Intel Core i5-14490F vs Intel Core Ultra 7 366H Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits these two processors along predictable lines. The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H claims 15 of 17 head-to-head wins, while the Intel Core i5-14490F takes only 2. That dominance is not uniform, however, and the specific workloads where each chip prevails tell a clear story about their design priorities.

The Core Ultra 7 366H wins every Cinebench test by a margin of roughly 19%. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 28477 against 23000 for the i5-14490F, a 19.2% advantage. Single-core R23 shows the same gap: 4020 versus 3247, a 19.2% delta. The pattern repeats across R15 and R20, with the Ultra 7 leading by 19.2% to 19.3% in every render test. This consistency indicates a fundamental per-clock and throughput advantage, not a workload-specific quirk.

The Ultra 7 also dominates in several Passmark sub-tests. Floating point math shows a 35.8% lead, scoring 103615 versus 66558. Prime number finding is even more lopsided: 326 versus 122, a 62.6% gap. Data encryption favors the Ultra 7 by 29.5% (25845 against 18225), and physics simulation shows a 27.3% edge (2880 versus 2093). Extended instructions, multithread, random string sorting, and single-thread tests all go to the Ultra 7 with deltas ranging from 4.2% to 19.2%.

The i5-14490F wins two Passmark workloads. Data compression favors the desktop chip by 3.8%, scoring 340026 against 327455. Integer math also goes its way, with 87844 versus 83695, a 5% margin. These wins suggest the i5-14490F retains an edge in specific integer-heavy, memory-latency-sensitive tasks, despite losing the broader multithreaded contest.

The overall benchmark averages reflect this split. The Core Ultra 7 366H sits at an average benchmark score of 41263, while the i5-14490F averages 38149. The Ultra 7 lands in the 87th percentile of all CPUs, one point above the i5-14490F's 86th percentile. The nearest rival data for the i5-14490F shows it trading blows with the Core Ultra 5 245T (38194, delta -0.1%) and the Core i5-13600KF (38103, delta 0.1%). The Ultra 7 366H sits close to the Core Ultra 7 356H (41215, delta 0.1%) and the AMD Ryzen 9 5900X (41376, delta -0.3%), placing it in strong company for a mobile processor.

Architecture Differences

The two chips come from different architectural generations and target different market segments. The i5-14490F is a Raptor Lake-R desktop part built on Intel's 10 nm process, while the Ultra 7 366H is a Panther Lake-H mobile chip fabricated on a 3 nm node. Both come from Intel's own fabs, but the process gap is substantial.

Core counts differ significantly. The i5-14490F uses 10 cores and 16 threads, while the Ultra 7 366H packs 16 cores and 16 threads. This means the Ultra 7 has a 1:1 core-to-thread ratio, whereas the i5-14490F relies on hyperthreading to reach 16 threads from 10 physical cores. The Ultra 7 achieves higher multi-core throughput with more physical cores, while the i5-14490F uses simultaneous multithreading to fill its thread count.

Cache hierarchies are structured differently. The i5-14490F provides 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. The Ultra 7 offers 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. The Ultra 7 has more per-core cache at every level, but the i5-14490F has more total L3. The larger L3 on the desktop part likely helps its data compression and integer math wins.

Clock speeds favor the desktop chip on paper. The i5-14490F has a 2.50 GHz base clock and a 5.00 GHz boost clock. The Ultra 7 runs at 2.00 GHz base and 4.80 GHz boost. Despite lower clocks, the Ultra 7 wins most benchmarks, indicating superior instructions per clock from the newer Panther Lake architecture.

Thermal design power differs sharply. The i5-14490F is rated at 65 W, while the Ultra 7 draws 25 W. This makes the Ultra 7 a far more efficient part, delivering higher performance at lower power, a critical distinction for mobile use. The i5-14490F uses Socket 1700, a desktop platform, while the Ultra 7 is soldered to BGA 2540 for laptops.

Memory support overlaps on DDR5 but diverges elsewhere. The i5-14490F supports DDR4 and DDR5, while the Ultra 7 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. The Ultra 7 has a rated memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s; no bandwidth figure is recorded for the i5-14490F. Both use dual-channel memory buses. Neither supports ECC.

PCIe lanes differ. The i5-14490F provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the Ultra 7 offers Gen 5 with 12 lanes. The Ultra 7 includes integrated Intel Xe3 Graphics, while the i5-14490F has no integrated graphics at all. The i5-14490F is a desktop part with a locked multiplier, and the Ultra 7 is also multiplier-locked.

Release dates place them far apart. The i5-14490F launched at the end of 2023, while the Ultra 7 366H appears dated early 2026. Both are currently listed as active production parts.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H has 16 cores, while the Intel Core i5-14490F has 10 cores. Both chips support 16 threads.

