Intel Core i5-14600 vs Intel Core Ultra X7 368H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clear overall winner in the Intel Core i5-14600, which takes 13 of the 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons. The margin in most Cinebench tests is consistent at 7.9% to 8.0% in favor of the desktop part. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the i5-14600 scores 30464 against 28221 for the Core Ultra X7 368H, a 7.9% advantage. Single-core Cinebench R23 shows a similar pattern: 4300 versus 3984, again a 7.9% gap. The R15 and R20 variants follow the same trend, with the i5-14600 leading by 7.9% in multi-core and by 7.9% to 8.0% in single-core.

The largest single win for the i5-14600 comes in PassMark data compression, where it scores 434620 against 312927, a dominant 38.9% lead. Integer math also favors the desktop chip substantially: 117078 versus 88083, a 32.9% margin. Random string sorting shows a 26.1% advantage for the i5-14600, with scores of 48043 and 38093. PassMark multi-thread performance gives the i5-14600 an 8.8% lead (35848 versus 32956), and PassMark single-thread shows a 4.0% advantage (4167 versus 4005). The extended instructions test is effectively a tie, with scores of 25674 and 25669, a delta of 0%.

The Core Ultra X7 368H wins four comparisons, and its strongest result is in PassMark find prime numbers, where it scores 321 against 155 for the i5-14600. That is a 51.7% advantage for the mobile chip, the largest delta in either direction across the entire benchmark set. Floating point math also favors the Ultra X7 368H by 18.9%, with scores of 105681 versus 85759. Physics performance goes to the Ultra X7 368H by 18.4% (2857 versus 2330). Data encryption is a narrow win for the Ultra X7 368H at 25228 versus 25082, a 0.6% margin.

The average benchmark score positions the i5-14600 at 44889, which ranks in the 89th percentile of all CPUs in the database. The Ultra X7 368H averages 40518, placing it in the 87th percentile. The nearest rivals to the i5-14600 include the Intel Core i9-12900KS at 45094 (0.5% higher) and the AMD Ryzen 5 7500X3D at 44573 (0.7% lower). The nearest rival to the Ultra X7 368H is the Intel Core 7 253PE at 40557, just 0.1% higher, and the AMD Ryzen 9 7940H at 40431, 0.2% lower.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i5-14600 has an average benchmark score of 44889, while the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H averages 40518. The i5-14600 also holds a higher percentile ranking at 89 versus 87 for the Ultra X7 368H.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two processors?

A: The largest gap is in PassMark find prime numbers, where the Core Ultra X7 368H scores 321 against 155 for the i5-14600, a 51.7% advantage. The largest win for the i5-14600 is in PassMark data compression at 38.9% ahead.

Q: How do the two chips compare in single-core performance?

A: The i5-14600 wins every single-core test. Cinebench R15 single-core shows 433 versus 401 for an 8.0% lead, Cinebench R20 single-core shows 1806 versus 1673 for a 7.9% lead, Cinebench R23 single-core shows 4300 versus 3984 for a 7.9% lead, and PassMark single-thread shows 4167 versus 4005 for a 4.0% lead.

Q: Does the Core Ultra X7 368H win any math-related tests?

A: Yes. The Ultra X7 368H leads in PassMark floating point math with 105681 versus 85759, an 18.9% margin. It also leads in PassMark find prime numbers by 51.7% and PassMark physics by 18.4%.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The Core Ultra X7 368H lists a memory bandwidth of 153.6 GB/s with LPDDR5X support. The i5-14600 supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory in dual-channel configuration, but no bandwidth figure is recorded for it in the database.

Q: What are the nearest rivals for each processor?

A: For the i5-14600, the nearest rival is the Intel Core i9-12900KS with an average score of 45094, 0.5% higher, followed by the AMD EPYC 4344P at 45122, also 0.5% higher. For the Ultra X7 368H, the nearest rival is the Intel Core 7 253PE at 40557, 0.1% higher, and the Intel Core 5 223PE at 40585, 0.2% higher.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i5-14600 is the stronger choice for compression workloads. Its PassMark data compression score of 434620 is 38.9% above the Ultra X7 368H, and its integer math result of 117078 is 32.9% higher. These two tests indicate a clear advantage in tasks that rely heavily on integer arithmetic and data packing. The 26.1% lead in random string sorting reinforces this pattern, as sorting algorithms depend on efficient memory access and integer operations. The i5-14600 also wins every Cinebench test by a consistent 7.9% to 8.0% margin, which covers both multi-threaded and single-threaded rendering workloads. The PassMark multi-thread score of 35848 versus 32956 confirms that the desktop chip maintains its lead in general parallel throughput.

