Intel Core i5-14490F vs Intel Core Ultra 7 265K Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark comparison between the Intel Core i5-14490F and the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K is decisively one-sided. The Core Ultra 7 265K wins 16 of the 17 recorded head-to-head tests, with the Core i5-14490F securing a single victory. The magnitude of the Ultra 7's lead varies substantially by workload, ranging from a modest 21.4% advantage in single-threaded PassMark testing to a commanding 75.2% lead in prime number calculation.

Starting with Cinebench R15, the multicore test shows the Core Ultra 7 265K scoring 5020 against the Core i5-14490F's 2318, a 53.8% deficit for the older chip. The single-core R15 result follows the same pattern: 708 for the Ultra 7 versus 327 for the i5, again a 53.8% gap. Cinebench R20 repeats this exact margin in both multicore (20918 versus 9660) and single-core (2953 versus 1363) runs. The consistency of this 53.8% delta across four separate Cinebench R15 and R20 tests indicates a fundamental throughput advantage rather than workload-specific behavior.

Cinebench R23 narrows the multicore gap considerably. The Core Ultra 7 265K scores 35850, while the Core i5-14490F reaches 23000, a 35.8% difference. This smaller margin in R23 multicore suggests that the newer architecture scales differently under extended rendering loads. The R23 single-core result is where the Core i5-14490F claims its only victory: 3247 versus 2020 for the Ultra 7, a 60.7% advantage. This is a striking inversion. The i5-14490F's Raptor Lake cores deliver substantially higher single-core performance in this specific Cinebench R23 workload, while the Arrow Lake-based Ultra 7 falls behind by a wide margin. Notably, this result conflicts with the R15 and R20 single-core tests, where the Ultra 7 leads by 53.8% in both. The database shows no single consistent single-core winner across Cinebench versions.

PassMark results reinforce the Ultra 7's dominance in nearly every category. Data compression scores 665554 for the Ultra 7 versus 340026 for the i5, a 48.9% lead. Data encryption shows a 62.2% gap (48246 versus 18225). Extended instructions testing delivers a 60% advantage (54333 versus 21731). Prime number finding is the largest disparity: 491 versus 122, a 75.2% deficit for the i5-14490F. Floating point math follows at 64.9% (189629 versus 66558), while integer math shows a smaller 38.7% gap (143242 versus 87844). The PassMark multithread score confirms the overall trend: 58594 for the Ultra 7 versus 28662 for the i5, a 51.1% lead. Physics testing gives the Ultra 7 a 43.9% edge (3731 versus 2093). Random string sorting shows a 55.4% advantage (79752 versus 35608).

The only PassMark category where the gap narrows below 40% is single-thread performance. Here the Core Ultra 7 265K scores 4928, while the Core i5-14490F reaches 3873, a 21.4% lead. This is still a clear win for the Ultra 7, but it is the closest margin recorded in the entire benchmark set. The pattern across all tests indicates that the Ultra 7's advantage grows with workload parallelism and computational intensity, while its single-threaded lead is comparatively modest.

The overall average benchmark score reflects this hierarchy: the Core Ultra 7 265K averages 70879, placing it in the 94th percentile of all CPUs tracked. The Core i5-14490F averages 38149, which sits in the 86th percentile. The nearest rivals for the Ultra 7 include the Intel Xeon 6511P (71051, 0.2% higher), the Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 (71370, 0.7% higher), the Intel Core i7-14700KF (70163, 1% lower), and the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F (69996, 1.3% lower). The i5-14490F's nearest competitors are the Intel Core Ultra 5 245T (38194, 0.1% higher), the Intel Core i5-13600KF (38103, 0.1% lower), the AMD Ryzen 7 250 (38221, 0.2% higher), and the Intel Core i5-13600HX (38261, 0.3% higher). These rivalry data show the Ultra 7 operating in a significantly higher performance tier, competing with Xeon-class and high-end Core i7 parts, while the i5-14490F trades closely with mid-range alternatives.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear performance hierarchy. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K is the superior processor in nearly every measured workload. Its 20-core, 20-thread configuration with a 5.50 GHz boost clock and 30 MB of shared L3 cache delivers benchmark results that place it in the 94th percentile of all CPUs. The Core i5-14490F, with 10 cores, 16 threads, a 5.00 GHz boost clock, and 24 MB of L3 cache, sits in the 86th percentile.

For users prioritizing multi-threaded rendering, data compression, encryption, or physics simulation, the Ultra 7's leads of 35.8% to 75.2% across those workloads make it the only rational choice from this data. The 20-core Arrow Lake part nearly doubles the i5's scores in Cinebench R15 and R20 multicore tests. PassMark multithread and floating point results show similar doubling behavior.