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

A: The Ultra 7 366H leads in single-core Cinebench R23 with a score of 4020 against 3247 for the i5-14490F, a 19.2% advantage. Passmark single-thread also favors the Ultra 7 at 4043 versus 3873, a 4.2% lead.

Q: What is the difference in power consumption?

A: The i5-14490F has a thermal design power of 65 W, while the Ultra 7 366H is rated at 25 W. The Ultra 7 delivers higher benchmark scores at less than half the power draw.

Q: Which chip wins in data compression workloads?

A: The i5-14490F wins Passmark data compression with a score of 340026, beating the Ultra 7's 327455 by 3.8%. This is one of only two benchmark wins for the desktop chip.

Q: Does the Ultra 7 have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H includes Intel Xe3 Graphics. The Intel Core i5-14490F has no integrated graphics, listed as N/A.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The i5-14490F supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory. The Ultra 7 366H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Both use dual-channel memory buses.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification category. The i5-14490F belongs to the Core 14th Gen series with a Raptor Lake architecture, while the Ultra 7 366H is from the Core Ultra Series 3 with Panther Lake architecture. The i5-14490F uses a 10 nm process node; the Ultra 7 uses 3 nm. Both are built by Intel.

Core and thread counts differ: 10 cores and 16 threads for the i5-14490F against 16 cores and 16 threads for the Ultra 7. Base clocks are 2.50 GHz versus 2.00 GHz, and boost clocks are 5.00 GHz versus 4.80 GHz, favoring the desktop chip. Thermal design power is 65 W for the i5-14490F and 25 W for the Ultra 7.

Sockets differ completely. The i5-14490F uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Ultra 7 uses Intel BGA 2540. The i5-14490F has a die size of 215 mm²; no die size is recorded for the Ultra 7. Cache configurations diverge: the i5-14490F has 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and 24 MB shared L3, while the Ultra 7 has 192 KB L1 per core, 2.5 MB L2 per core, and 18 MB shared L3.

Memory support differs. The i5-14490F supports DDR4 and DDR5, while the Ultra 7 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. The Ultra 7 has a recorded memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s; none is listed for the i5-14490F. PCIe configurations differ: the i5-14490F has Gen 5 with 16 lanes, while the Ultra 7 has Gen 5 with 12 lanes. Integrated graphics are N/A on the i5-14490F, while the Ultra 7 includes Intel Xe3 Graphics.

Market segments differ, with the i5-14490F aimed at desktop and the Ultra 7 aimed at mobile. Release dates are far apart, with the i5-14490F appearing in late 2023 and the Ultra 7 in early 2026. Part numbers are SRN35 for the i5-14490F and SA4R9Q9EL for the Ultra 7. Neither chip has an unlocked multiplier.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench suite shows a consistent 19% advantage for the Ultra 7 366H across every test. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Ultra 7 scores 2870 against 2318 for the i5-14490F, a delta of 19.2%. Single-core R15 goes 405 to 327, also a 19.3% gap. R20 multi-core shows 11960 versus 9660, and R20 single-core shows 1688 versus 1363, both at 19.2% to 19.3% deltas. R23 multi-core delivers 28477 versus 23000, while R23 single-core delivers 4020 versus 3247. Every Cinebench result lands within a narrow band of 19.2% to 19.3%, indicating that the Ultra 7's architectural advantage scales uniformly across both multi-threaded and single-threaded render workloads.

The Passmark suite reveals more variance. The largest single gap comes in prime number finding, where the Ultra 7 scores 326 against 122, a 62.6% advantage. This test is highly sensitive to per-core efficiency and branch prediction, areas where Panther Lake appears to excel. Floating point math shows a 35.8% lead for the Ultra 7, scoring 103615 versus 66558. Data encryption favors the Ultra 7 by 29.5%, with 25845 against 18225. Physics simulation goes 2880 to 2093, a 27.3% gap. Extended instructions show 26901 versus 21731, a 19.2% delta. Multithread performance lands at 33429 against 28662, a 14.3% gap. Random string sorting gives the Ultra 7 a 10.6% edge, with 39814 versus 35608.

The i5-14490F counters in two areas. Data compression sees the desktop chip score 340026 versus 327455, a 3.8% win. Integer math goes to the i5-14490F at 87844 versus 83695, a 5% margin. These wins indicate that the i5-14490F's larger 24 MB L3 cache and higher clock speeds still matter for certain integer and compression workloads, even though the Ultra 7 wins the overall multithreaded contest by 14.3%.

The single-thread Passmark test shows the smallest overall gap. The Ultra 7 scores 4043 against 3873, a 4.2% edge. This is notably smaller than the Cinebench single-core gap of 19.2%, suggesting that Passmark's single-thread workload does not stress the architectural advantages of Panther Lake as heavily as Cinebench does. The average benchmark scores confirm the overall picture: 41263 for the Ultra 7 against 38149 for the i5-14490F, placing the Ultra 7 one percentile higher in the all-CPU distribution.