Intel Core i7-14701TE vs Intel Core Ultra X7 368H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark database records a decisive sweep for the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H. Across all 17 recorded head-to-head tests, the mobile Panther Lake chip posts the higher score. There is no test category in which the Intel Core i7-14701TE manages to outrun it.

The largest single deltas appear in compute-heavy workloads. In PassMark’s find prime numbers test, the Core Ultra X7 368H scores 321 against 143 for the i7-14701TE, a 55.5% deficit for the desktop part. Data encryption shows a similar margin: 25228 versus 11699, a 53.6% gap. Floating point math also leans heavily toward the Ultra part, with 105681 against 50219, a 52.5% difference.

Cinebench results tell the same story with slightly narrower margins. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core Ultra X7 368H delivers 28221 points, while the i7-14701TE manages 17035, a 39.6% shortfall. Single-core Cinebench R23 shows 3984 versus 2405, again a 39.6% gap. The pattern holds for Cinebench R20 and R15, with the same delta percentage of roughly 39.6% to 39.7% across both single-core and multi-core runs.

PassMark’s multithread score puts the Ultra part at 32956 versus 20042 for the i7-14701TE, a 39.2% lead. The physics test shows 2857 versus 1860, a 34.9% advantage. Integer math is closer in relative terms: 88083 versus 65792, a 25.3% gap. Data compression also lands at the smaller end of the spread, with 312927 versus 220520, a 29.5% difference. Extended instructions show 25669 versus 14354, a 44.1% margin. Random string sorting records 38093 versus 22760, a 40.3% gap. The single-thread PassMark tests, listed twice in the database as single_thread and singlethread, both show 4005 versus 2637, a 34.2% advantage.

The average benchmark score for the Core Ultra X7 368H sits at 40518, placing it in the 87th percentile among all CPUs in the database. The i7-14701TE averages 26013, which lands in the 78th percentile. The nearest rival for the Ultra part is the Intel Core 7 253PE with an average score of 40557, a delta of 0.1% in favor of the rival. The Core 5 223PE follows at 40585, 0.2% ahead. The AMD Ryzen 9 7940H scores 40431, 0.2% behind the Ultra part, and the Intel Xeon 6507P scores 40426, also 0.2% behind. For the i7-14701TE, the closest competitors are the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 5655GE at 25880 (0.5% ahead), the AMD Ryzen AI 5 340 at 25981 (0.1% ahead), the AMD Ryzen 5 8640HS at 26106 (0.4% behind), and the AMD Ryzen 5 8540U at 26187 (0.7% behind).

The Verdict

The data indicates a clear performance hierarchy. The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H wins every benchmark in the comparison set, and the margins are substantial in most categories. The smallest recorded advantage is 25.3% in integer math, which is still a large lead by any standard. The i7-14701TE does not claim a single win across the 17 head-to-head tests.

For workloads that stress multi-core throughput, floating point, encryption, or prime number calculation, the Core Ultra X7 368H is the stronger choice by a wide margin. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 28221 versus 17035 means the Ultra part finishes render workloads roughly 40% faster. The PassMark multithread score of 32956 versus 20042 reinforces that conclusion for general parallel tasks.

The single-core results also favor the Ultra part. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 3984 versus 2405, and PassMark single-thread shows 4005 versus 2637. Users running lightly threaded applications, such as legacy software or certain scripting workloads, will see a consistent advantage from the Core Ultra X7 368H.

The i7-14701TE remains a functional desktop processor with an average score in the 78th percentile, but the recorded data offers no scenario where it outperforms the Core Ultra X7 368H. The verdict from the database is unambiguous: the Core Ultra X7 368H is the faster processor in every measured category.

Where Each One Wins

Strictly from the benchmark results, the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H wins in every recorded test. There are no use cases in the data where the i7-14701TE takes the lead. That said, the margins vary by workload type, and the relative strengths can be described by category.

The largest advantages for the Core Ultra X7 368H appear in encryption, prime number finding, and floating point math. These are workloads that benefit from the architectural improvements in Panther Lake, including the larger L1 cache of 192 KB per core and the 3 nm process node. The 55.5% gap in prime number finding and the 53.6% gap in encryption suggest the Ultra part handles integer-heavy and cryptographic operations with notably higher efficiency.

The smallest margins, though still decisive, are in integer math (25.3%) and data compression (29.5%). These tasks rely less on raw single-core speed and more on sustained throughput, where the i7-14701TE’s 33 MB of shared L3 cache helps narrow the gap. The desktop part also has a higher boost clock of 5.20 GHz versus 5.00 GHz for the Ultra part, which may explain why the integer math deficit is smaller than in other tests.

