Intel Core i9-11900F vs Intel Core Ultra 9 288V Comparison

The Intel Core i9-11900F and the Intel Core Ultra 9 288V are both 8-core processors, yet they deliver starkly different performance profiles, with the desktop Rocket Lake chip winning 10 of 17 head-to-head benchmarks and the mobile Lunar Lake part taking 7. The overall average benchmark scores are nearly identical — 23254 for the i9-11900F versus 23219 for the Ultra 9 288V, a 0.2% gap — but the distribution of wins tells a story of specialized strengths rather than overall equivalence.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most dramatic victory for the Intel Core i9-11900F comes in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where it scores 18759 against the Ultra 9 288V's 10178, a massive 84.3% lead. This is not an isolated result; the i9 also wins Cinebench R20 multi-core by 11.4% (7878 vs 7069) and Cinebench R15 multi-core by 19.4% (1890 vs 1583). The pattern continues in PassMark integer math, where the i9 posts 83718 versus 44019 — a 90.2% advantage — and in data compression, scoring 280847 against 186521 for a 50.6% win. Random string sorting also favors the i9 decisively at 32520 versus 22622, a 43.8% margin.

However, the Ultra 9 288V strikes back in single-threaded and specialized workloads. In PassMark single-thread, it scores 4274 against the i9's 3413, a 20.1% advantage. The Ultra 9 also wins Cinebench R15 single-core (301.5 vs 266, an 11.8% lead), but the i9 takes Cinebench R20 single-core (1112 vs 997, an 11.5% win) and Cinebench R23 single-core (2648 vs 1950, a 35.8% margin). In PassMark physics, the Ultra 9 dominates with 1637 versus 949, a 42% lead, and it wins floating-point math at 59536 versus 48562, an 18.4% edge. The Ultra 9 also excels at finding prime numbers, scoring 195 versus just 61, a 68.7% gap, and edges out the i9 in data encryption at 14141 versus 13636, a 3.6% win.

The multi-threaded PassMark test shows a closer contest, with the i9 winning 22115 to 19810, an 11.6% margin. Notably, the i9's 16 threads provide a clear advantage in heavily parallel workloads, while the Ultra 9's 8 threads still manage competitive scores in many tests, underscoring its higher per-thread efficiency.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different foundations. The Intel Core i9-11900F uses the Rocket Lake architecture on a 14 nm process node manufactured by Intel, with a die size of 276 mm². The Ultra 9 288V employs the Lunar Lake architecture on a 3 nm node from TSMC, representing a significant manufacturing leap. This process difference is reflected in power consumption: the i9 has a 65 W TDP, while the Ultra 9 draws only 30 W, making it far more energy-efficient.

Cache configurations also diverge sharply. The i9 offers 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ultra 9 counters with 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3. Despite having less L3, the Ultra 9's larger per-core L1 and L2 caches contribute to its strong single-thread performance.

Memory support differs completely: the i9 uses DDR4 with dual-channel memory and 51.2 GB/s bandwidth, while the Ultra 9 uses LPDDR5X with dual-channel memory and 136.5 GB/s bandwidth — a 2.7x bandwidth advantage for the newer chip. PCIe connectivity also changes: the i9 provides Gen 4 with 20 lanes, whereas the Ultra 9 offers Gen 5 but only 4 lanes. The Ultra 9 includes integrated Arc 140V graphics, while the i9 has no integrated graphics. Clock speeds are close, with the i9 boosting to 5.20 GHz and the Ultra 9 to 5.10 GHz, but the base clocks differ at 2.50 GHz versus 3.30 GHz. The i9 supports 16 threads via hyperthreading, while the Ultra 9 has 8 threads.

The Verdict

The data clearly indicates that the Intel Core i9-11900F is the superior choice for multi-threaded desktop workloads. Its 84.3% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 90.2% advantage in PassMark integer math are decisive for rendering, compiling, and other parallel tasks. The i9 also wins overall in the head-to-head count with 10 wins out of 17 benchmarks, and its average benchmark score of 23254 is 0.2% higher than the Ultra 9's 23219.

