Intel Core i9-11900H vs Intel Core Ultra 5 228V Comparison

The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V and Intel Core i9-11900H are two very different mobile processors that land at nearly identical average benchmark scores, yet they achieve that parity through opposing design philosophies. The i9-11900H is an older, high-power Tiger Lake-H part with 16 threads and a large cache, while the Ultra 5 228V is a modern, efficient Lunar Lake chip with a 17W TDP. Despite the i9-11900H winning 10 of 17 head-to-head benchmarks, the overall average score is nearly identical, with the Ultra 5 228V posting a 21440 average against the i9-11900H’s 21367, a difference of just 0.3%. The data suggests the i9-11900H excels in sustained multi-threaded workloads, while the Ultra 5 228V delivers superior single-thread performance per watt, making the choice dependent entirely on workload priorities.

The Verdict

From the benchmark data, pick the Intel Core i9-11900H if your priority is raw multi-threaded compute power. This processor wins the Cinebench R23 multi-core test decisively with a score of 16772, which is 40.8% higher than the Ultra 5 228V’s 9932. It also dominates integer math, scoring 72882 against the Ultra 5’s 39679, a 45.6% advantage. The i9-11900H’s 16 threads provide a clear edge in heavily parallel workloads like video rendering, code compilation, and data compression, where it beats the Ultra 5 by 27.3% in PassMark data compression.

Pick the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V for modern single-thread efficiency and specialized workloads. It wins the Cinebench R15 single-core test with a 12.2% lead over the i9-11900H, and it is 23.7% faster in PassMark single-thread performance. The Ultra 5 also shows massive advantages in specific tasks: it is 93.1% faster in finding prime numbers, 61.4% faster in physics simulations, and 23.7% faster in floating-point math. For users running scientific computations, physics engines, or applications that favor newer instruction sets, the Ultra 5 228V is the superior choice despite its lower overall multi-thread scores.

The data also shows the Ultra 5 228V achieves this with a 17W TDP versus the i9-11900H’s 35W TDP. This makes the Ultra 5 the obvious pick for thin-and-light laptops where battery life and thermals matter more than peak multi-core output. The i9-11900H, conversely, requires more power and cooling infrastructure, making it better suited to larger chassis with robust cooling solutions. In summary, the i9-11900H is the multi-threaded workhorse, while the Ultra 5 228V is the efficiency-focused single-thread specialist.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from entirely different Intel design eras. The Core Ultra 5 228V uses the Lunar Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process node from TSMC, while the Core i9-11900H uses the older Tiger Lake-H architecture on Intel’s 10 nm process. This node difference explains much of the efficiency gap: the Ultra 5 operates at a 17W TDP, while the i9-11900H has a 35W TDP.

Core configurations differ significantly. Both have 8 cores, but the i9-11900H supports 16 threads via Hyper-Threading, while the Ultra 5 228V has only 8 threads. The i9-11900H compensates with a larger 24 MB shared L3 cache versus the Ultra 5’s 8 MB shared L3 cache. However, the Ultra 5 has more L1 cache per core (192 KB per core versus 80 KB per core) and more L2 cache per core (2.5 MB versus 1.25 MB). The i9-11900H also has a larger die at 190 mm², though the Ultra 5’s die size is not listed.

Memory support diverges as well. The i9-11900H supports DDR4 memory with a measured bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s, while the Ultra 5’s memory support is listed as dependent on the motherboard. Both use dual-channel memory buses. PCIe connectivity is a major differentiator: the Ultra 5 supports PCIe Gen 5 with 4 CPU lanes, while the i9-11900H uses PCIe Gen 4 with 20 CPU lanes. This gives the older chip more expansion capability, though the newer standard offers higher per-lane bandwidth.

Integrated graphics differ substantially. The Ultra 5 228V features Arc 130V graphics, while the i9-11900H has UHD Graphics 750. The production status also differs: the Ultra 5 is active, while the i9-11900H is end-of-life. The i9-11900H has a launch MSRP of $546, while the Ultra 5 has no listed launch MSRP.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in single-core performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V leads in single-core tests. It scores 267 in Cinebench R15 single-core versus the i9-11900H’s 238, a 12.2% advantage. In PassMark single-thread, the Ultra 5 scores 3836 against the i9-11900H’s 3102, a 23.7% lead.

Q: How much faster is the i9-11900H in multi-core workloads?

A: The i9-11900H’s advantage is significant in multi-core tests. It leads by 11.1% in Cinebench R15 multi-core (1690 vs 1502.5), by 7.9% in Cinebench R20 multi-core (7044 vs 6491), and by a massive 40.8% in Cinebench R23 multi-core (16772 vs 9932).

Q: Is the Core Ultra 5 228V more power efficient?

A: Yes, the data shows the Ultra 5 228V has a 17W TDP, which is less than half of the i9-11900H’s 35W TDP. Despite this, it wins several benchmarks, indicating better performance per watt in those specific tests.

