Intel Core i5-14501E vs Intel Core Ultra X7 358H Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i5-14501E and the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H occupy distinctly different market segments, and the benchmark data reflects that split. The i5-14501E is a desktop part designed for sustained workloads with a traditional core layout, while the Ultra X7 358H is a mobile processor built around a much newer manufacturing process and a wider core configuration. The data shows that the Ultra X7 358H dominates in almost every measurable workload category, while the i5-14501E has no recorded benchmark scores in the database to challenge it. This makes the comparison one-sided in favor of the Ultra X7, but the reasons behind that outcome are rooted in architectural choices rather than simple clock speed differences.

The Ultra X7 358H wins every single benchmark category where data exists, which includes multi-core rendering, single-core performance, and a full suite of PassMark tests for encryption, compression, physics, and math operations. Its 87th percentile ranking among all CPUs versus the i5-14501E's 50th percentile is a clear indicator of overall standing. The i5-14501E, despite having a higher boost clock of 5.20 GHz compared to the Ultra X7's 4.80 GHz, cannot compensate for the Ultra X7's superior core count and more efficient architecture. For workloads that scale across many threads, the Ultra X7 is the clear winner. For tasks that rely on raw single-thread speed, the i5-14501E's higher clock might suggest an advantage, but without recorded scores for the i5, the database cannot confirm this.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different generations and use entirely different design philosophies. The i5-14501E is built on Intel's Raptor Lake architecture, specifically the Raptor Lake-R refresh, using a 10 nm process node. It features 6 cores and 12 threads, relying on Hyper-Threading to double its thread count. The Ultra X7 358H uses the Panther Lake architecture, specifically Panther Lake-H, on a much more advanced 3 nm process node. It offers 16 cores and 16 threads, meaning it does not use Hyper-Threading but instead relies on a larger number of physical cores to achieve its thread count. This is a fundamental difference: the i5-14501E has fewer physical cores but more threads per core, while the Ultra X7 has more physical cores but one thread per core.

Cache hierarchies also differ substantially. The i5-14501E has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ultra X7 has 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ultra X7's larger per-core cache sizes suggest it can keep more data closer to the execution units, which is typical for a newer architecture. The i5-14501E has more total L3 cache (24 MB versus 18 MB), which can help with certain shared-data workloads. The memory support also diverges: the i5-14501E supports DDR4 and DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration, while the Ultra X7 supports LPDDR5X with a recorded memory bandwidth of 153.6 GB/s. The i5-14501E supports ECC memory, while the Ultra X7 does not. PCIe lanes also differ, with the i5-14501E offering Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only) and the Ultra X7 offering Gen 5 with only 4 lanes (CPU only).

The integrated graphics are another major split. The i5-14501E uses UHD Graphics 770, a desktop-class iGPU, while the Ultra X7 uses Arc B390, which is a significantly more capable mobile graphics solution. The Ultra X7's socket is Intel BGA 2540, meaning it is soldered to the motherboard, while the i5-14501E uses Intel Socket 1700, a standard desktop socket. The TDP figures reflect their intended use cases: the i5-14501E has a 65 W TDP, while the Ultra X7 has a 25 W TDP, making the Ultra X7 far more power-efficient per watt.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark entries between these two processors, and the i5-14501E has no recorded benchmark scores at all. The Ultra X7 358H, however, has a comprehensive set of scores that paint a detailed picture of its capabilities. In Cinebench R15, it scores 3027 in multi-core and 301.5 in single-core. In Cinebench R20, it scores 12011 in multi-core and 1695 in single-core. In Cinebench R23, it scores 18747 in multi-core and 2080 in single-core. These numbers indicate strong scaling from R15 to R23, with multi-core scores increasing by over six times from R15 to R23, while single-core scores increase by nearly seven times.

PassMark results for the Ultra X7 show a broad range of strengths. It scores 332508 in data compression, 26046 in data encryption, 27274 in extended instructions, 337 in find prime numbers, 103842 in floating point math, 83147 in integer math, 33802 in multithread, 3021 in physics, 40357 in random string sorting, and 4124 in single-thread. The multithread score of 33802 is particularly notable, as it is nearly 10 times the single-thread score, indicating excellent parallel scaling. The physics score of 3021 is relatively low compared to other categories, which may reflect the architecture's behavior under specific simulation workloads. The data compression score of 332508 is exceptionally high, suggesting the Ultra X7 handles compression algorithms very well, likely due to its many cores and large per-core cache.

