Intel Core i7-14700F vs Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data separates these two processors into distinct performance profiles. The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus wins 15 of the 17 recorded comparisons, while the Intel Core i7-14700F takes 2. The magnitude of the victories, however, tells a more nuanced story than the raw win count.

The Ultra 9 290HX Plus dominates in multi-threaded workloads. In Cinebench R15 multicore, it scores 5981 against 3540 for the i7-14700F, a 40.8% advantage. Cinebench R20 multicore shows a similar pattern: 21198 versus 14751, a 30.4% gap. The Cinebench R23 multicore result narrows the margin to 11.5%, with the Ultra 9 posting 39684 against 35122. PassMark multithread delivers 59439 for the Ultra 9 versus 41317 for the i7-14700F, a 30.5% difference.

The Ultra 9's largest single win comes in PassMark find prime numbers, where it scores 519 against 176, a 66.1% advantage. PassMark extended instructions shows a 44.3% gap (51290 versus 28564), and PassMark floating point math shows a 47% gap (201773 versus 107005). Data encryption favors the Ultra 9 by 39.7% (50008 versus 30144), while data compression favors it by 23.2% (658724 versus 505885). Random string sorting goes to the Ultra 9 by 30.4% (80327 versus 55918), and physics tests favor it by 27.5% (3387 versus 2455). Integer math is the closest multi-threaded margin, with the Ultra 9 ahead by only 5.5% (164839 versus 155808).

The i7-14700F claims both of its wins in single-core Cinebench tests. In Cinebench R15 singlecore, it scores 499 versus 340, a 46.8% advantage. The Cinebench R23 singlecore result is even more decisive: 4958 versus 2356, a 110.4% lead. These are the only two benchmarks where the i7-14700F comes out ahead, and both are substantial margins.

The Cinebench R20 singlecore result breaks the pattern. The Ultra 9 wins that test with 2992 against 2082, a 30.4% margin, which is the same percentage as the R20 multicore gap. This is notable because the i7-14700F wins the other two single-core Cinebench iterations, but the R20 version favors the Ultra 9. PassMark single thread also favors the Ultra 9, scoring 4951 against 4257, a 14% difference.

For overall standing, the Ultra 9 290HX Plus sits at the 95th percentile of all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 79574. The i7-14700F sits at the 91st percentile with an average score of 53620. The Ultra 9's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i9-14900KF (0.3% higher score) and the Intel Core i9-14900K (0.6% higher), placing it in flagship desktop territory. The i7-14700F's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X, which scores 0.6% higher, and the AMD EPYC 7313P at 0.8% higher.

Where Each One Wins

The performance split maps cleanly onto workload types. The Ultra 9 290HX Plus is the choice for sustained multi-threaded throughput. Its wins in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multicore, combined with PassMark multithread, data compression, data encryption, extended instructions, floating point math, integer math, physics, and random string sorting, indicate strength in rendering, number crunching, compression workloads, and parallel processing tasks. The 66.1% lead in prime number finding and the 47% lead in floating point math point to particular strength in mathematical and scientific workloads.

The i7-14700F shows a specific and narrow strength: legacy single-threaded Cinebench performance. Its 110.4% margin in Cinebench R23 singlecore and 46.8% margin in Cinebench R15 singlecore are the largest wins recorded on either side. These results suggest that applications relying on older single-threaded Cinebench execution paths will see a clear benefit from the i7-14700F. The PassMark single thread result, however, contradicts this narrative, as the Ultra 9 wins that test by 14%. The Cinebench R20 singlecore result also contradicts it, with the Ultra 9 ahead by 30.4%.

The data indicates a workload-dependent decision. For multi-threaded rendering, encoding, scientific computation, and data processing, the Ultra 9 290HX Plus delivers consistent and often large advantages. For specific single-threaded Cinebench workloads, the i7-14700F holds a decisive edge. The mixed single-core results across different Cinebench versions and PassMark suggest that the i7-14700F's advantage is not universal across all single-threaded applications.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel design generations and manufacturing approaches. The i7-14700F uses the Raptor Lake architecture on a 10 nm process node manufactured by Intel, with a die size of 257 mm². The Ultra 9 290HX Plus uses the Arrow Lake-HX Refresh codename on a 3 nm process node manufactured by TSMC, with a die size of 243 mm² and 17,800 million transistors. The process node difference is substantial: 10 nm versus 3 nm, which explains the Ultra 9's ability to pack 24 cores into a smaller die.

Core and thread counts differ significantly. The i7-14700F has 20 cores and 28 threads, indicating a hybrid layout with performance and efficiency cores where some cores contribute more threads. The Ultra 9 290HX Plus has 24 cores and 24 threads, meaning no simultaneous multithreading. Despite having 4 fewer threads, the Ultra 9 wins the majority of multi-threaded benchmarks, which points to higher per-core efficiency from the newer architecture and process node.

