Intel Core i9-14900HX vs Intel Core Ultra 7 366H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core i9-14900HX dominates the head-to-head comparison, winning 13 of 17 benchmark comparisons, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H takes 4 wins. The margin of victory matters more than the count, and the data shows a clear split: the i9-14900HX wins heavily in throughput-heavy workloads, while the Ultra 7 366H wins decisively in single-threaded Cinebench tests and a few specialized PassMark workloads.

The largest win for the i9-14900HX comes in PassMark integer math, where it scores 157375 against 83695, a 88% advantage. Data compression shows a 64.9% lead (539965 vs 327455), and Cinebench R15 multicore shows a 59.4% lead (4574 vs 2870). These are substantial gaps that indicate the i9-14900HX has far more parallel execution resources available.

The Ultra 7 366H's biggest win is in Cinebench R23 single-core, where it scores 4020 against 2181.5, a 45.7% advantage. It also wins Cinebench R15 single-core by 23.3% (405 vs 310.5), PassMark find prime numbers by 40.8% (326 vs 193), and PassMark physics by 8.4% (2880 vs 2638). These wins point to a newer core design with better instructions-per-clock.

In multi-core Cinebench tests, the i9-14900HX leads by 30.6% in R20 (15616 vs 11960) but only by 5.5% in R23 (30055 vs 28477). The shrinking gap from R20 to R23 suggests the Ultra 7 366H scales better under sustained load, though the i9-14900HX still comes out ahead. PassMark multithread shows a 31% lead for the i9-14900HX (43778 vs 33429), and floating-point math shows an 8.4% lead (112273 vs 103615).

The single-thread PassMark results are nearly tied: the i9-14900HX scores 4175 versus 4043, a 3.3% edge. This is the only single-thread test the i9-14900HX wins, and it is a narrow margin. The data encryption test shows a 26.2% lead for the i9-14900HX (32619 vs 25845), extended instructions show a 16.2% lead (31247 vs 26901), and random string sorting shows a 52.9% lead (60861 vs 39814).

Where Each One Wins

The i9-14900HX wins in every multi-threaded and throughput-oriented workload recorded. Its advantages are largest in integer math, data compression, and random string sorting, which are workloads that benefit from many cores and high memory bandwidth. The Cinebench R20 and R15 multicore results confirm this pattern, with leads of 30.6% and 59.4% respectively. The i9-14900HX also wins in data encryption, extended instructions, and floating-point math, though by smaller margins ranging from 8.4% to 26.2%.

The Ultra 7 366H wins in Cinebench R23 single-core and R15 single-core by substantial margins, and it also takes PassMark physics and find prime numbers. The prime number test is notable: the Ultra 7 scores 326 versus 193, a 40.8% advantage that likely reflects a more efficient core pipeline. The physics win is smaller at 8.4%, but it indicates better per-thread performance in simulation-style workloads.

The single-thread PassMark test is the only area where the two are closely matched, with the i9-14900HX ahead by just 3.3%. Across the broader benchmark set, the i9-14900HX is the clear winner for heavy parallel workloads, while the Ultra 7 366H offers better single-core performance in Cinebench tests and specific integer workloads.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural generations. The i9-14900HX uses Raptor Lake, specifically the Raptor Lake-HX refresh, built on a 10 nm process node. The Ultra 7 366H uses Panther Lake, built on a 3 nm process node. Both are manufactured by Intel, but the process difference is significant: the 3 nm node allows for denser transistors and lower power consumption, while the 10 nm node is an older, less dense process.

The core counts differ substantially. The i9-14900HX has 24 cores and 32 threads, while the Ultra 7 366H has 16 cores and 16 threads. The i9-14900HX supports simultaneous multithreading, which doubles its thread count from 24 to 32. The Ultra 7 366H does not appear to support SMT, as its thread count equals its core count.

Cache hierarchies are also different. The i9-14900HX has 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 36 MB shared L3. The Ultra 7 366H has 192 KB L1 per core, 2.5 MB L2 per core, and 18 MB shared L3. The Ultra 7 has more L1 and L2 per core, which helps single-threaded performance, while the i9 has twice the total L3 capacity for shared workloads.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The i9-14900HX uses UHD Graphics 770, while the Ultra 7 366H uses Intel Xe3 Graphics. The newer Xe3 architecture is expected to deliver better graphics performance, though no benchmark scores for graphics are recorded in the database.

