Intel Core i7-14701E vs Intel Core Ultra 5 235T Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a decisive picture: the Intel Core Ultra 5 235T wins 16 of the 17 recorded head-to-head comparisons. The single exception is the PassMark physics test, where the Core i7-14701E leads by 11.2%. That result is notable because it is the only test where the older processor demonstrates a clear advantage, and it suggests a specific workload characteristic rather than a general trend.

The Cinebench suite shows consistent margins. Across R15, R20, and R23, the Ultra 5 235T leads the i7-14701E by roughly 15.4% in both multi-core and single-core tests. For example, in Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Ultra 5 scores 26,232 versus 22,195 for the i7-14701E, a 15.4% gap. The single-core R23 result follows the same pattern: 3,703 versus 3,133, again a 15.4% difference. This uniformity across all three Cinebench versions indicates a consistent architectural advantage rather than a workload-specific quirk.

The PassMark results reveal where the Ultra 5 pulls further ahead. The largest margin appears in PassMark data encryption, where the Ultra 5 scores 23,457 versus 14,862, a 36.6% lead. Floating point math also shows a wide gap: 106,546 versus 61,873, a 41.9% advantage for the Ultra 5. The find prime numbers test shows the Ultra 5 at 318 versus 176, a 44.7% lead, the largest relative difference in the entire comparison. These results indicate that the Ultra 5's architecture handles encryption, floating-point workloads, and prime-number calculations with substantially greater efficiency.

Other PassMark tests show narrower but still positive margins for the Ultra 5. Integer math sits at 84,244 versus 81,325, a 3.5% lead. Data compression shows 295,100 versus 282,939, a 4.1% gap. Single-thread performance is nearly identical: 4,339 versus 4,305, a 0.8% difference. The extended instructions test shows a 20.2% lead for the Ultra 5, and random string sorting shows a 17.6% lead.

The average benchmark score tells the same story. The Ultra 5 235T records an average score of 38,561, while the i7-14701E averages 33,206. The percentile rankings place the Ultra 5 at the 86th percentile of all CPUs, versus the 83rd percentile for the i7-14701E. The nearest rivals for each processor reinforce the positioning: the i7-14701E sits within 0.4% of the AMD Ryzen 7 7745HX and Intel Core i7-13650HX, while the Ultra 5 235T sits within 0.7% of the Intel Core Ultra 9 285H.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more benchmark comparisons?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 235T wins 16 of 17 head-to-head tests. The Intel Core i7-14701E wins only the PassMark physics test, by 11.2%.

Q: How large is the performance gap in multi-core workloads?

A: The Ultra 5 235T leads by 15.4% in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core tests. In PassMark multithread, the lead is 15.5%.

Q: Is the single-core performance difference significant?

A: The Ultra 5 leads by 15.4% across all three Cinebench single-core tests. In PassMark single-thread, the lead narrows to just 0.8%.

Q: What is the largest performance difference between the two?

A: The PassMark find prime numbers test shows the largest gap, with the Ultra 5 leading by 44.7%. Data encryption follows at 36.6%, and floating point math at 41.9%.

Q: Where does the i7-14701E outperform the Ultra 5?

A: Only in the PassMark physics test, where it scores 2,399 versus 2,157, a lead of 11.2%.

Q: How do the processors compare in overall ranking?

A: The Ultra 5 235T sits at the 86th percentile of all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 38,561. The i7-14701E sits at the 83rd percentile with an average score of 33,206.

The Verdict

The recorded data points decisively toward the Intel Core Ultra 5 235T for almost every workload category. Its 15.4% lead across the entire Cinebench suite, combined with large advantages in encryption, floating-point math, and prime-number calculations, makes it the stronger processor for multi-threaded productivity, scientific computing, and data processing tasks. The 36.6% lead in data encryption and the 41.9% lead in floating-point math are particularly meaningful for workloads that stress these specific instruction paths.

The i7-14701E retains one specific niche: the PassMark physics test. Its 11.2% lead there suggests that certain physics simulations may favor its architecture, though this is a single data point against a broad pattern of losses. The near-parity in single-thread PassMark results (0.8% difference) indicates that for lightly threaded everyday tasks, the two processors are effectively equivalent, despite the larger single-core gaps in Cinebench.

The percentile rankings reinforce the overall assessment. The Ultra 5's 86th percentile versus the i7-14701E's 83rd places the newer processor in a higher performance tier. The rival sets confirm this: the i7-14701E competes with the AMD Ryzen 7 7745HX and Intel Core i7-13650HX, while the Ultra 5 235T sits alongside the Intel Core Ultra 9 285H.