Q: Which processor has better integrated graphics?

A: The Core Ultra 5 228V features Arc 130V integrated graphics, while the i9-11900H has UHD Graphics 750. The benchmark data does not include graphics performance tests, so this comparison is based solely on the listed specifications.

Q: What is the overall average benchmark score difference?

A: The average scores are nearly identical. The Core Ultra 5 228V has an average benchmark score of 21440, while the i9-11900H scores 21367. This puts the Ultra 5 just 0.3% ahead of the i9-11900H in overall average performance.

Q: Which processor supports more PCIe lanes?

A: The Intel Core i9-11900H supports 20 PCIe Gen 4 lanes, while the Core Ultra 5 228V supports only 4 PCIe Gen 5 lanes. This gives the i9-11900H far more expansion capacity for discrete components.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every major specification category. The Core Ultra 5 228V has 8 cores and 8 threads, while the Core i9-11900H has 8 cores and 16 threads. Both have a base clock of 2.10 GHz, but the i9-11900H boosts to 4.90 GHz versus the Ultra 5’s 4.50 GHz. The Ultra 5 has a 17W TDP, while the i9-11900H has a 35W TDP. The Ultra 5 uses an Intel BGA 2833 socket, while the i9-11900H uses an Intel BGA 1787 socket.

The cache hierarchy is completely different: the Ultra 5 has 192 KB L1 per core and 2.5 MB L2 per core, while the i9-11900H has 80 KB L1 per core and 1.25 MB L2 per core. The L3 cache is 8 MB shared on the Ultra 5 versus 24 MB shared on the i9-11900H. Memory support differs, with the i9-11900H specifying DDR4 and 51.2 GB/s bandwidth, while the Ultra 5 lists memory as motherboard-dependent. PCIe connectivity is Gen 5 with 4 lanes on the Ultra 5 versus Gen 4 with 20 lanes on the i9-11900H. Integrated graphics are Arc 130V versus UHD Graphics 750. The process node is 3 nm TSMC for the Ultra 5 versus 10 nm Intel for the i9-11900H. The i9-11900H has a die size of 190 mm², while the Ultra 5’s is not listed. The i9-11900H has a launch MSRP of $546, while the Ultra 5 has none listed.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark suite reveals a clear split between single-thread and multi-thread performance. The i9-11900H wins the majority of tests, taking 10 of 17 benchmarks. Its largest victory is in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where it scores 16772 against the Ultra 5’s 9932, a 40.8% advantage. The i9-11900H also dominates integer math with a 45.6% lead (72882 vs 39679), data compression with a 27.3% lead (239366 vs 173924), and random string sorting with a 25% lead (28328 vs 21254). In multi-threaded PassMark tests, the i9-11900H scores 20162 versus 18227, a 9.6% win.

The Core Ultra 5 228V counters with 7 wins, concentrated in single-thread and specialized math. Its standout victory is in finding prime numbers, where it scores 168 versus the i9-11900H’s 87, a 93.1% advantage. The Ultra 5 wins physics simulations by 61.4% (1538 vs 953), and it wins floating-point math by 23.7% (53310 vs 43094). In single-thread tests, the Ultra 5 is 12.2% faster in Cinebench R15 single-core (267 vs 238) and 23.7% faster in PassMark single-thread (3836 vs 3102). The Ultra 5 also wins data encryption by 6.5% (13032 vs 12232). In Cinebench R20 single-core, the i9-11900H wins by 7.8% (994 vs 916), and it wins R15 multi-core by 11.1% (1690 vs 1502.5) and R20 multi-core by 7.9% (7044 vs 6491). The i9-11900H also leads in extended instructions by 8.2% (16123 vs 14801).

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i9-11900H is the clear winner for multi-threaded productivity applications. Its 16 threads and larger 24 MB L3 cache give it substantial leads in Cinebench multi-core tests, ranging from 7.9% to 40.8% across different versions. It is also the better choice for integer-heavy workloads, as shown by the 45.6% win in PassMark integer math and the 27.3% win in data compression. Random string sorting, which often indicates database and sorting performance, favors the i9-11900H by 25%. For users running video encoding, 3D rendering, or any workload that scales with thread count, the i9-11900H is the data-backed choice.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V wins in scenarios that favor modern architecture and lower power consumption. It is the better option for single-threaded responsiveness, winning PassMark single-thread by 23.7% and Cinebench R15 single-core by 12.2%. The Ultra 5’s 93.1% lead in prime number finding and 61.4% lead in physics simulations suggest it excels in scientific and simulation workloads that use newer instruction sets. Its 23.7% advantage in floating-point math also makes it suitable for graphics and scientific computing. With a 17W TDP, the Ultra 5 is the obvious choice for fanless or passively cooled designs and for users who prioritize battery life over maximum multi-core throughput. The Ultra 5 also wins in data encryption, which could be relevant for security-focused applications.