Intel Core i5-14490F vs Intel Core Ultra 7 165HL Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i5-14490F and the Intel Core Ultra 7 165HL occupy different positions in the performance spectrum, and the recorded data reveals a clear split. The i5-14490F has a substantial body of benchmark results across Cinebench R15, R20, R23, and PassMark suites, while the Ultra 7 165HL arrives with no recorded benchmark scores in the database. This means the i5-14490F wins every measurable category by default, not because of a direct comparison, but because the Ultra 7 165HL has no entries in the benchmark tables.

Looking at the i5-14490F alone, its strengths are evident. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it reaches 23000 points, while its single-core score sits at 3247. The PassMark multi-thread result of 28662 and single-thread result of 3873 both indicate a processor that handles heavily threaded workloads and lightly threaded tasks with similar competence. The data compression score of 340026 stands out as the highest single PassMark subtest result for this chip, suggesting a particular aptitude for compression workloads. Integer math at 87844 and floating point math at 66558 both show solid arithmetic throughput, while encryption at 18225 and extended instructions at 21731 round out a balanced profile.

For the Ultra 7 165HL, the absence of benchmark data means the database cannot attribute any wins to it. The percentile ranking of 50 versus the i5-14490F's 86 illustrates the gap in measured performance, though this percentile likely reflects the lack of recorded results rather than an actual performance deficit. The architecture of the Ultra 7 differs fundamentally, with 16 cores and 22 threads against 10 cores and 16 threads for the i5, which suggests the Ultra 7 could potentially excel in multi-threaded scenarios if its benchmarks were recorded. However, without scores, the data supports no claims of superiority.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel generations and use different silicon designs. The i5-14490F belongs to the Core 14th Gen series and uses Raptor Lake architecture, specifically the Raptor Lake-R refresh, built on a 10 nm process at Intel's foundry. Its die size measures 215 mm², and it uses the Intel Socket 1700 platform. The Ultra 7 165HL, by contrast, belongs to the Core Ultra Series 1 and uses Meteor Lake architecture, specifically the Meteor Lake-PS variant, built on a 7 nm process, also at Intel's foundry. It uses the Intel Socket 1851 platform.

Cache hierarchies differ between the two. The i5-14490F carries 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, while the Ultra 7 165HL has 112 KB of L1 per core and 2 MB of L2 per core. Both share 24 MB of L3 cache, so the larger per-core caches in the Ultra 7 give it a potential advantage in data locality for workloads that repeatedly access the same memory regions.

Memory support also diverges. The i5-14490F supports both DDR4 and DDR5, with a dual-channel memory bus, whereas the Ultra 7 165HL supports DDR5 only, with its memory type dependent on the motherboard and a dual-channel bus. The Ultra 7 lists a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, a figure the i5 lacks in the database. PCIe connectivity differs as well: the i5-14490F uses Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the Ultra 7 165HL uses Gen 4 with 8 lanes from the CPU, a notable reduction in both generation and lane count.

Integrated graphics present another clear distinction. The i5-14490F has no integrated graphics, marked as N/A. The Ultra 7 165HL includes Arc Xe-LPG 128EU graphics, making it a viable option for systems that require display output without a discrete GPU. Both processors have locked multipliers, so neither supports manual overclocking through the clock multiplier.

The process node difference of 10 nm versus 7 nm, combined with the newer Meteor Lake architecture in the Ultra 7, suggests the Ultra 7 should offer better power efficiency per core. The i5-14490F has a TDP of 65 watts, while the Ultra 7 165HL has a TDP of 45 watts, reinforcing that expectation. The Ultra 7 also carries a launch MSRP of $459, while the i5-14490F has no recorded launch MSRP in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 165HL has 16 cores and 22 threads, while the Intel Core i5-14490F has 10 cores and 16 threads.

Q: Do both processors use the same socket?

A: No. The i5-14490F uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Ultra 7 165HL uses Intel Socket 1851.

Q: Which processor includes integrated graphics?

A: The Ultra 7 165HL includes Arc Xe-LPG 128EU integrated graphics. The i5-14490F has no integrated graphics.

Q: What is the shared L3 cache size for both processors?

A: Both processors have 24 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: Both processors have a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, so they are equal in this regard.

Q: Which processor has a higher TDP?

A: The i5-14490F has a TDP of 65 watts, while the Ultra 7 165HL has a TDP of 45 watts.

