Intel Core i5-14490F vs Intel Core Ultra 9 386H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data records 17 direct comparisons between the Intel Core i5-14490F and the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H. The Ultra 9 386H wins 13 of those matchups, while the i5-14490F takes 4. The overall average benchmark score tells a similar story: the Ultra 9 386H posts 43,210 against 38,149 for the i5-14490F, a gap that places the Ultra 9 at the 88th percentile of all CPUs compared to the i5's 86th.

The largest single victory for the Ultra 9 386H comes in PassMark's find prime numbers test, where it scores 341 against 122, a 64.2% advantage. This is not an isolated anomaly. The Ultra 9 also dominates floating point math with a score of 108,527 versus 66,558, a 38.7% lead, and data encryption with 27,150 against 18,225, a 32.9% margin. Extended instructions favor the Ultra 9 by 25.4% (29,138 versus 21,731), and physics simulation shows a 30.9% gap (3,028 versus 2,093). These results indicate that the Ultra 9's wider core configuration translates into substantial throughput advantages in compute-heavy workloads.

Multi-core Cinebench results are split between the two processors. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Ultra 9 386H scores 3,223 versus 2,318, a 28.1% lead. In Cinebench R20 multicore, the Ultra 9 extends that lead to 24.6% (12,820 versus 9,660). However, in Cinebench R23 multicore, the i5-14490F reverses the trend with a score of 23,000 against 20,547, an 11.9% advantage. The different Cinebench versions record different workload behaviors, and the R23 result suggests that the i5-14490F's higher sustained boost capability can overcome the Ultra 9's core-count advantage under that specific rendering load.

Single-core performance is where the i5-14490F makes its strongest case. In Cinebench R15 singlecore, the i5 scores 327 versus 303.5, a 7.7% lead. In Cinebench R23 singlecore, the margin grows to 56.7% (3,247 versus 2,071.5). That is the largest win for the i5 in any test. PassMark single thread also favors the Ultra 9 by 8.2% (4,218 versus 3,873), so the single-core picture is mixed across suites, but the Cinebench R23 result is decisive enough to signal a real advantage for the i5 in lightly threaded rendering tasks.

Other PassMark tests show the Ultra 9 ahead but by smaller margins. Multithread performance is 19% higher (35,399 versus 28,662), random string sorting is 15.5% higher (42,135 versus 35,608), and data compression is 3.5% higher (352,365 versus 340,026). The only PassMark test the i5 wins is integer math, and barely: 87,844 versus 87,284, a 0.6% edge. The i5's four wins across the full benchmark set are Cinebench R15 singlecore, Cinebench R23 multicore, Cinebench R23 singlecore, and PassMark integer math.

Looking at the nearest rivals in the database provides context. The i5-14490F's average score of 38,149 sits within 0.3% of the Intel Core Ultra 5 245T (38,194), the Intel Core i5-13600KF (38,103), and the AMD Ryzen 7 250 (38,221). The Ultra 9 386H's average of 43,210 places it near the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 (43,326, 0.3% higher) and the AMD Ryzen AI 9 465 (43,431, 0.5% higher), while it leads the Intel Core i9-12900 by 0.7% and the i9-12900KF by 0.9%.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher multi-core performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H wins Cinebench R15 multicore (3,223 versus 2,318, 28.1% ahead) and Cinebench R20 multicore (12,820 versus 9,660, 24.6% ahead), but the Intel Core i5-14490F wins Cinebench R23 multicore (23,000 versus 20,547, 11.9% ahead). PassMark multithread favors the Ultra 9 at 35,399 versus 28,662.

Q: How large is the single-core performance gap?

A: The i5-14490F leads Cinebench R15 singlecore by 7.7% (327 versus 303.5) and Cinebench R23 singlecore by 56.7% (3,247 versus 2,071.5). The Ultra 9 386H leads PassMark single thread by 8.2% (4,218 versus 3,873).

Q: Which processor ranks higher among all CPUs in the database?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H sits at the 88th percentile, while the Intel Core i5-14490F sits at the 86th percentile. The Ultra 9 also has a higher average benchmark score: 43,210 versus 38,149.

Q: What are the closest competing processors for each model?

