Intel Core i5-14490F vs Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a clear hierarchy between these two processors, with the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus winning 16 of the 17 recorded comparisons. The sheer scale of the victory in multi-threaded workloads is striking. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Ultra 9 scores 5981 against 2318 for the i5-14490F, a margin of 61.2 percent. The R20 multicore result shows a similar pattern: 21198 versus 9660, a 54.4 percent advantage. Even in R23 multicore, where the i5-14490F posts a respectable 23000, the Ultra 9 pulls ahead with 39684, a 42 percent lead.

The PassMark suite reinforces this multi-threaded dominance. Data compression shows the Ultra 9 at 658724 against 340026, a 48.4 percent gap. Floating point math delivers 201773 versus 66558, a 67 percent difference. Integer math follows at 164839 versus 87844, a 46.7 percent edge. The multithread aggregate score of 59439 for the Ultra 9 compared to 28662 for the i5-14490F represents a 51.8 percent advantage. Find prime numbers, which often reflects raw integer throughput, shows the Ultra 9 at 519 versus 122, the largest proportional gap in the entire dataset at 76.5 percent.

Single-thread performance tells a more nuanced story. In Cinebench R15 singlecore, the Ultra 9 wins narrowly with 340 against 327, a 3.8 percent margin. PassMark single-thread also favors the Ultra 9 at 4951 versus 3873, a 21.8 percent lead. However, Cinebench R23 singlecore is the one test where the i5-14490F emerges victorious. It scores 3247 against 2356 for the Ultra 9, a 37.8 percent advantage. This is the only recorded win for the i5-14490F across all head-to-head benchmarks, and it raises an interesting question about workload-specific behavior. The R20 singlecore result shows the Ultra 9 ahead at 2992 versus 1363, a 54.4 percent margin, which complicates the picture further.

The average benchmark score in the database places the Ultra 9 at 79574, roughly double the 38149 recorded for the i5-14490F. This aligns with the percentile rankings: the Ultra 9 sits at the 95th percentile of all CPUs, while the i5-14490F sits at the 86th.

Where Each One Wins

The data splits clearly along workload boundaries. The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus dominates every heavily parallel task. Rendering, as measured by Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multicore tests, shows consistent leads ranging from 42 to 61.2 percent. Compression, encryption, extended instruction workloads, and physics simulations all favor the Ultra 9 by wide margins. The passmark_multithread score of 59439 confirms that the Ultra 9 is built for sustained multi-core throughput.

The i5-14490F finds its single bright spot in Cinebench R23 singlecore, where its 3247 score beats the Ultra 9's 2356 by 37.8 percent. This suggests that in certain lightly threaded scenarios, particularly those that resemble the R23 single-core workload, the i5-14490F can outperform its larger rival. The R15 singlecore result is close enough to call effectively a tie, with the Ultra 9 ahead by only 3.8 percent.

For tasks that rely on data encryption, extended instruction sets, or random string sorting, the Ultra 9 is the clear choice. The encryption score of 50008 versus 18225 is a 63.6 percent advantage. Extended instructions show 51290 versus 21731, a 57.6 percent lead. Random string sorting comes in at 80327 versus 35608, a 55.7 percent edge.

The i5-14490F does not win any PassMark subtest. Its only victory is the single Cinebench R23 singlecore result. This makes the decision straightforward for most use cases, but the R23 singlecore anomaly suggests that not every single-threaded workload will favor the Ultra 9.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design generations and manufacturing approaches. The Intel Core i5-14490F uses the Raptor Lake architecture, specifically the Raptor Lake-R refresh, built on Intel's 10 nm process. It features 10 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The thermal design power is 65 watts. Its cache layout includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. The die size is 215 mm². Memory support covers DDR4 and DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration. PCIe connectivity is Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU. It has no integrated graphics and does not support ECC memory. The socket is Intel Socket 1700, and the multiplier is locked.

