Intel Core i5-14490F vs Intel Core Ultra 9 288V Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a clear picture: the Intel Core i5-14490F dominates the Intel Core Ultra 9 288V across the vast majority of tests, winning 14 of the 17 recorded comparisons. The most dramatic gap appears in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the i5-14490F scores 23000 against 10178 for the Ultra 9 288V, a 126% advantage. This is the single largest delta in the entire dataset and indicates a fundamental difference in multi-threaded throughput between the two processors.

The i5-14490F also shows overwhelming strength in integer-heavy workloads. PassMark integer math sees the desktop part score 87844 versus 44019 for the mobile chip, a 99.6% lead. Data compression follows a similar pattern, with the i5-14490F posting 340026 against 186521, a 82.3% margin. These results align with the core and thread configuration differences, as the i5-14490F has 10 cores and 16 threads while the Ultra 9 288V operates with 8 cores and 8 threads.

Cinebench R20 single-core is another notable win for the i5-14490F, where it scores 1363 against 997, a 36.7% gap. The R23 single-core test shows a similar trend, with the i5-14490F reaching 3247 versus 1950, a 66.5% advantage. Even in R15 single-core, the desktop chip leads by 8.5%, scoring 327 against 301.5.

The Ultra 9 288V does secure three victories. PassMark single-thread and singlethread tests (which are the same test recorded twice) show the mobile processor ahead at 4274 versus 3873, a 9.4% lead. The other win comes in PassMark find prime numbers, where the Ultra 9 288V scores 195 against 122, a 37.4% advantage. This suggests the Lunar Lake architecture has strengths in specific algorithmic tasks that benefit from its newer microarchitecture.

Other multi-core benchmarks reinforce the i5-14490F's lead. Cinebench R15 multi-core shows 2318 versus 1583, a 46.4% gap, while R20 multi-core shows 9660 versus 7069, a 36.7% margin. PassMark multithread delivers 28662 versus 19810, a 44.7% lead. The i5-14490F also wins in floating-point math (66558 versus 59536, an 11.8% lead), random string sorting (35608 versus 22622, a 57.4% margin), physics (2093 versus 1637, a 27.9% gap), data encryption (18225 versus 14141, a 28.9% lead), and extended instructions (21731 versus 15613, a 39.2% margin).

The average benchmark scores place the i5-14490F at 38149, which puts it in the 86th percentile of all CPUs tracked. The Ultra 9 288V averages 23219, landing in the 76th percentile. The nearest rivals for the i5-14490F include the Intel Core Ultra 5 245T at 38194 (0.1% difference) and the Intel Core i5-13600KF at 38103 (0.1% difference). The Ultra 9 288V sits near the Intel Core i9-11900F at 23254 (0.2% difference) and the AMD Ryzen 7 5800H at 23277 (0.2% difference).

Where Each One Wins

The i5-14490F wins decisively in almost every workload category recorded. Its advantages are most pronounced in multi-threaded applications, where its 10 cores and 16 threads allow it to process more parallel work. The Cinebench R23 multi-core result, with a 126% lead, confirms that rendering and video encoding workloads will strongly favor this desktop processor. Integer math and data compression results, where it leads by 99.6% and 82.3% respectively, indicate strength in database operations, compilation tasks, and general productivity software.

The i5-14490F also wins in floating-point math, albeit by a smaller margin of 11.8%. This suggests that scientific computing and simulation workloads still favor the desktop part, though the gap is narrower. Data encryption shows a 28.9% lead, making the i5-14490F the better choice for security-related processing. Extended instructions, which often reflect SIMD and AVX workload performance, show a 39.2% advantage for the desktop chip.

The Ultra 9 288V wins only in single-threaded PassMark tests and the prime number finding test. The 9.4% lead in PassMark single-thread indicates that the Lunar Lake architecture has a more efficient single-core design at lower power. The prime number test result, where the Ultra 9 288V leads by 37.4%, suggests that certain integer algorithms that fit within the core's resources execute faster on this newer architecture. However, these are isolated wins against a broad field of losses.

