Intel Core i9-11900F vs Intel Core Ultra 7 266V Comparison

The Intel Core Ultra 7 266V and Intel Core i9-11900F are separated by three years of silicon evolution, yet their average benchmark scores are nearly identical. The Ultra 7 266V posts an average of 23,297, while the i9-11900F averages 23,254, a difference of just 0.2%. This near-parity in overall performance, however, masks starkly different strengths, with the older desktop chip dominating multi-threaded productivity while the newer mobile part wins on efficiency and specific computational tasks.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result in the data is the Core i9-11900F’s overwhelming victory in integer math. It scores 83,718 versus the Ultra 7’s 41,558, a massive 50.4% advantage. This is the single largest performance gap in either direction and reflects the i9’s higher sustained power envelope and 16 threads. The i9 also wins decisively in data compression, scoring 280,847 against the Ultra 7’s 187,050, a 33.4% lead, and in random string sorting, where it posts 32,520 versus 22,905, a 29.6% advantage. These are classic multi-threaded workloads, and the 8-core/16-thread i9 simply has more parallel execution resources than the 8-core/8-thread Ultra 7.

Across the Cinebench suite, the i9-11900F is consistently ahead by nearly identical margins. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 18,759 versus 16,544, an 11.8% lead. The single-core result is similar: 2,648 versus 2,335, also an 11.8% gap. This pattern repeats across R15 and R20, with the i9 winning single and multi-core tests by margins between 11.7% and 11.9%. The consistency suggests a fundamental clock and power advantage rather than a specific architectural edge in rendering. The i9’s boost clock of 5.20 GHz and 65W TDP allow it to sustain higher frequencies than the Ultra 7’s 5.00 GHz and 17W TDP, which is crucial for short-duration render tasks.

The Ultra 7 266V’s wins are fewer but more dramatic in percentage terms. Its most impressive result is in the find prime numbers test, where it scores 191 versus the i9’s 61, a stunning 213.1% advantage. This is the only test where the Ultra 7 more than doubles the i9’s score. It also wins physics by a wide margin, scoring 1,608 versus 949, a 69.4% lead. In floating point math, the Ultra 7 scores 56,923 versus 48,562, a 17.2% win. These three victories share a common theme: they appear to favor the newer Lunar Lake architecture’s execution units and possibly its integrated vector capabilities.

In single-threaded PassMark tests, the Ultra 7 takes a clear win with 3,943 versus 3,413, a 15.5% margin. This is notable because the i9 wins Cinebench single-core, yet the Ultra 7 wins PassMark single-thread. The difference likely stems from the test content; PassMark’s single-thread test may better leverage the Ultra 7’s newer instruction set and memory architecture. The data encryption test is nearly a tie, with the Ultra 7 winning 13,822 versus 13,636, a slim 1.4% margin. The i9 takes the overall multithread test with 22,115 versus 19,461, a 12% lead, reinforcing its multi-core dominance. In total, the i9 wins 11 head-to-head benchmarks while the Ultra 7 wins 6.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent fundamentally different design philosophies. The Core Ultra 7 266V is built on Lunar Lake architecture using a 3 nm process from TSMC, while the Core i9-11900F uses the 14 nm Rocket Lake architecture fabricated by Intel. This process gap is enormous; the Ultra 7’s transistors are far smaller, which is the primary enabler of its dramatically lower power consumption. The i9’s die size is 276 mm², whereas the Ultra 7’s die size is not listed in the data, but the process difference alone explains the TDP disparity: 17W for the Ultra 7 versus 65W for the i9.

Core counts are identical at 8, but threading differs. The i9 supports 16 threads via Hyper-Threading, while the Ultra 7 has only 8 threads. This is a critical architectural decision; the i9’s extra threads are the main reason it wins most multi-threaded benchmarks. Cache hierarchies also differ significantly. The Ultra 7 has a larger L1 cache at 192 KB per core versus the i9’s 80 KB per core, and a much larger L2 at 2.5 MB per core versus 512 KB. However, the i9 has a larger shared L3 cache at 16 MB versus 12 MB. The Ultra 7’s larger per-core caches likely contribute to its wins in physics and prime number calculations, where fast access to working data is critical.