Cache configurations also differ. The i7-14700F has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 33 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ultra 9 290HX Plus has 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ultra 9 has larger allocations at every cache level. The L1 cache is 2.4 times larger per core, and the L2 cache is 50% larger per core.

Memory support differs as well. The i7-14700F supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration. The Ultra 9 290HX Plus supports only DDR5, also dual-channel, but with a rated memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. Both support ECC memory. The PCIe configurations differ: the i7-14700F provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the Ultra 9 provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU.

The integrated graphics situation is a major differentiator. The i7-14700F has no integrated graphics (N/A), requiring a discrete GPU for any display output. The Ultra 9 290HX Plus includes Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units, making it self-sufficient for display output and basic graphics tasks. The i7-14700F is a desktop processor on Intel Socket 1700, while the Ultra 9 is a mobile processor on Intel BGA 2114, reflecting their different market segments. The i7-14700F has a locked multiplier, while the Ultra 9 has an unlocked multiplier.

Clock speeds are close. The i7-14700F has a base clock of 2.10 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz. The Ultra 9 has a base clock of 2.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz. The Ultra 9 has a slight edge in both base and boost clocks, but the i7-14700F's higher thread count and the specific benchmark results show that clock speed alone does not determine the winner. The i7-14700F has a TDP of 65 watts, while the Ultra 9 has a TDP of 55 watts, meaning the Ultra 9 delivers higher multi-threaded performance at a lower rated power draw. The release dates also differ: the i7-14700F launched in January 2024, while the Ultra 9 launched in March 2026.

The Verdict

The benchmark data identifies the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus as the stronger overall processor. Its 95th percentile ranking, 79574 average benchmark score, and 15 of 17 head-to-head wins establish it as the higher-performing part. The Ultra 9 leads by 40.8% in Cinebench R15 multicore, 30.4% in Cinebench R20 multicore, 11.5% in Cinebench R23 multicore, and 30.5% in PassMark multithread. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i9-14900K and i9-14900KF, flagship desktop processors, which confirms its high-end positioning despite being a mobile part.

The i7-14700F is the better processor for a narrow set of workloads. Its Cinebench R23 singlecore score of 4958 is 110.4% higher than the Ultra 9's 2356, and its Cinebench R15 singlecore score of 499 is 46.8% higher than the Ultra 9's 340. For applications that depend on those specific single-threaded Cinebench execution paths, the i7-14700F delivers a clear advantage. Its 91st percentile ranking and 53620 average benchmark score place it in the upper tier of desktop processors, with rivals like the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X within 0.6%.

For multi-threaded workloads, the choice is clear from the data: the Ultra 9 290HX Plus wins across rendering, compression, encryption, physics simulation, and math-heavy tasks. For single-threaded Cinebench workloads, the i7-14700F wins decisively. The overall average benchmark score, however, favors the Ultra 9 by a wide margin, and its percentile ranking is 4 points higher.

The platform differences reinforce the decision. The Ultra 9 includes integrated graphics, supports DDR5 with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth, offers 20 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, and has an unlocked multiplier. The i7-14700F requires a discrete GPU, supports DDR4 and DDR5, offers 16 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, and has a locked multiplier. The Ultra 9 also has a lower TDP of 55 watts versus 65 watts, meaning higher performance at a lower rated power draw. The i7-14700F has a launch MSRP of $359. The Ultra 9 has no recorded launch MSRP in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus has an average benchmark score of 79574, compared to 53620 for the Intel Core i7-14700F. The Ultra 9 also ranks at the 95th percentile of all CPUs, while the i7-14700F ranks at the 91st percentile.

Q: How do the two processors compare in Cinebench R23?

A: In Cinebench R23 multicore, the Ultra 9 290HX Plus scores 39684 against 35122 for the i7-14700F, an 11.5% advantage. In Cinebench R23 singlecore, the i7-14700F scores 4958 against 2356 for the Ultra 9, a 110.4% advantage.

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 9 290HX Plus has 24 cores and 24 threads, meaning it does not use simultaneous multithreading.

Q: Does either processor include integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus includes Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units. The Intel Core i7-14700F has no integrated graphics and requires a discrete GPU.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The Intel Core i7-14700F supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration. The Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus supports only DDR5, also dual-channel, with a rated memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. Both support ECC memory.

Q: What is the largest performance margin recorded between the two processors?

A: The largest margin is in Cinebench R23 singlecore, where the Intel Core i7-14700F scores 4958 versus 2356 for the Ultra 9 290HX Plus, a 110.4% difference. The largest margin for the Ultra 9 is in PassMark find prime numbers, where it scores 519 versus 176, a 66.1% difference.