Intel Core i5-14490F vs Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus records an average benchmark score of 66159, while the Intel Core i5-14490F records 38149. The Ultra 5 250KF Plus sits in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, compared to the 86th percentile for the i5-14490F.

Q: How do the two processors differ in core and thread counts?

A: The Intel Core i5-14490F has 10 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has 18 cores and 18 threads. The Ultra 5 250KF Plus uses a 1:1 core-to-thread ratio, whereas the i5-14490F relies on hyperthreading to reach 16 threads from 10 physical cores.

Q: Which processor supports DDR4 memory?

A: Only the Intel Core i5-14490F supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus supports DDR5 exclusively. Both processors use a dual-channel memory bus, but the Ultra 5 250KF Plus has a recorded memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s, a figure not listed for the i5-14490F.

Q: What is the difference in boost clock speeds?

A: The Intel Core i5-14490F boosts to 5.00 GHz, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus boosts to 5.30 GHz. The base clocks are 2.50 GHz for the i5-14490F and 4.20 GHz for the Ultra 5 250KF Plus.

Q: Which processor is unlocked for overclocking?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has an unlocked multiplier, while the Intel Core i5-14490F does not. This makes the Ultra 5 250KF Plus the only one of the two with user-controlled frequency adjustment.

Q: How do the two processors compare in single-thread performance?

A: In PassMark single-thread testing, the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus scores 4698, which is 17.6% ahead of the Intel Core i5-14490F's 3873. The same margin appears in the Cinebench R23 single-core test, where the Ultra 5 250KF Plus scores 6030 versus 3247 for the i5-14490F.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core i5-14490F belongs to the Core 14th Gen series, built on Raptor Lake architecture with the codename Raptor Lake-R. It uses a 10 nm process node fabricated by Intel. The die size measures 215 mm². The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2, using the Arrow Lake Refresh codename. Its process node is 3 nm, fabricated by TSMC, with a die size of 243 mm² and 17,800 million transistors.

The cache hierarchy differs substantially. The i5-14490F provides 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ultra 5 250KF Plus provides 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 30 MB of shared L3 cache. This gives the Ultra 5 250KF Plus more than double the L1 and L2 per core, plus additional L3 capacity.

The memory controllers differ. The i5-14490F supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the Ultra 5 250KF Plus supports only DDR5. ECC memory support is absent on the i5-14490F but present on the Ultra 5 250KF Plus. The memory bandwidth for the Ultra 5 250KF Plus is listed as 115.2 GB/s.

PCIe connectivity differs as well. The i5-14490F provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the Ultra 5 250KF Plus provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU. Neither processor includes integrated graphics.

The sockets are incompatible. The i5-14490F uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Ultra 5 250KF Plus uses Intel Socket 1851. The part numbers are SRN35 for the i5-14490F and SA4V3 for the Ultra 5 250KF Plus.

The release dates differ significantly. The i5-14490F launched at the end of 2023, while the Ultra 5 250KF Plus launched in March 2026. The launch MSRP for the Ultra 5 250KF Plus is $184; no launch MSRP is recorded for the i5-14490F.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus wins all 17 recorded head-to-head benchmarks. The margins vary widely by workload, from a tight 17.6% single-thread gap to a dominant 73% gap in prime number finding.

In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Ultra 5 250KF Plus scores 42718 versus 23000 for the i5-14490F, a 46.2% advantage. The same 46.2% margin appears in Cinebench R20 multi-core (17941 versus 9660) and Cinebench R15 multi-core (4305 versus 2318). This consistent 46.2% delta across all three Cinebench multi-core versions indicates a uniform scaling advantage in heavily threaded rendering workloads.

Single-core Cinebench results show similar consistency. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Ultra 5 250KF Plus scores 6030 versus 3247, a 46.2% lead. Cinebench R20 single-core shows 2532 versus 1363, also 46.2%. Cinebench R15 single-core shows 607 versus 327, a 46.1% margin. The near-identical deltas across all Cinebench tests suggest the architecture and clock improvements translate evenly across both single and multi-threaded workloads in this benchmark suite.

PassMark integer math shows the smallest multi-threaded gap. The Ultra 5 250KF Plus scores 123030 versus 87844, a 28.6% advantage. This is notably smaller than the Cinebench margins, indicating that integer arithmetic does not scale as strongly with the additional cores and cache.

PassMark single-thread and singlethread tests both show 4698 versus 3873, a 17.6% lead. This is the narrowest margin in the entire comparison, reflecting the boost clock advantage of 5.30 GHz versus 5.00 GHz combined with the architectural improvements.