The sockets are incompatible: the i9-14900HX uses Intel BGA 1964, while the Ultra 7 366H uses Intel BGA 2540. The i9-14900HX has an unlocked multiplier, while the Ultra 7 366H does not.

Specification Differences

The base clock speeds are close, with the i9-14900HX at 2.20 GHz and the Ultra 7 366H at 2.00 GHz. The boost clocks differ more: the i9-14900HX boosts to 5.80 GHz, while the Ultra 7 366H boosts to 4.80 GHz. This 1.0 GHz boost advantage helps the i9-14900HX in bursty single-threaded workloads, though the Ultra 7's newer architecture partially compensates in Cinebench single-core tests.

Thermal design power differs by a large margin. The i9-14900HX has a 55 W TDP, while the Ultra 7 366H has a 25 W TDP. This is a 30 W difference, which explains why the i9-14900HX can sustain higher multi-core performance, but also means it requires more cooling and draws more power.

Memory support differs. The i9-14900HX supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the Ultra 7 366H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. The Ultra 7 has a recorded memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s, while the i9-14900HX has no recorded bandwidth figure. Both use dual-channel memory buses. The i9-14900HX supports ECC memory, while the Ultra 7 366H does not.

PCIe lanes differ: the i9-14900HX has 16 CPU-only PCIe Gen 5 lanes, while the Ultra 7 366H has 12 CPU-only PCIe Gen 5 lanes. The i9-14900HX has a larger die size at 257 mm², while the Ultra 7 366H has no recorded die size. The i9-14900HX was released on January 7, 2024, while the Ultra 7 366H has a release date of January 4, 2026.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core i9-14900HX has 24 cores and 32 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H has 16 cores and 16 threads. The i9-14900HX also supports SMT, which is why its thread count exceeds its core count.

Q: Which processor wins in Cinebench R23 multicore?

A: The Intel Core i9-14900HX scores 30055 versus 28477 for the Ultra 7 366H, a 5.5% lead. This is the closest multicore margin between the two processors.

Q: Which processor has better single-core Cinebench performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H wins Cinebench R23 single-core with 4020 versus 2181.5, a 45.7% lead. It also wins Cinebench R15 single-core with 405 versus 310.5, a 23.3% lead.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two processors?

A: The Intel Core i9-14900HX has a 55 W TDP, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H has a 25 W TDP. The i9-14900HX requires more power, which is consistent with its higher core count and boost clock.

Q: Do both processors support PCIe Gen 5?

A: Yes, both support PCIe Gen 5. The i9-14900HX has 16 CPU-only lanes, while the Ultra 7 366H has 12 CPU-only lanes.

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: The Intel Core i9-14900HX has 36 MB shared L3 cache. The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H has 18 MB shared L3 cache, exactly half the capacity.

The Verdict

The data shows a clear performance hierarchy. The Intel Core i9-14900HX is the stronger processor for multi-threaded and throughput-intensive workloads. It wins 13 of 17 benchmark comparisons, with particularly large leads in integer math (88%), data compression (64.9%), and Cinebench R15 multicore (59.4%). Its 24 cores, 32 threads, and 36 MB L3 cache give it a decisive advantage in parallel workloads. The 55 W TDP and 5.80 GHz boost clock allow it to maintain high performance across all cores.

The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H is the better choice for single-threaded performance in Cinebench tests. It wins Cinebench R23 single-core by 45.7% and R15 single-core by 23.3%, and it also wins PassMark find prime numbers by 40.8%. Its 3 nm process node, 192 KB L1 per core, and 2.5 MB L2 per core deliver better per-core efficiency. The 25 W TDP makes it more power-efficient, which is relevant for thin-and-light laptops.

The overall average benchmark scores confirm the i9-14900HX's lead: it averages 56004 across all recorded benchmarks, while the Ultra 7 366H averages 41263. The i9-14900HX sits in the 91st percentile of all CPUs, while the Ultra 7 366H sits in the 87th percentile. The nearest rivals for the i9-14900HX include the Intel Core 7 253PQE at 55919 (0.2% behind) and AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 at 56273 (0.5% ahead), while the Ultra 7 366H's nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H at 41215 (0.1% behind) and AMD Ryzen 9 5900X at 41376 (0.3% ahead).

Users who need maximum multi-core throughput for rendering, compression, or data processing should choose the i9-14900HX. Users who prioritize single-threaded responsiveness and power efficiency should choose the Ultra 7 366H. The i9-14900HX delivers superior raw performance, while the Ultra 7 366H delivers superior per-core efficiency and lower power consumption.