For multi-core rendering, the Core Ultra X7 368H’s 16 cores and 16 threads deliver a 39.6% advantage in Cinebench R23 multi-core. The i7-14701TE matches 16 threads despite having only 8 cores, but the Ultra part’s higher per-core efficiency still dominates. The physics test shows a 34.9% gap, and the multithread PassMark test shows a 39.2% gap.

In single-threaded work, the Ultra part leads by 34.2% in PassMark and 39.6% in Cinebench. The i7-14701TE’s higher boost clock does not overcome the architectural advantages of the Panther Lake design, which includes a 3 nm process node and larger per-core caches.

The practical takeaway from the data is that the Core Ultra X7 368H is the pick for any compute-heavy task, whether single-threaded or multi-threaded. The i7-14701TE’s only relative strength is that its deficits are smaller in integer math and compression, but it still loses those tests.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H has an average benchmark score of 40518, while the Intel Core i7-14701TE has an average score of 26013.

Q: How large is the Cinebench R23 multi-core gap?

A: The Core Ultra X7 368H scores 28221 points, and the i7-14701TE scores 17035 points, a 39.6% difference in favor of the Ultra part.

Q: What is the closest benchmark margin between the two?

A: The smallest recorded margin is in PassMark integer math, where the Core Ultra X7 368H scores 88083 versus 65792 for the i7-14701TE, a 25.3% gap.

Q: Does the i7-14701TE win any head-to-head test?

A: No. The database records 17 head-to-head tests, and the Core Ultra X7 368H wins all 17.

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

A: In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Core Ultra X7 368H scores 3984 versus 2405, a 39.6% lead. In PassMark single-thread, it scores 4005 versus 2637, a 34.2% lead.

Q: What are the nearest rivals for each processor?

A: For the Core Ultra X7 368H, the nearest rival is the Intel Core 7 253PE with an average score of 40557, 0.1% ahead. For the i7-14701TE, the nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen AI 5 340 with an average score of 25981, 0.1% ahead.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural generations and target different market segments. The Intel Core i7-14701TE is a desktop part from the Core 14th Gen series, built on Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-R codename. It uses a 10 nm process node and an Intel Socket 1700. The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H is a mobile part from the Core Ultra Series 3, built on Panther Lake architecture with the Panther Lake-H codename. It uses a 3 nm process node and an Intel BGA 2540 socket.

The core counts differ significantly. The i7-14701TE has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Core Ultra X7 368H has 16 cores and 16 threads. That means the Ultra part has twice as many physical cores but the same thread count, indicating that the mobile chip does not use hyper-threading in the same way. The i7-14701TE relies on simultaneous multithreading to reach 16 threads from 8 cores.

Clock speeds are close on paper. The i7-14701TE has a base clock of 2.10 GHz and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz. The Core Ultra X7 368H has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. Despite the lower clocks, the Ultra part wins every benchmark, which points to architectural efficiency gains from the 3 nm process and newer core design.

Thermal design power differs substantially. The i7-14701TE carries a 45 W TDP, while the Core Ultra X7 368H runs at 25 W. The lower TDP for the Ultra part, combined with higher performance, suggests a significant efficiency advantage, though the database does not record direct power consumption measurements.

Cache hierarchies are structured differently. The i7-14701TE 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 X7 368H has 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. The Ultra part has larger per-core caches but less shared L3, which reflects its mobile design and the different core topology.

Memory support also diverges. The i7-14701TE supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus, and it supports ECC memory. The Core Ultra X7 368H supports LPDDR5X only, also over a dual-channel bus, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 153.6 GB/s. ECC memory is not supported on the Ultra part.

PCIe connectivity differs. The i7-14701TE provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the Core Ultra X7 368H provides Gen 5 with 4 lanes from the CPU. The integrated graphics also differ: the i7-14701TE uses UHD Graphics 770, while the Core Ultra X7 368H uses Arc B390.

The release dates are separated by about a year and a half. The i7-14701TE was released in June 2024, and the Core Ultra X7 368H was released in January 2026. Both are listed as Active in production status, and neither has an unlocked multiplier. The die size for the i7-14701TE is recorded as 257 mm², while the die size for the Core Ultra X7 368H is not listed. Neither processor has a recorded transistor count or 3D V-Cache.