Intel Core i9-14900HX vs Intel Core Ultra 5 336H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head comparison between the Intel Core i9-14900HX and the Intel Core Ultra 5 336H reveals a processor contest defined by contrasting strengths. The i9-14900HX claims victory in 13 of the 17 recorded benchmark comparisons, while the Ultra 5 336H takes 4 wins. The magnitude of those wins, however, tells a more nuanced story about each chip's design priorities.

The most striking advantage for the i9-14900HX appears in integer math. The PassMark integer math test shows the i9 scoring 157375 against the Ultra 5's 62070, a delta of 153.5%. This is the largest single gap in the entire comparison. Data compression follows a similar pattern: the i9 scores 539965 versus 280340, a 92.6% advantage. Random string sorting also heavily favors the i9, with a score of 60861 against 34402, representing a 76.9% lead. These three workloads share a common thread: they rely on raw multi-threaded throughput and large shared caches.

Cinebench multi-core results reinforce this picture. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i9 scores 4574 against 2418, a 89.2% lead. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows a 55% advantage (15616 versus 10076), and Cinebench R23 multi-core narrows to a 25.3% lead (30055 versus 23991). The shrinking delta across newer Cinebench versions suggests the Ultra 5's architecture scales relatively better in longer or more complex rendering workloads, yet the i9 remains firmly ahead.

Floating point math favors the i9 by 36.2% (112273 versus 82415). Extended instructions show a 27.3% gap (31247 versus 24542). Data encryption sees the i9 ahead by 53.2% (32619 versus 21291). PassMark multithread measures 43778 for the i9 against 28545, a 53.4% difference. All of these point to the i9's commanding position in heavily parallel workloads.

The Ultra 5 336H's wins are fewer but meaningful. The largest is in Cinebench R23 single-core, where it scores 3387 against the i9's 2181.5, a 35.6% advantage. Cinebench R15 single-core also goes to the Ultra 5, scoring 341 versus 310.5, an 8.9% lead. In PassMark find prime numbers, the Ultra 5 achieves 299 versus 193, a 35.5% advantage. PassMark physics is nearly a tie, with the Ultra 5 at 2682 and the i9 at 2638, a 1.6% edge. Interestingly, PassMark single-thread goes to the i9 by a narrow 4% margin (4175 versus 4013), showing that the Ultra 5's single-core win is workload-dependent rather than universal.

The average benchmark score difference is substantial: the i9-14900HX averages 56004 across all tests, while the Ultra 5 336H averages 34485. The i9's nearest rival in the database is the Intel Core 7 253PQE at 55919 (0.2% delta), placing it just ahead of the AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 and AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470. The Ultra 5's nearest rival is the Intel Core i7-13700HX at 34554, a 0.2% delta in favor of the older chip, with the Intel Core i5-13450HX close behind.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design eras within Intel's lineup. The i9-14900HX belongs to the Core 14th Gen series, built on the Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-HX codename. The Ultra 5 336H is part of the Core Ultra Series 3, using the Panther Lake architecture with the Panther Lake-H codename. This generational split shows in nearly every architectural parameter.

The process node gap is stark. The i9-14900HX uses a 10 nm process manufactured by Intel, while the Ultra 5 336H is built on a 3 nm process, also by Intel. The smaller node allows the Ultra 5 to pack features into a die with no recorded die size, whereas the i9 has a die size of 257 mm². The i9 uses the Intel BGA 1964 socket; the Ultra 5 uses Intel BGA 2540.

Core configuration differs sharply. The i9-14900HX offers 24 cores and 32 threads, while the Ultra 5 336H provides 16 cores and 16 threads. The i9's thread count exceeds its core count, indicating hyper-threading support, whereas the Ultra 5 has equal core and thread counts. The i9's base clock is 2.20 GHz with a boost of 5.80 GHz; the Ultra 5 base is 1.90 GHz with a boost of 4.60 GHz. The i9 has an unlocked multiplier, while the Ultra 5 does not.

Cache hierarchies reflect different design philosophies. The i9 uses 80 KB of L1 per core and 2 MB of L2 per core, with 36 MB of shared L3. The Ultra 5 uses 192 KB of L1 per core and 2.5 MB of L2 per core, with 18 MB of shared L3. The per-core L1 and L2 figures are higher on the Ultra 5, but the i9's total L3 is double. The i9's larger shared cache likely contributes to its dominance in data compression and integer math, where working sets exceed the Ultra 5's 18 MB.

Memory support also diverges. The i9 supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the Ultra 5 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Both use dual-channel memory buses. The Ultra 5 has a recorded memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s; no bandwidth figure is recorded for the i9. The i9 supports ECC memory, while the Ultra 5 does not. PCIe connectivity differs: the i9 offers Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes, and the Ultra 5 offers Gen 5 with 12 CPU lanes. Integrated graphics are the UHD Graphics 770 on the i9 versus Intel Xe3 Graphics on the Ultra 5.

The release dates place these chips roughly two years apart: the i9 launched on 2024-01-07, and the Ultra 5 on 2026-01-04. Both have active production status and target the mobile market segment.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i9-14900HX has an average benchmark score of 56004, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 336H averages 34485. The i9 sits at the 91st percentile of all CPUs, and the Ultra 5 sits at the 84th percentile.

