Intel Core i9-12900HX vs Intel Core Ultra 5 336H Comparison

The Intel Core i9-12900HX and the Intel Core Ultra 5 336H represent two distinct approaches to mobile computing performance. The i9-12900HX is a 12th Gen Alder Lake-HX part, while the Ultra 5 336H is a Panther Lake-H chip from the Core Ultra Series 3. Both processors have 16 cores and are actively produced for mobile devices, but their architectural philosophies and performance characteristics diverge significantly. The recorded data shows a near-even split in benchmark wins, with the i9-12900HX taking nine tests and the Ultra 5 336H taking eight, making the choice between them highly workload-dependent.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i9-12900HX dominates in multi-threaded productivity and data-heavy workloads. In the Cinebench R15 multicore test, it scores 3566 against the Ultra 5 336H's 2418, a 47.5% advantage. The gap narrows in Cinebench R20 multicore, where the i9-12900HX posts 11764 versus 10076, a 16.8% lead. The PassMark integer math test shows the largest single delta in either direction, with the i9-12900HX scoring 113416 compared to 62070, an 82.7% advantage. Data compression also heavily favors the i9-12900HX, with scores of 400636 versus 280340, a 42.9% difference. The PassMark multithread score further confirms this pattern: 33158 for the i9-12900HX versus 28545 for the Ultra 5 336H, a 16.2% edge. Random string sorting, floating point math, and data encryption also go to the i9-12900HX, with leads of 27.5%, 2.4%, and 7.7% respectively.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H counters with significant wins in single-threaded performance and certain specialized tasks. The most striking result is in Cinebench R23 single-core, where the Ultra 5 336H scores 3387 against the i9-12900HX's 1912.5, a 43.5% margin. The Cinebench R15 single-core test shows a smaller but still clear win, 341 versus 278, a 18.5% difference. The PassMark single-thread test gives the Ultra 5 336H a 4013 score versus 3745, a 6.7% edge. In PassMark find prime numbers, the Ultra 5 336H scores 299 versus 132, a 55.9% advantage. PassMark physics also favors the Ultra 5 336H, 2682 versus 2012, a 25% gap. The extended instructions test is nearly even, with the Ultra 5 336H winning by 0.9% (24542 versus 24315). The Ultra 5 336H also wins the Cinebench R23 multicore test, scoring 23991 against 23150, a 3.5% lead. This suggests that despite its lower thread count, the newer architecture can keep pace in some all-core rendering scenarios.

Architecture Differences

The core configurations are identical in count but differ in threading capability. The i9-12900HX has 16 cores and 24 threads, meaning it supports Hyper-Threading. The Ultra 5 336H has 16 cores and 16 threads, with no such capability. This partly explains the i9-12900HX's strong showing in multithreaded tests. The i9-12900HX is built on Intel's 10 nm process with a die size of 215 mm², while the Ultra 5 336H uses a 3 nm process. Both are manufactured by Intel.

Cache hierarchies differ substantially. The i9-12900HX has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ultra 5 336H has 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. The Ultra 5 336H has more L1 and L2 per core but less total L3. The i9-12900HX supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, while the Ultra 5 336H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a recorded memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. ECC memory is supported on the i9-12900HX but not on the Ultra 5 336H.

PCIe lanes also differ. The i9-12900HX provides Gen 5 with 20 CPU-only lanes, while the Ultra 5 336H provides Gen 5 with 12 CPU-only lanes. Integrated graphics are present on both, but they differ in generation: the i9-12900HX uses UHD Graphics 770, while the Ultra 5 336H uses Intel Xe3 Graphics. The sockets are incompatible: Intel BGA 1964 for the i9-12900HX and Intel BGA 2540 for the Ultra 5 336H. Clock speeds are lower on the Ultra 5 336H (base 1.90 GHz, boost 4.60 GHz) compared to the i9-12900HX (base 2.30 GHz, boost 5.00 GHz), yet the Ultra 5 336H still wins in single-thread performance. The multiplier is unlocked on the i9-12900HX but locked on the Ultra 5 336H. The i9-12900HX was released in May 2022; the Ultra 5 336H has a January 2026 release date.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has better single-core performance based on the data?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H consistently outperforms the i9-12900HX in single-threaded tests. The Cinebench R23 single-core score is 3387 versus 1912.5, a 43.5% advantage. The PassMark single-thread score is 4013 versus 3745, a 6.7% edge.

Q: Is the Intel Core i9-12900HX always faster in multi-core workloads?

A: No. The i9-12900HX wins most multi-core tests, including Cinebench R15 multicore (3566 vs. 2418) and R20 multicore (11764 vs. 10076). However, the Ultra 5 336H wins Cinebench R23 multicore, scoring 23991 versus 23150, a 3.5% margin.

Q: What is the difference in thread counts?

A: The i9-12900HX has 24 threads across its 16 cores, while the Ultra 5 336H has 16 threads across 16 cores. The i9-12900HX's additional threads contribute to its multithreaded wins.

Q: How do the cache sizes compare?