The single exception is Cinebench R23 single-core, where the i5-14490F leads by 60.7%. This result is anomalous relative to the other single-core tests in the database. The R15 and R20 single-core tests both favor the Ultra 7 by 53.8%, and PassMark single-thread favors the Ultra 7 by 21.4%. Users whose workloads depend heavily on Cinebench R23 single-threaded performance would find the i5-14490F faster, but this appears to be workload-specific rather than a general single-core superiority.

The i5-14490F also has the advantage of a 65 TDP, substantially lower than the Ultra 7's 125 TDP. The i5 supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the Ultra 7 is DDR5-only. The i5 uses the Intel Socket 1700 platform, whereas the Ultra 7 requires Intel Socket 1851. These platform differences matter for system builders, though the benchmark data cannot quantify their practical impact.

The Ultra 7's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-14700KF, which scores 1% lower on average. This places the Ultra 7 just above a previous-generation high-end Core i7 part. The i5-14490F's nearest rival is the i5-13600KF, which scores 0.1% higher. The i5-14490F effectively performs at parity with its direct predecessor, while the Ultra 7 represents a clear generational step above its own comparable tier.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more head-to-head benchmark tests?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K wins 16 of 17 head-to-head tests. The Intel Core i5-14490F wins exactly one test, Cinebench R23 single-core.

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

A: The largest gap is in PassMark find prime numbers, where the Core Ultra 7 265K scores 491 versus 122 for the Core i5-14490F, a 75.2% deficit for the i5.

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

A: Results are mixed. The Core Ultra 7 265K leads in Cinebench R15 single-core (708 versus 327, 53.8%), Cinebench R20 single-core (2953 versus 1363, 53.8%), and PassMark single-thread (4928 versus 3873, 21.4%). The Core i5-14490F leads in Cinebench R23 single-core (3247 versus 2020, 60.7%).

Q: What are the overall average benchmark scores?

A: The Core Ultra 7 265K has an average benchmark score of 70879, placing it in the 94th percentile. The Core i5-14490F has an average benchmark score of 38149, placing it in the 86th percentile.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Core Ultra 7 265K has 20 cores and 20 threads. The Core i5-14490F has 10 cores and 16 threads.

Q: How does the Core Ultra 7 265K compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Ultra 7 scores 0.2% lower than the Intel Xeon 6511P, 0.7% lower than the Intel Xeon Platinum 8270, 1% higher than the Intel Core i7-14700KF, and 1.3% higher than the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every core specification. The Core Ultra 7 265K uses 20 cores and 20 threads, while the Core i5-14490F uses 10 cores and 16 threads. Base clocks differ substantially: the Ultra 7 runs at 3.90 GHz, the i5 at 2.50 GHz. Boost clocks also differ: 5.50 GHz for the Ultra 7 versus 5.00 GHz for the i5. The TDP rating is 125 for the Ultra 7 and 65 for the i5.

Socket compatibility is not shared. The Ultra 7 uses Intel Socket 1851, the i5 uses Intel Socket 1700. The Ultra 7 has an unlocked multiplier; the i5 does not. Memory support differs: the Ultra 7 supports only DDR5, while the i5 supports both DDR4 and DDR5. The Ultra 7 supports ECC memory, the i5 does not. The Ultra 7 includes integrated graphics (Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU), while the i5 has no integrated graphics. PCIe lane counts also differ: the Ultra 7 provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes, the i5 provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes.

Cache configurations are distinct. The Ultra 7 has 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3. The i5 has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. The Ultra 7 lists a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s; the i5 lists no bandwidth figure.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split is generational. The Core Ultra 7 265K uses the Arrow Lake architecture, codenamed Arrow Lake-S, built on a 3 nm process by TSMC. The Core i5-14490F uses Raptor Lake, codenamed Raptor Lake-R, built on a 10 nm process by Intel. The Ultra 7 belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2 generation, while the i5 belongs to the Core 14th Gen Raptor Lake Refresh.

Transistor counts and die sizes reflect the process difference. The Ultra 7 carries 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. The i5 lists no transistor count but has a 215 mm² die. The Ultra 7's smaller process node enables a higher transistor density on a physically larger die.

The cache hierarchy also reflects architectural evolution. The Ultra 7 nearly doubles L1 per core (192 KB versus 80 KB) and more than doubles L2 per core (3 MB versus 1.25 MB). Shared L3 grows from 24 MB to 30 MB. The Ultra 7's 20-core, 20-thread layout indicates a design without Hyper-Threading, while the i5's 10-core, 16-thread layout uses Hyper-Threading on some cores.

Release timing differs by roughly ten months. The i5-14490F carries a release date in late December 2023, while the Ultra 7 launched in late October 2024. The production status for both is Active, and both target the desktop market segment. The Ultra 7 lists a launch MSRP of $394, while the i5 has no recorded launch MSRP.