5-14490F also holds the 86th percentile ranking among all CPUs, confirming its position as a high-performing desktop processor.

The Intel Core i9-14901TE wins in scenarios that prioritize efficiency, reliability, and flexibility. Its 45-watt TDP undercuts the i5-14490F by 20 watts, indicating lower power draw. The integrated UHD Graphics 770 eliminates the need for a discrete GPU in basic configurations. ECC memory support makes it suitable for error-sensitive workloads. The higher boost clock of 5.50 GHz provides single-threaded headroom. The larger L3 cache of 36 MB and larger L2 cache of 2 MB per core suggest better data locality for cache-heavy operations. The larger die size of 257 mm² accommodates these additional resources. However, the database records no benchmark scores for this processor, so its actual performance advantages remain unverified.

The data-driven split is clear: the i5-14490F is the only processor with demonstrated performance, and it should be selected when measured multi-threaded and single-threaded capabilities are required. The i9-14901TE should be selected when its architectural features (integrated graphics, ECC support, lower TDP, larger cache) outweigh the need for verified performance numbers. For users who rely on benchmark data to make decisions, the i5-14490F is the only option with evidence in the database.