The Ultra 9 288V's 30 TDP, compared to the i5-14490F's 65 TDP, points toward efficiency as its primary design goal. Its 136.5 GB/s memory bandwidth, supported by LPDDR5X memory, gives it a memory bandwidth advantage that does not translate into benchmark victories in this dataset. The integrated Arc 140V graphics provide a feature the i5-14490F lacks, which matters for systems without discrete GPUs, but the CPU benchmark data shows the desktop part is overwhelmingly faster.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i5-14490F has an average benchmark score of 38149, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 288V averages 23219. This places the i5-14490F in the 86th percentile of all CPUs and the Ultra 9 288V in the 76th percentile.

Q: How large is the multi-core performance gap in Cinebench R23?

A: The i5-14490F scores 23000 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, while the Ultra 9 288V scores 10178. This represents a 126% advantage for the i5-14490F, the largest delta across all recorded benchmarks.

Q: In which tests does the Ultra 9 288V outperform the i5-14490F?

A: The Ultra 9 288V wins in PassMark single-thread (4274 versus 3873, a 9.4% lead) and PassMark find prime numbers (195 versus 122, a 37.4% lead). These are the only three wins recorded, with the single-thread test appearing twice in the dataset.

Q: What is the core and thread configuration difference?

A: The i5-14490F has 10 cores and 16 threads. The Ultra 9 288V has 8 cores and 8 threads. The i5-14490F's additional threads allow for better multi-threaded workload distribution.

Q: How do the two processors compare in PassMark integer math?

A: The i5-14490F scores 87844 in PassMark integer math, while the Ultra 9 288V scores 44019. The i5-14490F leads by 99.6%, nearly doubling the Ultra 9 288V's result.

Q: What are the TDP ratings for each processor?

A: The i5-14490F has a TDP of 65, while the Ultra 9 288V has a TDP of 30. The lower TDP of the Ultra 9 288V indicates a design focused on power efficiency rather than raw performance.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several fundamental specifications. The i5-14490F belongs to the Core 14th Gen series with a Raptor Lake architecture, while the Ultra 9 288V is part of Core Ultra Series 2 with Lunar Lake architecture. The i5-14490F is built on a 10 nm process node by Intel, whereas the Ultra 9 288V uses a 3 nm process node manufactured by TSMC.

Clock speeds differ notably. The i5-14490F has a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The Ultra 9 288V runs at a higher base clock of 3.30 GHz but boosts to only 5.10 GHz. Despite the higher base clock, the Ultra 9 288V cannot match the i5-14490F's multi-core performance due to fewer cores and threads.

Socket compatibility is entirely different. The i5-14490F uses Intel Socket 1700, designed for desktop platforms. The Ultra 9 288V uses Intel BGA 2833, a mobile socket that is soldered to the motherboard. This makes the i5-14490F upgradeable in desktop systems while the Ultra 9 288V is fixed in its mobile platform.

Cache hierarchies show architectural differences. The i5-14490F has 80 KB L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ultra 9 288V has 192 KB L1 per core, 2.5 MB L2 per core, but only 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The larger L1 and L2 caches in the Ultra 9 288V do not compensate for the halved L3 cache in multi-core workloads.

Memory support diverges completely. The i5-14490F supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration. The Ultra 9 288V supports only LPDDR5X memory, also dual-channel, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 136.5 GB/s. The i5-14490F has no recorded memory bandwidth figure in the data.

PCIe lanes differ substantially. The i5-14490F provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the Ultra 9 288V provides Gen 5 with only 4 lanes. This gives the desktop processor far more expansion capability for GPUs and NVMe storage.

