Intel Core i7-14700F vs Intel Core Ultra 5 338H Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in Cinebench R23 multi-core performance?

A: The Intel Core i7-14700F scores 35122, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H scores 16331. The i7-14700F leads by 115.1%.

Q: Does the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H win any benchmark tests?

A: Yes, the Ultra 5 338H wins the PassMark find prime numbers test (304 vs 176) and the PassMark physics test (2697 vs 2455).

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The Intel Core i7-14700F has 20 cores and 28 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H has 12 cores and 12 threads.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock speed?

A: The Intel Core i7-14700F boosts to 5.40 GHz, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H boosts to 4.70 GHz.

Q: How do the two processors compare in single-threaded performance?

A: The i7-14700F leads in Cinebench R23 single-core with 4958 vs 2044, a 142.6% advantage. In PassMark single-thread, the lead is much smaller at 4257 vs 4180, a 1.8% difference.

Q: What is the process node for each chip?

A: The Intel Core i7-14700F uses a 10 nm process, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H uses a 3 nm process.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from entirely different Intel design families. The Intel Core i7-14700F belongs to the Raptor Lake Refresh generation, built on the Raptor Lake architecture with a 10 nm process node. Its die size is 257 mm². The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H belongs to the Panther Lake architecture, specifically the Panther Lake-H mobile variant, built on a 3 nm process node. The database lists no die size for the Ultra 5 338H.

Core organization differs dramatically. The i7-14700F packs 20 cores and 28 threads, while the Ultra 5 338H has 12 cores and 12 threads. The i7-14700F therefore supports hyper-threading, while the Ultra 5 338H does not, at least as reflected in the equal core and thread counts.

Cache hierarchies also differ. The i7-14700F uses 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 33 MB of shared L3. The Ultra 5 338H uses 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. The larger per-core L1 and L2 on the Ultra 5 338H suggest a different cache design philosophy, but the total L3 pool is larger on the i7-14700F.

Memory support separates the two as well. The i7-14700F supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory with a dual-channel bus. The Ultra 5 338H supports LPDDR5X memory with a dual-channel bus and a recorded memory bandwidth of 136.5 GB/s. The i7-14700F also supports ECC memory; the Ultra 5 338H does not.

PCIe connectivity is another differentiator. The i7-14700F provides Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes. The Ultra 5 338H provides Gen 5 with 4 CPU lanes. The i7-14700F has no integrated graphics, while the Ultra 5 338H includes Arc B370 graphics.

The socket and market segment align with their intended roles. The i7-14700F uses Intel Socket 1700 and targets the desktop segment. The Ultra 5 338H uses Intel BGA 2540 and targets the mobile segment. The i7-14700F has a 65 W TDP, while the Ultra 5 338H has a 25 W TDP.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results show a decisive edge for the Intel Core i7-14700F across every iteration. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i7-14700F scores 3540 against 2504, a 41.4% advantage. In R15 single-core, it leads 499 to 305, a 63.6% margin. The R20 results follow a similar pattern: 14751 vs 10213 in multi-core (44.4% ahead) and 2082 vs 1441 in single-core (44.5% ahead). The largest Cinebench gap appears in R23 single-core, where the i7-14700F leads 4958 to 2044, a 142.6% difference. The R23 multi-core result shows a 115.1% advantage with scores of 35122 and 16331.

PassMark results reinforce the pattern, though with more variation. Data compression favors the i7-14700F at 505885 vs 276539, an 82.9% lead. Data encryption shows a 41.1% advantage (30144 vs 21367). Extended instructions produce a narrower 19.5% gap (28564 vs 23906). Floating point math favors the i7-14700F at 107005 vs 84067, a 27.3% lead. Integer math delivers one of the largest differences: 155808 vs 64934, a 139.9% advantage. Multithread performance sits at 41317 vs 28717, a 43.9% lead. Random string sorting shows a 64.1% gap (55918 vs 34082).

Single-thread PassMark results are much closer. The i7-14700F scores 4257 while the Ultra 5 338H scores 4180, a modest 1.8% difference. This near parity in single-thread PassMark contrasts sharply with the Cinebench single-core results, where the i7-14700F leads by over 140%. The discrepancy suggests the two tests measure different aspects of single-core behavior.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H wins two PassMark tests. In find prime numbers, it scores 304 against 176, a 42.1% advantage relative to the i7-14700F. In physics, it scores 2697 against 2455, a 9% lead. These wins are isolated but real.

Overall, the i7-14700F wins 15 of the 17 recorded head-to-head benchmarks, while the Ultra 5 338H wins 2.

The average benchmark score places the i7-14700F at 53620 with a 91st percentile ranking across all CPUs. The Ultra 5 338H averages 33989 with an 84th percentile ranking. Nearest rivals for the i7-14700F include the Intel Xeon 6505P (53701, 0.2% behind), the Intel Xeon Phi 7290 (53469, 0.3% ahead), the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X (53288, 0.6% ahead), and the AMD EPYC 7313P (53206, 0.8% ahead). The Ultra 5 338H sits near the Intel Core Ultra 7 165H (34083, 0.3% behind), the Intel Core i7-12800HX (33875, 0.3% ahead), the Intel Xeon 6353P (33844, 0.4% ahead), and the AMD EPYC 4244P (34220, 0.7% behind).