The largest gap appears in PassMark find prime numbers, where the Ultra 5 250KF Plus scores 452 versus 122, a 73% advantage. This workload is highly sensitive to the combination of core count, cache size, and memory bandwidth, all of which favor the Ultra 5 250KF Plus.

PassMark floating point math shows a 58.4% lead for the Ultra 5 250KF Plus (159824 versus 66558). Data encryption shows a 55.9% lead (41292 versus 18225). Extended instructions show a 49.3% lead (42880 versus 21731). Random string sorting shows a 47% lead (67209 versus 35608).

PassMark data compression shows a 38.5% lead (553155 versus 340026). PassMark multithread shows a 42.8% lead (50146 versus 28662). PassMark physics shows a 34.2% lead (3183 versus 2093).

The nearest rival data contextualizes the Ultra 5 250KF Plus position. It sits 0.1% above the Intel Core 9 273PQE (66099), 0.4% above the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D (65914), 1% below the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus (66855), and 1.1% below the AMD EPYC 4465P (66925). The i5-14490F, by comparison, sits 0.1% below the Intel Core Ultra 5 245T (38194) and 0.1% above the Intel Core i5-13600KF (38103).

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every specification category. Core count: 10 versus 18. Thread count: 16 versus 18. Base clock: 2.50 GHz versus 4.20 GHz. Boost clock: 5.00 GHz versus 5.30 GHz. TDP: 65 W versus 125 W.

Socket: Intel Socket 1700 versus Intel Socket 1851. Process node: 10 nm versus 3 nm. Foundry: Intel versus TSMC. Die size: 215 mm² versus 243 mm². Transistor count: not listed for the i5-14490F, versus 17,800 million for the Ultra 5 250KF Plus.

L1 cache per core: 80 KB versus 192 KB. L2 cache per core: 1.25 MB versus 3 MB. L3 cache shared: 24 MB versus 30 MB. Memory support: DDR4 and DDR5 versus DDR5 only. ECC memory: false versus true. Memory bandwidth: not listed for the i5-14490F, versus 115.2 GB/s for the Ultra 5 250KF Plus.

PCIe lanes: 16 versus 20. Integrated graphics: N/A for both. Multiplier unlocked: false versus true. Part number: SRN35 versus SA4V3. Release date: end of 2023 versus March 2026. Launch MSRP: not listed for the i5-14490F, versus $184 for the Ultra 5 250KF Plus.

The architecture field is listed as Raptor Lake for the i5-14490F, while the Ultra 5 250KF Plus records no architecture name but uses the Arrow Lake Refresh codename. The generation field shows Core i5 (Raptor Lake Refresh) for the former and Ultra 5 (Arrow Lake) for the latter.

The Verdict

The recorded data shows a comprehensive performance advantage for the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus across every benchmark in the comparison. The 18-core, 18-thread configuration with a 3 nm process node and larger cache hierarchy delivers scores that place it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, seven points higher than the i5-14490F's 86th percentile.

Users with workloads that stress prime number calculation or floating point math will see the largest relative gains, with 73% and 58.4% improvements respectively. Those focused on single-thread responsiveness will still see a meaningful 17.6% gain. Rendering workloads in Cinebench show a consistent 46.2% improvement regardless of core count or threading model.

The i5-14490F retains advantages in power envelope and memory flexibility. Its 65 W TDP is substantially lower than the 125 W TDP of the Ultra 5 250KF Plus, and its DDR4 support allows upgrades from older platforms without changing memory. However, the socket change to Socket 1851 for the Ultra 5 250KF Plus means neither processor can serve as a drop-in replacement for the other.

The Ultra 5 250KF Plus also offers ECC memory support and an unlocked multiplier, features absent from the i5-14490F. Its 20 PCIe Gen 5 lanes provide additional expansion bandwidth compared to 16 lanes.

The nearest rival data places the Ultra 5 250KF Plus in the company of high-end desktop and workstation processors, including the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D and the AMD EPYC 4465P. The i5-14490F sits among mid-range parts like the Intel Core i5-13600KF and AMD Ryzen 7 250.

For users building a new system and seeking the highest recorded performance in this comparison, the data points to the Ultra 5 250KF Plus as the stronger processor in every measured workload. For users with existing DDR4 memory or constrained power budgets, the i5-14490F offers a lower-TDP alternative with older platform compatibility, though it trails significantly in all 17 benchmark comparisons.