Specification Differences

The two processors diverge on nearly every major specification. The i7-14701E uses 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Ultra 5 235T uses 14 cores and 14 threads. The core count advantage belongs to the Ultra 5, but the i7-14701E has hyper-threading, which the Ultra 5 lacks. This explains why the thread counts differ so sharply despite the core difference.

Clock speeds show the i7-14701E with a base clock of 2.60 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz, versus 2.20 GHz base and 5.00 GHz boost for the Ultra 5. The i7-14701E holds the clock speed advantage on paper, yet the benchmark results show the Ultra 5 winning despite lower clocks. The sockets differ as well: the i7-14701E uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Ultra 5 uses Intel Socket 1851.

Memory support separates the two clearly. The i7-14701E supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the Ultra 5 supports DDR5 only. The Ultra 5 lists a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s; the i7-14701E record does not include a bandwidth figure. ECC memory is supported on the i7-14701E but not on the Ultra 5.

PCIe lanes also differ: the i7-14701E provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes, while the Ultra 5 provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes. Integrated graphics are different as well, with the i7-14701E using UHD Graphics 770 and the Ultra 5 using Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 24EU. The Ultra 5 has a launch MSRP of $247; no MSRP is recorded for the i7-14701E. Both processors are locked (multiplier unlocked: false), both target the desktop market, and both are active production parts.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two processors is substantial. The i7-14701E uses the Raptor Lake architecture, specifically Raptor Lake-R, built on a 10 nm process at Intel's foundry. The Ultra 5 235T uses the Arrow Lake architecture, specifically Arrow Lake-S, built on a 3 nm process at TSMC. This process node difference, from 10 nm to 3 nm, is the most fundamental architectural distinction and likely explains much of the performance-per-clock advantage seen in the benchmarks.

The transistor count reflects the newer design. The Ultra 5 lists 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. The i7-14701E record does not include a transistor count but lists a die size of 257 mm². The Ultra 5 packs more transistors into a smaller die, consistent with the denser 3 nm process.

Cache layouts differ significantly. The i7-14701E uses 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 33 MB of shared L3. The Ultra 5 uses 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. The Ultra 5 has larger per-core caches but less total L3. The i7-14701E's larger L3 pool may benefit certain cache-heavy workloads, though the benchmark data does not show a consistent advantage from it.

The generation labels confirm the positioning: the i7-14701E belongs to the Core i7 (Raptor Lake Refresh) generation, while the Ultra 5 belongs to the Ultra 5 (Arrow Lake) generation. The release dates reflect this: the i7-14701E launched on 2024-06-30, and the Ultra 5 on 2025-01-06. The part numbers differ (Q49FSRNJK for the i7-14701E, SRQES for the Ultra 5).

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235T dominates the benchmark landscape. It wins every Cinebench test by 15.4%, covering both multi-core and single-core scenarios. It wins all PassMark tests except physics, with margins ranging from 0.8% in single-thread to 44.7% in find prime numbers. The Ultra 5's strengths are clearest in data encryption (36.6% lead), floating-point math (41.9% lead), and extended instructions (20.2% lead). These results position it as the superior choice for scientific computing, encryption-heavy workloads, and any task that benefits from modern instruction set extensions.

The Intel Core i7-14701E wins exactly one test: PassMark physics, where it leads by 11.2%. This single victory suggests that its architecture, with 16 threads and higher clock speeds (5.40 GHz boost versus 5.00 GHz), handles physics simulations more effectively. The i7-14701E also supports ECC memory, which the Ultra 5 does not, making it the appropriate choice for systems that require error-correcting memory. Its DDR4 support provides flexibility for builds using older memory platforms.

The data does not support a general recommendation for the i7-14701E outside of the physics test and the ECC memory requirement. The Ultra 5's 14 cores, larger per-core caches, newer 3 nm process, and higher percentile ranking give it advantages across nearly every measured workload. The i7-14701E's higher boost clock (5.40 GHz) and larger L3 cache (33 MB versus 24 MB) do not translate into benchmark wins, suggesting that the Ultra 5's architectural efficiency overcomes these nominal advantages.

For workloads that stress encryption, floating-point math, compression, or extended instructions, the Ultra 5 is the clear choice. For physics simulations and ECC-memory-dependent systems, the i7-14701E holds a narrow but real edge. The 86th percentile ranking of the Ultra 5 versus the 83rd for the i7-14701E summarizes the overall hierarchy: the newer processor is the stronger performer in the vast majority of scenarios.