A: The i9-12900HX has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3. The Ultra 5 336H has 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: Only the i9-12900HX supports ECC memory. The Ultra 5 336H does not list ECC as a feature.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth for the Ultra 5 336H?

A: The recorded memory bandwidth is 115.2 GB/s for the Ultra 5 336H. The i9-12900HX does not have a recorded bandwidth figure in the data.

Specification Differences

The recorded specifications show clear differences between the two processors. The i9-12900HX has a base clock of 2.30 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, while the Ultra 5 336H has a base clock of 1.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. Thermal design power is 55 watts for the i9-12900HX and 25 watts for the Ultra 5 336H. The i9-12900HX uses socket Intel BGA 1964, the Ultra 5 336H uses Intel BGA 2540. Architecture names differ: Alder Lake for the i9-12900HX, Panther Lake for the Ultra 5 336H. The process node is 10 nm for the i9-12900HX and 3 nm for the Ultra 5 336H. Die size is 215 mm² for the i9-12900HX, with no die size recorded for the Ultra 5 336H. L1 cache per core is 80 KB for the i9-12900HX and 192 KB for the Ultra 5 336H. L2 cache per core is 1.25 MB for the i9-12900HX and 2.5 MB for the Ultra 5 336H. L3 cache is 30 MB shared for the i9-12900HX and 18 MB shared for the Ultra 5 336H. Memory support is DDR4 and DDR5 for the i9-12900HX, DDR5 and LPDDR5X for the Ultra 5 336H. ECC memory is true for the i9-12900HX, false for the Ultra 5 336H. PCIe lanes are 20 for the i9-12900HX and 12 for the Ultra 5 336H, both Gen 5. Integrated graphics are UHD Graphics 770 for the i9-12900HX, Intel Xe3 Graphics for the Ultra 5 336H. The multiplier is unlocked for the i9-12900HX, locked for the Ultra 5 336H. Part numbers are SRLGK and SA4RD respectively. The launch MSRP for the i9-12900HX is $606, while no launch MSRP is recorded for the Ultra 5 336H.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest win for the i9-12900HX is in PassMark integer math, where it scores 113416 versus 62070, an 82.7% delta. This is followed by Cinebench R15 multicore with a 47.5% delta (3566 vs. 2418), and PassMark data compression with a 42.9% delta (400636 vs. 280340). Random string sorting shows a 27.5% delta (43877 vs. 34402), and Cinebench R20 multicore shows a 16.8% delta (11764 vs. 10076). PassMark multithread gives a 16.2% delta (33158 vs. 28545), data encryption a 7.7% delta (22932 vs. 21291), and floating point math a 2.4% delta (84410 vs. 82415).

The largest win for the Ultra 5 336H is in PassMark find prime numbers, where it scores 299 versus 132, a 55.9% delta. Cinebench R23 single-core shows a 43.5% delta (3387 vs. 1912.5). PassMark physics gives a 25% delta (2682 vs. 2012). Cinebench R15 single-core shows an 18.5% delta (341 vs. 278). PassMark single-thread gives a 6.7% delta (4013 vs. 3745). Cinebench R23 multicore shows a 3.5% delta (23991 vs. 23150), and extended instructions a 0.9% delta (24542 vs. 24315). Notably, the Cinebench R20 single-core test goes to the i9-12900HX, with a score of 1660 versus 1422, a 16.7% delta, which is an unusual result given the Ultra 5 336H's other single-thread wins.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the Intel Core i9-12900HX is the stronger choice for integer-heavy computation, data compression, and general multithreaded throughput. Its 82.7% lead in integer math and 47.5% lead in Cinebench R15 multicore make it suitable for tasks like code compilation, data processing, and other workloads that scale with thread count. The i9-12900HX also holds a 16.2% advantage in PassMark multithread, and its 30 MB of L3 cache and 24 threads provide a solid foundation for parallel tasks.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H is the better option for single-thread-bound applications and scenarios where power efficiency matters. Its 43.5% win in Cinebench R23 single-core and 55.9% win in find prime numbers show a clear architectural advantage in per-core performance. The 25-watt TDP, compared to the i9-12900HX's 55 watts, suggests a lower thermal footprint, which is relevant for thin-and-light mobile designs. The Ultra 5 336H also wins the Cinebench R23 multicore test by 3.5%, proving it can handle all-core rendering without falling behind in that specific scenario.

Users who prioritize maximum multi-threaded performance and have access to a higher power budget should select the i9-12900HX. Users who need strong single-core responsiveness, lower power consumption, and a more modern 3 nm process should select the Ultra 5 336H. Both processors sit at the 84th percentile among all CPUs in the database, with average benchmark scores of 35003 for the i9-12900HX and 34485 for the Ultra 5 336H. The i9-12900HX's nearest rival is the Intel Core i7-13800H with a 0% delta, while the Ultra 5 336H's nearest rival is the Intel Core i7-13700HX at a -0.2% delta. The choice ultimately rests on whether the workload favors the i9-12900HX's thread-heavy design or the Ultra 5 336H's high-efficiency cores.