Intel Core i5-14600 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 356H Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i5-14600 leads with an average benchmark score of 44889, placing it in the 89th percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H scores 41215 and sits in the 87th percentile.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap between the two in the head-to-head tests?

A: The largest difference appears in Cinebench R23 single-core, where the Intel Core i5-14600 scores 4300 versus 2040, a 110.8% advantage for the desktop part.

Q: Does the Core Ultra 7 356H win any benchmark categories?

A: Yes, it wins 5 of the 17 head-to-head tests, including PassMark data encryption (26345 vs 25082), extended instructions (27898 vs 25674), find prime numbers (327 vs 155), floating point math (103128 vs 85759), and physics (2895 vs 2330).

Q: How do the two compare in multi-threaded workloads?

A: The Intel Core i5-14600 leads in Cinebench R23 multi-core with 30464 versus 18395, a 65.6% gap, and in PassMark multithread with 35848 versus 33978, a 5.5% advantage.

Q: What are the core and thread configurations?

A: The Intel Core i5-14600 has 14 cores and 20 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H has 16 cores and 16 threads, meaning the mobile chip has more cores but no hyperthreading.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core i5-14600 boosts to 5.20 GHz, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H reaches 4.70 GHz.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core i5-14600 is built on the Raptor Lake architecture, specifically the Raptor Lake-R refresh, using Intel's 10 nm process. It is a desktop part designed for Intel Socket 1700. The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H uses the Panther Lake architecture on a 3 nm process and is a mobile processor for Intel BGA 2540.

The core counts differ substantially. The i5-14600 provides 14 cores and 20 threads, leveraging hyperthreading to reach that thread count. The Core Ultra 7 356H has 16 cores but only 16 threads, indicating no hyperthreading on that part. The base clocks show a notable split: 2.70 GHz for the desktop chip versus 1.90 GHz for the mobile chip, though the boost clocks are closer at 5.20 GHz and 4.70 GHz.

Cache hierarchies diverge as well. The i5-14600 uses 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 7 356H has 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. The mobile chip's larger per-core L1 and L2 suggest a different optimization focus, while the desktop part has more total L3.

Memory support also differs. The i5-14600 supports both DDR4 and DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration, and it includes ECC memory support. The Core Ultra 7 356H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, also dual-channel, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s, but it does not support ECC memory.

PCIe lane counts vary. The desktop part offers Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the mobile part provides Gen 5 with 12 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics differ as well: the i5-14600 uses UHD Graphics 770, and the Core Ultra 7 356H uses Intel Xe3 Graphics.

The process node difference is significant. The 3 nm Panther Lake process is a major shrink from the 10 nm Raptor Lake, which explains some of the efficiency and feature differences even if raw benchmark scores favor the desktop chip.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core i5-14600 wins 12 of the 17 head-to-head tests, often by substantial margins. The most dramatic victory is in Cinebench R23 single-core, where the desktop chip scores 4300 against the mobile chip's 2040, a 110.8% lead. This is the largest delta in the entire comparison. Cinebench R23 multi-core also strongly favors the i5-14600, with 30464 versus 18395, a 65.6% advantage.

Single-core performance across other tests confirms the trend. Cinebench R15 single-core shows 433 versus 303, a 42.9% lead. Cinebench R20 single-core gives 1806 versus 1715, a 5.3% advantage. PassMark single-thread shows 4167 versus 4072, a 2.3% edge. The desktop part consistently delivers higher per-thread throughput.

Multi-core scaling follows a similar pattern, though less extreme. Cinebench R15 multi-core shows 3070 versus 3055, only a 0.5% lead. Cinebench R20 multi-core gives 12794 versus 12153, a 5.3% advantage. PassMark multithread shows 35848 versus 33978, a 5.5% lead.

In integer math, the i5-14600 dominates with 117078 versus 83111, a 40.9% advantage. Data compression also favors the desktop part, 434620 versus 336177, a 29.3% lead. Random string sorting shows 48043 versus 40990, a 17.2% advantage.

The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H counters with five wins, mostly in specialized workloads. The largest margin for the mobile chip is in find prime numbers, where it scores 327 versus 155, a 52.6% advantage. Floating point math shows 103128 versus 85759, a 16.8% lead. Physics tests give 2895 versus 2330, a 19.5% advantage. Data encryption shows 26345 versus 25082, a 4.8% lead. Extended instructions give 27898 versus 25674, an 8% advantage.

