Intel Core i7-14700 vs Intel Core Ultra 9 285 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores, the Intel Core i7-14700 or the Intel Core Ultra 9 285?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 has 24 cores, while the Intel Core i7-14700 has 20 cores. However, the Core i7-14700 has 28 threads compared to the Core Ultra 9 285's 24 threads.

Q: What is the process node difference between these two CPUs?

A: The Intel Core i7-14700 is built on a 10 nm process node at Intel, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 285 uses a 3 nm process node fabricated by TSMC.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 has a boost clock of 5.60 GHz, which is higher than the Intel Core i7-14700's 5.40 GHz boost clock.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Intel Core i7-14700 and the Intel Core Ultra 9 285 support ECC memory.

Q: Which CPU supports DDR4 memory?

A: The Intel Core i7-14700 supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 285 supports only DDR5 memory.

Q: What is the difference in their average benchmark scores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 has an average benchmark score of 75488, while the Intel Core i7-14700 has an average benchmark score of 52301. This places the Core Ultra 9 285 in the 95th percentile of all CPUs, compared to the 91st percentile for the Core i7-14700.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core i7-14700 belongs to the Core 14th Gen family and uses the Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-R codename. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 is part of the Core Ultra Series 2 and uses the Arrow Lake architecture with the Arrow Lake-S codename. This is a generational shift in design philosophy.

The manufacturing process differs substantially. The Core i7-14700 uses a 10 nm node from Intel, while the Core Ultra 9 285 uses a 3 nm node from TSMC. The Core Ultra 9 285 contains 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die, whereas the Core i7-14700 does not have a recorded transistor count and has a 257 mm² die size. The smaller die with a far larger transistor count indicates a much denser design.

Core and thread configurations differ. The Core i7-14700 has 20 cores and 28 threads, which indicates the presence of hyper-threading on some cores. The Core Ultra 9 285 has 24 cores and 24 threads, meaning it has one thread per core across the entire chip. This represents an architectural change where simultaneous multithreading is no longer used.

Cache hierarchies are different as well. The Core i7-14700 has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 33 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 9 285 has 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The larger per-core caches on the Arrow Lake part are consistent with its newer design.

Memory support diverges. The Core i7-14700 supports both DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel memory bus. The Core Ultra 9 285 supports only DDR5, also with a dual-channel bus, and has a recorded memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. The Core i7-14700 has no recorded memory bandwidth figure.

PCIe connectivity differs. The Core i7-14700 provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU. The Core Ultra 9 285 provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU. Integrated graphics also change: the Core i7-14700 uses UHD Graphics 770, while the Core Ultra 9 285 uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU.

Socket compatibility is not shared. The Core i7-14700 uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Core Ultra 9 285 uses Intel Socket 1851. Both have a 65 TDP and both are desktop parts with locked multipliers. The Core i7-14700 was released on 2024-01-07, and the Core Ultra 9 285 was released on 2024-12-31.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded benchmark data shows the Intel Core Ultra 9 285 winning every head-to-head comparison between the two processors. The margin varies considerably by workload.

In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Core Ultra 9 285 scores 4933 against 4061 for the Core i7-14700, a delta of -17.7%. The single-core R15 result is far more lopsided: 696 versus 299, a delta of -57%. This single-core gap is the largest proportional difference in the entire Cinebench suite.

Cinebench R20 shows similar patterns. Multicore results are 20556 for the Core Ultra 9 285 versus 14388 for the Core i7-14700, a delta of -30%. Single-core R20 is 2901 versus 2031, also a delta of -30%.

Cinebench R23 provides the most dramatic numbers. The multicore score for the Core Ultra 9 285 is 48945 against 28398, a delta of -42%. Single-core R23 is 6909 versus 2080, a delta of -69.9%. This is the largest single delta in the entire comparison, and it suggests a fundamental single-threaded performance advantage for the Arrow Lake design.

PassMark results reinforce the dominance. In data compression, the Core Ultra 9 285 scores 602121 versus 498198, a delta of -17.3%. Data encryption shows 46949 versus 29601, a delta of -37%. Extended instructions produce 45357 versus 28388, a delta of -37.4%. The prime number search test shows 459 versus 164, a delta of -64.3%. Floating point math is 194988 versus 106716, a delta of -45.3%.

The closest contest is in integer math. The Core Ultra 9 285 scores 164869 against 154535, a delta of only -6.3%. This is the narrowest margin in the data set and indicates that integer-heavy workloads do not benefit as much from the architectural changes.

Other PassMark results show consistent but varied leads. Multithread is 56602 versus 40318, a delta of -28.8%. Physics is 3598 versus 2226, a delta of -38.1%. Random string sorting is 73651 versus 54340, a delta of -26.2%. Single-thread is 4881 versus 4236, a delta of -13.2%.