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

A: The i9-14900HX scores 30055 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, which is 25.3% higher than the Ultra 5's 23991. The gap is larger in Cinebench R15 multi-core, where the i9 leads by 89.2%.

Q: Does the Ultra 5 336H ever beat the i9-14900HX?

A: Yes, in four recorded tests: Cinebench R15 single-core (341 versus 310.5, an 8.9% lead), Cinebench R23 single-core (3387 versus 2181.5, a 35.6% lead), PassMark find prime numbers (299 versus 193, a 35.5% lead), and PassMark physics (2682 versus 2638, a 1.6% lead).

Q: How do the core and thread counts compare?

A: The i9-14900HX has 24 cores and 32 threads. The Ultra 5 336H has 16 cores and 16 threads. The i9's thread count is higher than its core count, while the Ultra 5 has a 1:1 ratio.

Q: What are the process node differences?

A: The i9-14900HX is built on a 10 nm process, while the Ultra 5 336H uses a 3 nm process. Both are manufactured by Intel.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The i9-14900HX supports ECC memory. The Ultra 5 336H does not.

The Verdict

The recorded data draws a clear line between these two mobile processors. The Intel Core i9-14900HX is the multi-threaded performance leader by a wide margin. Its 13 head-to-head wins include several dominant results: integer math with a 153.5% lead, data compression with a 92.6% lead, and Cinebench R15 multi-core with an 89.2% lead. The i9 also holds the higher average benchmark score (56004 versus 34485) and the higher percentile ranking (91st versus 84th). Systems that prioritize rendering, data processing, encryption, and any workload that scales across 32 threads will find the i9 substantially faster.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H wins in four specific areas, and those wins are not trivial. The Cinebench R23 single-core result is decisive: 3387 versus 2181.5, a 35.6% advantage. The find prime numbers test shows a 35.5% lead. These results indicate that the Ultra 5's architecture, built on the newer 3 nm process, delivers superior per-core efficiency in certain workloads. The physics test is essentially a tie, with the Ultra 5 ahead by only 1.6%, suggesting that the i9's extra cores do not help in that particular simulation.

The data also shows the i9's nearest rivals in the database are the Intel Core 7 253PQE, AMD Ryzen AI Max 390, and AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470, all within 1% of its average score. The Ultra 5's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-13700HX and Intel Core i5-13450HX, meaning the Ultra 5 competes against last-generation HX-class parts rather than the top-tier i9.

For users prioritizing maximum multi-threaded throughput, the i9-14900HX is the clear choice based on the benchmark record. For users whose workloads emphasize single-core responsiveness, particularly in Cinebench R23 or prime number calculations, the Ultra 5 336H demonstrates a measurable advantage. The i9's higher TDP of 55 watts versus the Ultra 5's 25 watts aligns with its performance profile, though the database records no thermal or power efficiency benchmarks to qualify that relationship further.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i9-14900HX | Intel Core Ultra 5 336H |

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

| Cores | 24 | 16 |

| Threads | 32 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 2.20 GHz | 1.90 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.80 GHz | 4.60 GHz |

| TDP | 55 W | 25 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1964 | Intel BGA 2540 |

| Architecture | Raptor Lake | Panther Lake |

| Codename | Raptor Lake-HX | Panther Lake |

| Generation | Core i9 (Raptor Lake-HX Refresh) | Ultra 5 (Panther Lake-H) |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 3 nm |

| Die Size | 257 mm² | Not recorded |

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

| L2 Cache | 2 MB (per core) | 2.5 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 36 MB (shared) | 18 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR5, LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | Not recorded | 115.2 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 12 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 770 | Intel Xe3 Graphics |

| Multiplier Unlocked | Yes | No |

| Release Date | 2024-01-07 | 2026-01-04 |

| Part Number | SRMXF | SA4RD |

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i9-14900HX wins in every multi-threaded rendering benchmark recorded. Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core all favor the i9, with deltas ranging from 25.3% to 89.2%. Data compression, data encryption, floating point math, integer math, extended instructions, random string sorting, and PassMark multithread also go to the i9. The largest wins are integer math (153.5%), data compression (92.6%), and random string sorting (76.9%). The i9 also edges out the Ultra 5 in PassMark single-thread, though by only 4%.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H wins in Cinebench R15 single-core, Cinebench R23 single-core, PassMark find prime numbers, and PassMark physics. The Cinebench R23 single-core win is the most substantial at 35.6%, and the find prime numbers win matches that at 35.5%. These results indicate an architecture that excels in latency-sensitive, low-thread-count tasks. The physics win, though narrow, shows the Ultra 5 can hold its own in at least one simulation-style workload.

The use-case split follows the benchmark pattern. Multi-threaded production workloads, large data transformations, encryption tasks, and rendering pipelines belong to the i9-14900HX. Single-threaded interactive workloads, prime number calculations, and specific physics simulations show the Ultra 5 336H in a favorable light. The i9's 36 MB of shared L3 cache versus the Ultra 5's 18 MB likely explains part of the compression and sorting advantage. The Ultra 5's larger per-core L1 and L2 caches, along with its 3 nm process, likely contribute to its single-core wins. The recorded data does not include power efficiency benchmarks, so any claims about energy consumption remain outside the scope of this analysis.