Memory support is another major divergence. The Ultra 7 uses LPDDR5X with memory bandwidth of 136.5 GB/s, while the i9 uses DDR4 with a much lower 51.2 GB/s. This 2.7x bandwidth advantage for the Ultra 7 is likely a factor in its floating point math win, as that workload can be memory-bound. The i9 supports PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes, while the Ultra 7 has PCIe Gen 5 but only 4 lanes (CPU only). This makes the i9 more suitable for multi-GPU setups or many NVMe drives, while the Ultra 7’s limited lanes are adequate for a single high-speed device.

The Ultra 7 includes integrated graphics (Arc 140V), while the i9-11900F has none, as indicated by the 'F' suffix. This means the Ultra 7 can power a display without a discrete GPU, a major feature for mobile systems. The Ultra 7 is a mobile part on Intel BGA 2833 socket, while the i9 is a desktop part on Intel Socket 1200. The i9 has a launch MSRP of $422, while the Ultra 7 has no listed launch price. The Ultra 7’s production status is Active, while the i9 is End-of-life.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-threaded workloads?

A: The Intel Core i9-11900F is faster. It wins all Cinebench multi-core tests by 11.8% (e.g., R23: 18,759 vs 16,544) and the PassMark multithread test by 12% (22,115 vs 19,461), due to its 16 threads versus 8.

Q: Why does the Core Ultra 7 266V win the PassMark find prime numbers test by so much?

A: The Ultra 7 scores 191 versus the i9’s 61, a 213.1% advantage. This likely stems from the newer Lunar Lake architecture’s execution units and larger per-core caches (2.5 MB L2 vs 512 KB), which are well-suited to this workload.

Q: Is the Core Ultra 7 266V more power-efficient?

A: Yes, the data shows a TDP of 17W for the Ultra 7 versus 65W for the i9-11900F. This is enabled by the Ultra 7’s 3 nm TSMC process versus the i9’s 14 nm Intel process.

Q: Does the Core i9-11900F have integrated graphics?

A: No. The 'F' suffix in its name indicates it lacks integrated graphics. The Core Ultra 7 266V has an Arc 140V integrated GPU.

Q: Which processor has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The Core Ultra 7 266V has significantly higher memory bandwidth at 136.5 GB/s using LPDDR5X, compared to 51.2 GB/s for the i9-11900F using DDR4.

Q: What is the overall benchmark score difference?

A: The Ultra 7 266V has an average benchmark score of 23,297, and the i9-11900F has 23,254. The Ultra 7 is 0.2% ahead, making them statistically tied in overall performance.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core Ultra 7 266V | Intel Core i9-11900F |

|---|---|---|

| Threads | 8 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 2.20 GHz | 2.50 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.00 GHz | 5.20 GHz |

| TDP | 17 W | 65 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 2833 | Intel Socket 1200 |

| Process Node | 3 nm (TSMC) | 14 nm (Intel) |

| Die Size | Not listed | 276 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 192 KB (per core) | 80 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 2.5 MB (per core) | 512 KB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 12 MB (shared) | 16 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | LPDDR5X | DDR4 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 136.5 GB/s | 51.2 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 4 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4, 20 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Arc 140V | None |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

| Release Date | 2024-09-23 | 2021-03-15 |

| Part Number | SRPMMSRPMY | SRKNK |

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i9-11900F is the clear choice for multi-threaded productivity. Its 16 threads give it a decisive edge in any workload that scales with core count. The data shows it winning integer math by 50.4%, data compression by 33.4%, and random string sorting by 29.6%. For users who compile code, compress large files, or run heavily threaded scientific simulations, the i9 offers superior throughput. Its 65W TDP and desktop socket also imply it can be paired with robust cooling for sustained all-core loads, though the data does not explicitly state cooling requirements. The i9’s 20 PCIe Gen 4 lanes also make it better for systems with multiple expansion cards or high-speed storage arrays.

The Intel Core Ultra 7 266V is the efficiency and single-thread specialist. Its 17W TDP makes it suitable for thin-and-light laptops where battery life and thermals are paramount. The data shows it winning the PassMark single-thread test by 15.5%, indicating strong per-core performance for everyday applications. Its 213.1% lead in prime number finding and 69.4% lead in physics suggest it excels in specific computational tasks that benefit from its large L2 cache and newer architecture. The integrated Arc 140V graphics mean a system built around it needs no discrete GPU for basic display output, which is a significant advantage for portable devices. The 136.5 GB/s memory bandwidth also gives it an edge in memory-intensive workloads like floating point math, where it wins by 17.2%. In short, the Ultra 7 is the better part for a power-conscious mobile user, while the i9 is the better part for a desktop user who needs raw multi-core grunt.