The i5-14490F has no integrated graphics, while the Ultra 9 288V includes Arc 140V graphics. The market segments reflect this: the i5-14490F is a desktop processor, and the Ultra 9 288V is a mobile processor.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split between these two processors is substantial. The i5-14490F uses Raptor Lake-R, a refresh of the Raptor Lake design, built on Intel's 10 nm process. This is a desktop-oriented architecture with a die size of 215 mm². The Ultra 9 288V uses Lunar Lake, built on TSMC's 3 nm process, representing a newer and denser manufacturing technology.

Core organization differs fundamentally. The i5-14490F has 10 cores and 16 threads, meaning some of its cores support hyper-threading to process two threads each. The Ultra 9 288V has 8 cores and 8 threads, with no hyper-threading support, meaning each core handles exactly one thread. This explains the i5-14490F's dominance in multi-threaded benchmarks.

Cache design reflects the different target markets. The i5-14490F allocates 80 KB L1 and 1.25 MB L2 per core, with 24 MB shared L3. The Ultra 9 288V allocates 192 KB L1 and 2.5 MB L2 per core, showing a larger per-core cache footprint for its 8 cores. However, its shared L3 drops to 12 MB, which limits the total cache available for data sharing across cores.

The memory controller designs differ by platform. The i5-14490F supports both DDR4 and DDR5, offering flexibility for different motherboard configurations. The Ultra 9 288V is restricted to LPDDR5X, which is typically soldered on the motherboard for mobile devices. The recorded memory bandwidth of 136.5 GB/s for the Ultra 9 288V indicates a high-bandwidth design, but the benchmark results do not show a corresponding performance advantage.

The process node difference is significant. Intel's 10 nm process used for the i5-14490F is larger than TSMC's 3 nm process used for the Ultra 9 288V. The smaller node typically enables higher transistor density and better power efficiency, which aligns with the Ultra 9 288V's lower 30 TDP. However, the i5-14490F's 65 TDP allows for higher sustained power delivery, supporting its superior benchmark scores.

Integrated graphics present another architectural divergence. The i5-14490F has no integrated graphics, requiring a discrete GPU for display output. The Ultra 9 288V includes Arc 140V graphics, providing display capabilities in mobile systems without a separate graphics card. This makes the Ultra 9 288V suitable for compact laptops where space and power for discrete GPUs are limited.

The Verdict

The data directs distinct usage scenarios for each processor. The Intel Core i5-14490F is the clear choice for multi-threaded desktop workloads. Its 126% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core, 99.6% lead in integer math, and 82.3% lead in data compression make it suitable for rendering, compilation, and data processing tasks. The 16 threads provide ample parallelism, and the 65 TDP allows sustained operation under load.

The Intel Core Ultra 9 288V serves a different purpose. Its 30 TDP and mobile BGA 2833 socket place it firmly in laptop systems. The 9.4% single-thread lead in PassMark tests shows that its architecture is efficient in lightly threaded scenarios. The 37.4% lead in prime number finding suggests specific algorithmic advantages. The integrated Arc 140V graphics eliminate the need for a discrete GPU in systems where graphics demands are modest.

The percentile rankings support this split. The i5-14490F sits in the 86th percentile of all CPUs, while the Ultra 9 288V sits in the 76th percentile. These positions reflect the overall performance hierarchy, with the desktop processor ranking higher despite the Ultra 9 288V's newer manufacturing process.

Systems integrators building desktop workstations should select the i5-14490F. Its 16 PCIe Gen 5 lanes support multiple expansion cards, and the DDR4/DDR5 memory flexibility accommodates various motherboard options. Laptop manufacturers targeting thin-and-light designs should choose the Ultra 9 288V, leveraging its lower power draw and integrated graphics to reduce thermal and space requirements.

The benchmark record confirms that process node and architectural recency do not guarantee performance superiority. The i5-14490F's older 10 nm Raptor Lake design outperforms the newer 3 nm Lunar Lake in 14 of 17 tests. The Ultra 9 288V's wins are confined to specific single-threaded and algorithmic tasks, making it a specialized choice rather than a general-purpose performance leader.