The Intel Core Ultra 9 288V, however, is the better option for power-constrained mobile environments and single-threaded responsiveness. Its 20.1% win in PassMark single-thread, 42% lead in physics, and 68.7% advantage in prime number finding demonstrate superior per-core efficiency. With a 30 W TDP versus 65 W, the Ultra 9 delivers competitive performance at less than half the power draw, making it ideal for laptops where battery life matters.

For desktop users with access to Socket 1200 motherboards and DDR4 memory, the i9-11900F offers unmatched parallel performance. For those needing a mobile processor with integrated graphics and high memory bandwidth, the Ultra 9 288V is the clear winner. The choice ultimately depends on whether raw multi-threaded throughput or energy-efficient single-thread performance is the priority.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher multi-core performance?

A: The Intel Core i9-11900F wins all three Cinebench multi-core tests, with a 19.4% lead in R15, 11.4% in R20, and a massive 84.3% in R23.

Q: Does the Intel Core Ultra 9 288V beat the i9-11900F in single-threaded tests?

A: The Ultra 9 wins PassMark single-thread by 20.1% and Cinebench R15 single-core by 11.8%, but the i9 wins Cinebench R20 single-core by 11.5% and R23 single-core by 35.8%.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between the two?

A: The i9-11900F has an average score of 23254, while the Ultra 9 288V scores 23219, a difference of only 0.2% in favor of the i9.

Q: How do the memory bandwidth specs compare?

A: The Ultra 9 288V supports LPDDR5X with 136.5 GB/s bandwidth, while the i9-11900F supports DDR4 with 51.2 GB/s, giving the Ultra 9 a 2.7x bandwidth advantage.

Q: Which processor has a higher TDP?

A: The i9-11900F has a TDP of 65 W, while the Ultra 9 288V has a TDP of 30 W, making the Ultra 9 significantly more power-efficient.

Q: How many threads does each processor support?

A: The i9-11900F supports 16 threads through hyperthreading, while the Ultra 9 288V supports 8 threads.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i9-11900F is the definitive winner in multi-threaded, parallel-heavy workloads. It dominates in Cinebench R23 multi-core by 84.3%, integer math by 90.2%, and data compression by 50.6%. These results make it the clear choice for video rendering, 3D modeling, scientific computing, and any application that scales with thread count. Its 16 threads provide a significant advantage over the Ultra 9's 8 threads in these scenarios. The i9 also wins extended instructions by 24.5% and random string sorting by 43.8%, indicating strength in data processing and sorting tasks.

The Intel Core Ultra 9 288V excels in scenarios where power efficiency and single-thread responsiveness are critical. Its wins in PassMark physics (42% lead), floating-point math (18.4% lead), and prime number finding (68.7% lead) suggest strong performance in physics simulations and mathematical computations. The 20.1% single-thread advantage makes it better suited for everyday responsiveness, light productivity, and applications that rely heavily on single-core performance. Its 136.5 GB/s memory bandwidth and integrated Arc 140V graphics also make it a more complete mobile solution, while the 30 W TDP ensures longer battery life in laptops.

For data encryption, the Ultra 9 holds a narrow 3.6% edge, while the i9 wins multi-threaded PassMark by 11.6%. Users requiring the highest multi-core throughput should choose the i9-11900F; those prioritizing portability, efficiency, and single-thread speed should select the Ultra 9 288V.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i9-11900F | Intel Core Ultra 9 288V |

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

| Series | Core 11th Gen | Core Ultra Series 2 |

| Threads | 16 | 8 |

| Base Clock | 2.50 GHz | 3.30 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.20 GHz | 5.10 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 30 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1200 | Intel BGA 2833 |

| Architecture | Rocket Lake | Lunar Lake |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Die Size | 276 mm² | N/A |

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

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

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

| Memory Support | DDR4 | LPDDR5X |

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

| PCIe | Gen 4, 20 Lanes | Gen 5, 4 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | None | Arc 140V |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

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

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

| Launch MSRP | $422 | N/A |

| Part Number | SRKNK | SRPMSSRPMWQ5JTQ5JUQ5KW |