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every core specification. The i7-14700F has 20 cores and 28 threads; the Ultra 5 338H has 12 cores and 12 threads. Base clocks are 2.10 GHz for the i7-14700F and 1.90 GHz for the Ultra 5 338H. Boost clocks are 5.40 GHz and 4.70 GHz respectively. TDP ratings are 65 W and 25 W. The i7-14700F uses Intel Socket 1700; the Ultra 5 338H uses Intel BGA 2540.

Architecture and process differ: Raptor Lake on 10 nm for the i7-14700F, Panther Lake on 3 nm for the Ultra 5 338H. The i7-14700F has a die size of 257 mm²; no die size is recorded for the Ultra 5 338H.

Cache configurations differ in all three levels. L1 is 80 KB per core on the i7-14700F vs 192 KB per core on the Ultra 5 338H. L2 is 2 MB per core vs 2.5 MB per core. L3 is 33 MB shared vs 18 MB shared.

Memory support differs: DDR4 and DDR5 for the i7-14700F, LPDDR5X for the Ultra 5 338H. Both use dual-channel buses. The Ultra 5 338H has a recorded memory bandwidth of 136.5 GB/s; none is recorded for the i7-14700F. ECC memory is supported on the i7-14700F only.

PCIe differs: Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes for the i7-14700F, Gen 5 with 4 CPU lanes for the Ultra 5 338H. The i7-14700F has no integrated graphics; the Ultra 5 338H includes Arc B370. The release dates differ: 2024-01-07 for the i7-14700F and 2026-01-04 for the Ultra 5 338H. The i7-14700F has a launch MSRP of $359; no launch MSRP is recorded for the Ultra 5 338H. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i7-14700F dominates the multi-core and single-core rendering workloads captured by Cinebench. Its R23 multi-core score of 35122 is more than double the Ultra 5 338H's 16331. That 115.1% gap indicates a clear advantage for CPU-bound rendering, video encoding, and other heavily threaded workloads. The integer math result reinforces the point: 155808 vs 64934, a 139.9% lead. Data compression also strongly favors the i7-14700F with an 82.9% edge.

The i7-14700F also excels in memory-intensive tasks. Random string sorting shows a 64.1% advantage. Data encryption shows a 41.1% lead. Floating point math favors it by 27.3%. Extended instructions favor it by 19.5%. The multithread PassMark score is 43.9% higher.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H wins in two specific workloads. The find prime numbers test shows a 42.1% advantage, indicating a particular strength in integer-based prime computation. The physics test shows a 9% lead. Both wins are narrow in absolute terms but consistent across the recorded data.

Single-thread performance is nearly even in PassMark, with the i7-14700F ahead by only 1.8%. That near parity suggests that for lightly threaded desktop tasks, the two processors are closer than the Cinebench single-core results imply. The Cinebench R23 single-core gap of 142.6% however indicates that in certain single-threaded workloads, the i7-14700F is far ahead.

The Ultra 5 338H belongs to the mobile segment with a 25 W TDP and integrated Arc B370 graphics. The i7-14700F is a desktop part with a 65 W TDP and no integrated graphics. The data cannot quantify the graphics capabilities of the Arc B370, but its presence gives the Ultra 5 338H a feature the i7-14700F lacks entirely.

The Verdict

The Intel Core i7-14700F is the stronger processor in almost every recorded benchmark. It wins 15 of 17 head-to-head tests, including all Cinebench variants and the majority of PassMark tests. Its average benchmark score of 53620 places it in the 91st percentile of all CPUs, while the Ultra 5 338H sits at 33989 and the 84th percentile. The i7-14700F's nearest rivals all score within 1% of its average, confirming it is positioned among high-end desktop parts. The Ultra 5 338H sits near mid-range mobile and server parts, with its closest rival, the Intel Core Ultra 7 165H, just 0.3% behind.

The choice between these two depends entirely on the intended use case. For desktop users running rendering, compression, encryption, or integer-heavy workloads, the i7-14700F delivers substantially higher scores. Its 20 cores, 28 threads, 33 MB of L3, and 16 PCIe Gen 5 lanes support a wide range of desktop configurations. Its 65 W TDP and Socket 1700 compatibility define its role as a mainstream desktop processor.

The Ultra 5 338H is a mobile processor with a 25 W TDP, LPDDR5X memory support, and integrated Arc B370 graphics. It wins the find prime numbers and physics tests, and its single-thread PassMark score trails by only 1.8%. For workloads that fit those two categories, or for systems requiring integrated graphics, the Ultra 5 338H has a specific role. Its 3 nm process and larger per-core L1 and L2 caches suggest a different efficiency profile, though the database does not record power consumption measurements beyond TDP.

The data does not support a single universal winner. The i7-14700F is the clear performance leader in the vast majority of tests, but the Ultra 5 338H offers integrated graphics, a lower TDP, and wins in two specific benchmarks. Buyers choosing a desktop system with a discrete GPU would find the i7-14700F consistently faster. Buyers needing a mobile platform with integrated graphics would select the Ultra 5 338H, accepting lower scores in most workloads.