Since the i5-14501E has no scores, the database cannot provide a direct comparison. The only meaningful way to interpret this is that the Ultra X7's recorded performance stands on its own, and the i5-14501E's absence from the benchmark suite means it has not been validated in these specific tests. The nearest rivals for the Ultra X7, which include the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 with an average score of 41208 and a delta of -0.6%, the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H with an average score of 41215 and a delta of -0.6%, the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435G with an average score of 40718 and a delta of 0.6%, and the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H with an average score of 41263 and a delta of -0.7%, all fall within a narrow band around 41,000. The Ultra X7's average benchmark score is 40967, placing it right in the middle of this group.

FAQ

Q: Does the Intel Core i5-14501E have any benchmark scores in the database?

A: No, the database lists no benchmarks for the i5-14501E. Its average benchmark score is 0, and it has no nearest rivals recorded.

Q: How does the Ultra X7 358H's core count compare to the i5-14501E?

A: The Ultra X7 358H has 16 cores and 16 threads, while the i5-14501E has 6 cores and 12 threads. The Ultra X7 has more physical cores but no Hyper-Threading, while the i5 has fewer cores but uses Hyper-Threading to reach 12 threads.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The i5-14501E has a boost clock of 5.20 GHz, which is higher than the Ultra X7 358H's boost clock of 4.80 GHz.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of the Ultra X7 358H?

A: The Ultra X7 358H supports LPDDR5X memory with a recorded bandwidth of 153.6 GB/s. The i5-14501E supports DDR4 and DDR5 but has no bandwidth figure recorded in the database.

Q: Does the i5-14501E support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the i5-14501E supports ECC memory. The Ultra X7 358H does not support ECC memory.

Q: What is the process node difference between the two processors?

A: The i5-14501E is built on a 10 nm process node, while the Ultra X7 358H is built on a 3 nm process node. Both are manufactured by Intel.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every specification field. The i5-14501E has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Ultra X7 358H has 16 cores and 16 threads. Base clocks are 3.30 GHz for the i5 and 1.90 GHz for the Ultra X7. Boost clocks are 5.20 GHz and 4.80 GHz, respectively. The TDP is 65 W for the i5 and 25 W for the Ultra X7. The i5 uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Ultra X7 uses Intel BGA 2540. The architecture is Raptor Lake for the i5, while the Ultra X7 has no architecture listed but uses the Panther Lake codename. The process node is 10 nm for the i5 and 3 nm for the Ultra X7. The die size is 215 mm² for the i5, while the Ultra X7 has no die size recorded.

Cache configurations differ significantly: the i5 has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. The Ultra X7 has 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. Memory support is DDR4 and DDR5 for the i5, while the Ultra X7 uses LPDDR5X with a recorded bandwidth of 153.6 GB/s. The i5 supports ECC memory, the Ultra X7 does not. PCIe lanes are Gen 5 with 16 lanes for the i5 and Gen 5 with 4 lanes for the Ultra X7. Integrated graphics are UHD Graphics 770 for the i5 and Arc B390 for the Ultra X7. The market segment is Desktop for the i5 and Mobile for the Ultra X7. The release dates are 2024-06-30 for the i5 and 2026-01-04 for the Ultra X7. Neither processor has a recorded launch MSRP.

The Verdict

The data clearly favors the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H in terms of recorded performance. It has a 87th percentile ranking, an average benchmark score of 40967, and a full suite of Cinebench and PassMark results that demonstrate strong multi-core and single-core capabilities. Its nearest rivals all score within a narrow range around 41,000, confirming that it sits in a competitive tier. The i5-14501E, by contrast, has no benchmark scores and a 50th percentile ranking, which places it in the middle of the overall CPU distribution but provides no evidence of actual performance.

For users who need a mobile processor with high thread counts and strong integrated graphics, the Ultra X7 358H is the only choice between these two, given its mobile market segment and 25 W TDP. Its 16 cores and 16 threads, combined with 153.6 GB/s of memory bandwidth, make it suitable for parallel workloads that benefit from many physical cores. The i5-14501E, with its 6 cores and 12 threads, 65 W TDP, and desktop socket, is designed for traditional desktop systems. Its higher boost clock of 5.20 GHz could provide an advantage in lightly threaded tasks, but the absence of recorded scores means the database cannot validate that claim.

The verdict from the data is straightforward: the Ultra X7 358H is the superior performer in every measured category, while the i5-14501E remains unverified. Users prioritizing raw multi-core performance, power efficiency, and a newer process node should choose the Ultra X7. Users who require a desktop socket, ECC memory support, and a higher base clock for legacy compatibility might consider the i5-14501E, but they should note that its performance profile is not backed by any recorded measurements. The database's measurements speak only for the Ultra X7, and they speak favorably.