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus is a different beast entirely. It uses the Arrow Lake-HX Refresh codename under the Core Ultra Series 2 umbrella, fabricated on a 3 nm process by TSMC. The transistor count is 17,800 million on a 243 mm² die. It packs 24 cores and 24 threads, with a base clock of 2.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz. The thermal design power is lower at 55 watts, despite the larger core count. Cache sizes are substantially larger: 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3. Memory support is DDR5 only, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. ECC memory is supported. PCIe connectivity is Gen 5 with 20 lanes. It includes integrated graphics in the form of Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU. The socket is Intel BGA 2114, indicating a mobile form factor, and the multiplier is unlocked.

The process node difference is significant. The 3 nm TSMC process gives the Ultra 9 a density advantage that likely contributes to its higher core count within a 243 mm² die, compared to the 215 mm² die of the i5-14490F on Intel's 10 nm process. The lack of hyper-threading on the Ultra 9, evidenced by 24 threads for 24 cores, is notable. The i5-14490F has 10 cores and 16 threads, meaning it uses hyper-threading to reach that thread count.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus as the stronger processor for the vast majority of workloads. Its average benchmark score of 79574 places it in the 95th percentile of all CPUs, and its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i9-14900KF at a 0.3 percent delta and the Intel Core i9-14900K at 0.6 percent. The i5-14490F, with an average score of 38149, sits at the 86th percentile and trades blows with the Intel Core i5-13600KF at a 0.1 percent delta.

For multi-threaded rendering, data compression, encryption, and physics, the Ultra 9 delivers between 38.2 and 76.5 percent higher scores. The i5-14490F offers one specific advantage in Cinebench R23 singlecore, where it beats the Ultra 9 by 37.8 percent. Any workload that resembles that benchmark's characteristics could see the i5-14490F come out ahead, but the broader single-thread picture favors the Ultra 9, as shown by its 21.8 percent lead in PassMark single-thread and its 54.4 percent lead in R20 singlecore.

The i5-14490F remains a capable desktop processor with a 65 watt TDP and a locked multiplier. The Ultra 9, despite its mobile BGA socket and lower 55 watt TDP, outperforms it across nearly every measured metric. The Ultra 9 also adds ECC memory support, integrated graphics, and more PCIe lanes. The i5-14490F supports both DDR4 and DDR5, which could matter for platform flexibility.

The data does not support choosing the i5-14490F for general or multi-threaded work. Its single Cinebench R23 singlecore victory is real but narrow in scope. For users whose workloads align with that specific benchmark pattern, the i5-14490F has a demonstrable edge. For everything else in the recorded data, the Ultra 9 is ahead, often by wide margins.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus records an average benchmark score of 79574, while the Intel Core i5-14490F records 38149.

Q: Does the Intel Core i5-14490F win any benchmark against the Ultra 9?

A: Yes, the i5-14490F wins Cinebench R23 singlecore with a score of 3247 against 2356 for the Ultra 9, a 37.8 percent advantage.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The i5-14490F has 10 cores and 16 threads. The Ultra 9 290HX Plus has 24 cores and 24 threads.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus supports ECC memory. The Intel Core i5-14490F does not.

Q: What is the largest performance gap in the head-to-head results?

A: The largest gap is in PassMark find prime numbers, where the Ultra 9 scores 519 against 122 for the i5-14490F, a 76.5 percent difference.

Q: Do both processors use the same manufacturing process?

A: No. The i5-14490F uses Intel's 10 nm process. The Ultra 9 290HX Plus uses a 3 nm process from TSMC.

Specification Differences

| Field | Intel Core i5-14490F | Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus |

|-------|----------------------|------------------------------|

| Cores | 10 | 24 |

| Threads | 16 | 24 |

| Base Clock | 2.50 GHz | 2.70 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.00 GHz | 5.50 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 55 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel BGA 2114 |

| Codename | Raptor Lake-R | Arrow Lake-HX Refresh |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Transistors | Not specified | 17,800 million |

| Die Size | 215 mm² | 243 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 80 KB per core | 192 KB per core |

| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB per core | 3 MB per core |

| L3 Cache | 24 MB shared | 36 MB shared |

| Memory Support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR5 |

| Memory Bandwidth | Not specified | 102.4 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 20 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | N/A | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | Yes |

| Release Date | 2023-12-31 | 2026-03-16 |

| Part Number | SRN35 | SADSS |

| Percentile vs All CPUs | 86 | 95 |