These wins suggest the Panther Lake architecture has particular strengths in certain math and encryption workloads, despite losing the overall average score comparison.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly all core specification fields. The i5-14600 has 14 cores and 20 threads, while the Core Ultra 7 356H has 16 cores and 16 threads. Base clocks are 2.70 GHz versus 1.90 GHz, and boost clocks are 5.20 GHz versus 4.70 GHz.

Thermal design power differs dramatically: 65 W for the desktop part versus 25 W for the mobile part. This reflects their different market segments and cooling requirements. The sockets are incompatible: Intel Socket 1700 for the i5-14600, Intel BGA 2540 for the Core Ultra 7 356H.

Process nodes differ, with 10 nm for Raptor Lake and 3 nm for Panther Lake. Die size is listed as 257 mm² for the i5-14600, while no die size is recorded for the Core Ultra 7 356H.

Cache configurations differ in all levels. L1 is 80 KB per core versus 192 KB per core. L2 is 2 MB per core versus 2.5 MB per core. L3 is 24 MB shared versus 18 MB shared.

Memory support shows the i5-14600 accepting DDR4 and DDR5, while the Core Ultra 7 356H accepts DDR5 and LPDDR5X. ECC memory is supported on the desktop part but not on the mobile part. The mobile chip has a recorded memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s, while no bandwidth figure is listed for the desktop chip.

PCIe lanes differ: 16 lanes for the i5-14600, 12 lanes for the Core Ultra 7 356H, both Gen 5 and CPU-only. Integrated graphics are UHD Graphics 770 versus Intel Xe3 Graphics. Release dates also differ, with the i5-14600 launched earlier and the Core Ultra 7 356H launched later. The i5-14600 has a launch MSRP of $255, while no launch MSRP is recorded for the Core Ultra 7 356H.

The part numbers differ: SRN44 for the i5-14600, SA4RGQ9EU for the Core Ultra 7 356H. Neither processor is multiplier unlocked.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i5-14600 wins in scenarios that demand high single-thread performance and general multi-core throughput. Its 110.8% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core and 42.9% lead in Cinebench R15 single-core make it the stronger choice for applications that rely on per-core speed, such as lightly threaded productivity tasks, legacy software, and certain gaming workloads. Its 40.9% advantage in integer math and 29.3% lead in data compression point to strengths in database operations, file archiving, and general desktop responsiveness.

The i5-14600 also wins the multi-core comparisons across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, with the largest gap at 65.6% in R23. This indicates a clear edge in heavily threaded rendering and encoding tasks that scale well across cores and threads. The PassMark multithread result, a 5.5% lead, reinforces this direction.

The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H wins in specific computational patterns. Its 52.6% advantage in find prime numbers suggests a strength in integer-heavy loops and algorithmic workloads. The 19.5% lead in physics and 16.8% lead in floating point math indicate advantages in simulation and scientific computing tasks that use floating point operations heavily.

Data encryption shows a modest 4.8% lead for the mobile chip, and extended instructions give an 8% advantage. These wins, while fewer in count, are concentrated in areas where the Panther Lake architecture appears to have specialized execution resources. The mobile chip also operates at a much lower 25 W TDP, making it suitable for battery-powered systems, though the database does not record efficiency metrics beyond TDP.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split. The Intel Core i5-14600 is the higher-performing processor overall, with an average benchmark score of 44889 versus 41215, a difference that places it in the 89th percentile compared to the 87th percentile for the Core Ultra 7 356H. It wins 12 of 17 head-to-head tests, including the most demanding multi-core and single-core benchmarks.

The desktop chip's advantages are largest in single-threaded performance, where it leads by 110.8% in Cinebench R23 single-core, and in multi-core rendering, where it leads by 65.6% in Cinebench R23 multi-core. It also dominates integer math and data compression, making it the better choice for desktop workflows that prioritize raw throughput and low-latency per-thread execution.

The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H, despite its lower average score, demonstrates clear strengths in floating point math, prime number finding, physics, data encryption, and extended instructions. It wins 5 of 17 tests, and its 16 cores at a 25 W TDP make it a mobile-focused part with a different thermal envelope. The 3 nm Panther Lake process and larger per-core L1 and L2 caches contribute to these specialized wins.

For a desktop system where performance is the primary goal, the Intel Core i5-14600 is the choice indicated by the data. For a mobile platform where the Core Ultra 7 356H's 25 W TDP and specialized math capabilities matter, the mobile chip has clear justification. The i5-14600 also carries a launch MSRP of $255, while the Core Ultra 7 356H has no recorded launch MSRP.