A: For the i5-14490F, the nearest rivals are the Intel Core Ultra 5 245T (0.1% lower score), the Intel Core i5-13600KF (0.1% higher), and the AMD Ryzen 7 250 (0.2% lower). For the Ultra 9 386H, the nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 (0.3% higher), the AMD Ryzen AI 9 465 (0.5% higher), and the Intel Core i9-12900 (0.7% lower).

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H has 16 cores and 16 threads. The Intel Core i5-14490F has 10 cores and 16 threads. Both have 16 threads, but the Ultra 9 has 6 more physical cores.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory types?

A: No. The i5-14490F supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the Ultra 9 386H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Neither supports ECC memory.

The Verdict

The recorded data separates these two processors into distinct roles. The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H is the stronger all-around performer, winning 13 of 17 head-to-head benchmarks and posting a higher average score (43,210 versus 38,149). Its advantages in floating point math, encryption, extended instructions, physics, and multithread throughput make it the pick for workloads that scale across many cores. The 16-core configuration delivers a 28.1% lead in Cinebench R15 multicore and a 24.6% lead in Cinebench R20 multicore, plus a 19% lead in PassMark multithread.

The Intel Core i5-14490F is the better choice for single-threaded rendering tasks. Its Cinebench R23 singlecore score of 3,247 is 56.7% above the Ultra 9's 2,071.5, and it also wins Cinebench R23 multicore by 11.9%. The i5's 5.00 GHz boost clock versus the Ultra 9's 4.90 GHz likely explains part of that edge, along with the different architecture generations. For users running applications that resemble Cinebench R23's workload profile, the i5 delivers a clear advantage.

The Ultra 9 386H also carries integrated Intel Xe3 Graphics, while the i5-14490F has no integrated graphics (N/A). That makes the Ultra 9 usable in systems without a discrete GPU, a consideration the i5 cannot offer. The Ultra 9's mobile segment designation, 25 W TDP, and BGA 2540 socket target laptops, while the i5's 65 W TDP and Socket 1700 target desktops. The data shows the Ultra 9 as the overall performance winner, with the i5-14490F as the specialist for single-core and R23-style multi-core rendering.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every fundamental specification. The Intel Core i5-14490F uses 10 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H uses 16 cores and 16 threads. The i5 has a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz; the Ultra 9 has a base clock of 2.10 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz. The i5 carries a 65 W TDP, the Ultra 9 a 25 W TDP.

Socket and market segment split them completely. The i5-14490F uses Intel Socket 1700 and is a desktop part. The Ultra 9 386H uses Intel BGA 2540 and is a mobile part. The i5 supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration. The Ultra 9 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X in dual-channel, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. Neither supports ECC memory.

PCIe lanes differ as well: the i5 provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Ultra 9 provides Gen 5 with 12 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics is N/A on the i5, while the Ultra 9 includes Intel Xe3 Graphics. The i5's part number is SRN35, the Ultra 9's is SA4R5Q9EH. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two is large. The Intel Core i5-14490F is built on Raptor Lake, specifically the Raptor Lake-R codename, and belongs to the Core 14th Gen series as a Core i5 (Raptor Lake Refresh) generation part. It uses a 10 nm process node fabricated by Intel, with a die size of 215 mm². Its cache layout includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache.

The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H belongs to the Core Ultra Series 3 and uses the Panther Lake architecture with the Panther Lake codename. It is an Ultra 9 (Panther Lake-H) generation part. The process node is 3 nm, also fabricated by Intel, and no die size is recorded. Its cache layout is substantially different: 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The L1 per core is 2.4 times larger on the Ultra 9, and the L2 per core is exactly double, but the i5 has 6 MB more shared L3 cache.

The release dates differ by about two years. The i5-14490F was released at the end of 2023, while the Ultra 9 386H was released at the start of 2026. Both are listed as Active in production status. The architectural shift from Raptor Lake to Panther Lake brings a 7 nm process shrink (from 10 nm to 3 nm), a change from 10 cores to 16 cores, and a move from a desktop socket to a mobile BGA package. The Ultra 9's 16 cores with 16 threads indicates no hyperthreading, whereas the i5's 10 cores with 16 threads indicates hyperthreading on some cores. The i5's higher boost clock (5.00 GHz versus 4.90 GHz) and larger L3 cache (24 MB versus 18 MB) are its architectural advantages, while the Ultra 9 counters with more cores, more L1 and L2 per core, a smaller process node, and a much lower TDP of 25 W.