The overall picture is clear. The Core Ultra 9 285 leads in every recorded benchmark, with advantages ranging from 6.3% in integer math to 69.9% in Cinebench R23 single-core. The Core i7-14700 does not register a single win in the head-to-head data.

The Verdict

The benchmark data indicates a decisive performance advantage for the Intel Core Ultra 9 285. It wins all 17 recorded head-to-head comparisons and holds a higher average benchmark score of 75488 compared to 52301 for the Intel Core i7-14700. The Core Ultra 9 285 also sits in the 95th percentile of all CPUs, while the Core i7-14700 sits in the 91st percentile.

The Core Ultra 9 285 has more cores, higher base and boost clocks, larger caches, a more advanced process node, and a higher memory bandwidth figure. It also supports DDR5 only, whereas the Core i7-14700 retains DDR4 support. The Core i7-14700 has more threads despite fewer cores, which is a consequence of its different threading implementation.

For users selecting between these two, the data supports the Core Ultra 9 285 for nearly all compute-focused tasks. The Core i7-14700 remains an active product with its own strengths, but those strengths do not appear in the recorded benchmark results. The nearest rivals for the Core Ultra 9 285 are AMD EPYC server parts, with the AMD EPYC 8224P at a -0.1% delta, while the Core i7-14700's rivals include the Intel Xeon Gold 5320H at -0.2% and the AMD Ryzen 9 5950X at 0.7%.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every major specification field. The Intel Core i7-14700 has 20 cores and 28 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 285 has 24 cores and 24 threads. Base clocks are 2.10 GHz for the Core i7-14700 and 2.50 GHz for the Core Ultra 9 285. Boost clocks are 5.40 GHz and 5.60 GHz respectively.

The socket changes from Intel Socket 1700 to Intel Socket 1851. The architecture moves from Raptor Lake to Arrow Lake. The process node changes from 10 nm at Intel to 3 nm at TSMC. The Core Ultra 9 285 has a recorded transistor count of 17,800 million and a die size of 243 mm², while the Core i7-14700 has no transistor count and a die size of 257 mm².

Cache specifications differ at every level. L1 cache is 80 KB per core on the Core i7-14700 versus 192 KB per core on the Core Ultra 9 285. L2 cache is 2 MB per core versus 3 MB per core. L3 cache is 33 MB shared versus 36 MB shared.

Memory support narrows from DDR4 and DDR5 on the Core i7-14700 to DDR5 only on the Core Ultra 9 285. The Core Ultra 9 285 has a recorded memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s, while the Core i7-14700 has no recorded value. PCIe lanes from the CPU increase from 16 to 20, both Gen 5. Integrated graphics change from UHD Graphics 770 to Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU.

The release dates differ by nearly a year, with the Core i7-14700 launching on 2024-01-07 and the Core Ultra 9 285 launching on 2024-12-31. The part numbers are SRN40 and SRQD4 respectively. Both CPUs have a TDP of 65, support ECC memory, are desktop parts, are active in production, and have locked multipliers.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 wins every recorded benchmark category. Its largest advantages appear in single-core rendering and mathematical workloads. Cinebench R23 single-core shows the biggest lead at -69.9%, and PassMark prime number search follows at -64.3%. Floating point math is -45.3% ahead. These results indicate workloads that depend on per-core efficiency and advanced instruction execution benefit the most from the Arrow Lake architecture.

The Core Ultra 9 285 also leads heavily in multi-threaded rendering. Cinebench R23 multicore is -42% ahead, Cinebench R20 multicore is -30% ahead, and PassMark multithread is -28.8% ahead. Data encryption at -37% and extended instructions at -37.4% show strong gains in security and vectorized tasks. Physics at -38.1% and random string sorting at -26.2% round out a comprehensive sweep.

The smallest margin is in PassMark integer math at -6.3%. This is the single area where the Core i7-14700 comes closest to matching the newer processor. Even so, it still loses. Users with integer-heavy workloads will see the least performance uplift from choosing the Core Ultra 9 285, though the direction of the advantage remains unchanged.

The Core i7-14700 has no recorded wins in any benchmark category. Its remaining advantages are structural rather than performance-based. It supports DDR4 memory, which matters for systems with existing DDR4 modules. It has more threads, 28 versus 24, which may be relevant for software that scales with thread count rather than core count. It also has an earlier release date, which may matter for platform availability. None of these factors appear in the benchmark results as a performance win.

For use-case planning, the data supports the Core Ultra 9 285 for rendering, encryption, compression, physics simulation, and single-threaded responsiveness. The Core i7-14700 remains a viable desktop processor with active production status, but the recorded measurements place it behind in every tested workload.