The Core Ultra X7 368H wins in specific computational niches. Its PassMark find prime numbers score of 321 is more than double the i5-14600 score of 155, a 51.7% advantage that suggests a fundamentally different efficiency profile for certain integer-heavy algorithms. The floating point math win of 18.9% (105681 versus 85759) indicates that the mobile chip handles floating point operations notably better than the desktop part, which is relevant for scientific calculations and physics simulations. The physics test result of 2857 versus 2330, an 18.4% lead, aligns with the floating point advantage. Data encryption is nearly even, with the Ultra X7 368H ahead by only 0.6%, so neither chip has a meaningful edge in that area.

The benchmark data suggests that the i5-14600 is the better general-purpose processor, with wins across the majority of tests and a higher average score. The Ultra X7 368H is more specialized, excelling in floating point and prime number workloads while trailing in integer math, compression, and sorting. For workloads that resemble the Cinebench suite, the i5-14600 is consistently ahead. For workloads that stress floating point execution or prime number generation, the Ultra X7 368H has a measurable advantage.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every core specification. The i5-14600 has 14 cores and 20 threads, while the Ultra X7 368H has 16 cores and 16 threads. The i5-14600 has a base clock of 2.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz, whereas the Ultra X7 368H operates at 2.00 GHz base and 5.00 GHz boost. The thermal design power differs substantially: the i5-14600 is rated at 65 watts, while the Ultra X7 368H is rated at 25 watts. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

The memory support is another major point of divergence. The i5-14600 supports DDR4 and DDR5 in dual-channel configuration and has ECC memory support. The Ultra X7 368H supports LPDDR5X in dual-channel configuration with a recorded memory bandwidth of 153.6 GB/s and no ECC support. The PCIe configurations also differ: the i5-14600 provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the Ultra X7 368H provides Gen 5 with 4 lanes from the CPU.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The i5-14600 uses UHD Graphics 770, while the Ultra X7 368H uses Arc B390. The market segments are distinct: the i5-14600 targets desktop systems with an Intel Socket 1700, and the Ultra X7 368H targets mobile systems with an Intel BGA 2540 socket. The i5-14600 has a launch MSRP of $255. The Ultra X7 368H has no launch MSRP recorded in the database. Both processors are listed as Active in production status.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split between these two chips is significant. The i5-14600 is built on Raptor Lake architecture, specifically the Raptor Lake-R codename, and belongs to the Core 14th Gen series under the Core i5 generation label. The Ultra X7 368H uses Panther Lake architecture with the Panther Lake-H codename and belongs to the Core Ultra Series 3 under the Ultra X7 generation label. The process nodes differ by a wide margin: the i5-14600 uses a 10 nm process from Intel, while the Ultra X7 368H uses a 3 nm process, also from Intel.

The cache layouts are structured differently. The i5-14600 has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ultra X7 368H has 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 2.5 MB of L2 cache per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The i5-14600 has a recorded die size of 257 mm², while no die size is recorded for the Ultra X7 368H. Neither chip has a recorded transistor count or 3D V-Cache.

The thread count difference is notable: the i5-14600 has 20 threads across 14 cores, which implies hyper-threading support, while the Ultra X7 368H has 16 threads across 16 cores, indicating a 1:1 core-to-thread ratio. The release dates are also far apart, with the i5-14600 released in January 2024 and the Ultra X7 368H released in January 2026. The part numbers are SRN44 for the i5-14600 and SA4R7Q9EJ for the Ultra X7 368H.

The architectural results in the benchmark data reflect these differences. The i5-14600 uses its higher clock speeds and hyper-threading to deliver consistent wins in most tests. The Ultra X7 368H uses its newer 3 nm process and larger per-core L1 and L2 caches to achieve advantages in floating point math and prime number generation, despite its lower base and boost clocks. The 18 MB L3 cache on the Ultra X7 368H is smaller than the 24 MB on the i5-14600, which may explain the desktop chip's lead in compression and sorting workloads that benefit from larger shared cache. The mobile chip's higher L1 and L2 per-core capacities appear to support its floating point strengths.