Specification Differences

The specification sheets for the two processors show several direct contrasts. The i5-14490F offers 10 cores and 16 threads, while the Ultra 7 165HL offers 16 cores and 22 threads. Base clocks differ substantially: the i5 runs at 2.50 GHz, the Ultra 7 at 1.40 GHz. Boost clocks match at 5.00 GHz for both.

The i5-14490F uses a 10 nm process node, the Ultra 7 165HL uses a 7 nm node. The i5 has a 215 mm² die size, while the Ultra 7 has no recorded die size. L1 cache per core is 80 KB on the i5 versus 112 KB on the Ultra 7. L2 cache per core is 1.25 MB on the i5 versus 2 MB on the Ultra 7. L3 cache is 24 MB shared on both.

Memory support differs: the i5 accepts DDR4 and DDR5, the Ultra 7 accepts DDR5 only, depending on the motherboard. The Ultra 7 records a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, the i5 has no such figure. PCIe connectivity: the i5 uses Gen 5 with 16 lanes, the Ultra 7 uses Gen 4 with 8 lanes. Integrated graphics: the i5 has none, the Ultra 7 has Arc Xe-LPG 128EU.

TDP ratings separate them further: 65 watts for the i5, 45 watts for the Ultra 7. The i5-14490F was released on 2023-12-31, while the Ultra 7 165HL was released on 2024-04-07. The Ultra 7 has a launch MSRP of $459; the i5 has no recorded launch MSRP. The i5's part number is SRN35, the Ultra 7's is SRN32.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark table in the database is empty, and the Ultra 7 165HL has no individual benchmark scores recorded. Consequently, the i5-14490F's results stand as the only measurable data points. In Cinebench R15, the i5 scores 2318 in multi-core and 327 in single-core. In R20, it scores 9660 multi-core and 1363 single-core. In R23, it scores 23000 multi-core and 3247 single-core. These results place the i5 at the 86th percentile among all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 38149.

The nearest rivals to the i5-14490F provide context for its performance. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245T has an average score of 38194, a delta of -0.1 percent relative to the i5, meaning the i5 trails it by a tenth of a percent. The Intel Core i5-13600KF scores 38103, a delta of 0.1 percent, meaning the i5 leads by a tenth of a percent. The AMD Ryzen 7 250 scores 38221, a delta of -0.2 percent. The Intel Core i5-13600HX scores 38261, a delta of -0.3 percent. These tiny margins indicate that the i5-14490F sits in a tightly contested performance band, with all four rivals within a third of a percent of its average score.

PassMark results for the i5-14490F show its strongest and weakest subtest performances. Data compression leads at 340026, followed by integer math at 87844, floating point math at 66558, and random string sorting at 35608. Extended instructions score 21731, data encryption scores 18225, and multi-thread scores 28662. Physics scores 2093, and find prime numbers scores 122, the lowest result in the set. The single-thread score of 3873 appears twice in the database under two test names, confirming consistency.

For the Ultra 7 165HL, the situation remains one of missing data. Its average benchmark score is 0, its percentile is 50, and it has no nearest rivals listed. The database records no wins for either processor in the head-to-head section, with winsA at 0 and winsB at 0, because no comparative benchmarks exist. The i5-14490F's 86th percentile ranking versus the Ultra 7's 50th percentile offers the only quantitative comparison, but the latter figure likely reflects the absence of scores rather than measured performance.

The Verdict

The data supports a straightforward conclusion: the Intel Core i5-14490F is the only one of the two processors with recorded benchmark performance. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 23000 and single-core score of 3247, along with a PassMark multi-thread score of 28662 and single-thread score of 3873, give it a measurable profile that places it at the 86th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals sit within 0.3 percent of its average score, confirming that it performs in line with contemporary mid-range and upper-mid-range processors.

The Intel Core Ultra 7 165HL, despite having more cores, more threads, a smaller process node, and integrated graphics, has no benchmark scores in the database. Its 45 watt TDP and 5.00 GHz boost clock suggest efficient operation and competitive single-thread potential, but the data cannot confirm these expectations. The 16 cores and 22 threads imply strong multi-threaded capability, and the 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth indicates a well-equipped memory subsystem, but none of this is verified by recorded results.

For users building a desktop system and seeking a processor with proven performance, the i5-14490F offers the only measured path. It supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory, uses PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes, and has no integrated graphics, so it requires a discrete GPU. For users who need integrated graphics, a lower TDP, or the newer socket 1851 platform, the Ultra 7 165HL provides those features on paper, but its performance remains unquantified in the database. The choice between them hinges on whether verified benchmark results or architectural specifications carry more weight, and the data only fully supports the former.