Intel Core i9-14900HX vs Intel Core Ultra X7 368H Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents two distinctly different mobile processors. The Intel Core i9-14900HX wins 13 of 17 head-to-head tests, while the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H takes 4. The i9-14900HX holds the overall average benchmark score of 56004 against the Ultra X7's 40518, a substantial gap that places the i9 in the 91st percentile of all CPUs versus the 87th percentile for the Ultra X7.

The i9-14900HX is the clear choice for multi-threaded workloads. Its multi-core wins range from 6.5% in Cinebench R23 to 78.7% in Passmark integer math. The Ultra X7 368H counters with decisive single-core victories in Cinebench R15 (401 versus 310.5) and Cinebench R23 (3984 versus 2181.5), though it loses the Passmark single-thread test by 4.2%.

The data suggests the Ultra X7 368H targets efficiency-focused designs with its 25 TDP and 16 threads, while the i9-14900HX delivers maximum throughput with 32 threads and a 55 TDP. Users prioritizing raw parallel performance should select the i9-14900HX. Users needing superior single-core Cinebench performance and lower power draw should consider the Ultra X7 368H.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design generations. The i9-14900HX uses Raptor Lake architecture on a 10 nm process node, while the Ultra X7 368H uses Panther Lake architecture on a 3 nm node. Both are manufactured by Intel, but the process difference is significant for power efficiency and transistor density.

Core counts diverge sharply. The i9-14900HX packs 24 cores with 32 threads, indicating hyper-threading support. The Ultra X7 368H has 16 cores and 16 threads, meaning no hyper-threading. The i9-14900HX's base clock of 2.20 GHz boosts to 5.80 GHz, while the Ultra X7 runs at 2.00 GHz base and 5.00 GHz boost.

Cache hierarchies differ substantially. The i9-14900HX uses 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 36 MB shared L3. The Ultra X7 368H has larger per-core allocations: 192 KB L1 per core, 2.5 MB L2 per core, but only 18 MB shared L3. This means the Ultra X7 offers more private cache per core but half the total L3.

Memory support separates the two platforms. The i9-14900HX supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory on a dual-channel bus. The Ultra X7 368H supports only LPDDR5X, also dual-channel, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 153.6 GB/s. The i9-14900HX supports ECC memory; the Ultra X7 does not.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The i9-14900HX provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Ultra X7 offers Gen 5 with just 4 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics vary as well: UHD Graphics 770 on the i9 versus Arc B390 on the Ultra X7. The i9-14900HX has an unlocked multiplier, the Ultra X7 does not. Socket types differ: Intel BGA 1964 for the i9, Intel BGA 2540 for the Ultra X7. The i9-14900HX die size is 257 mm²; no die size is recorded for the Ultra X7.

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 X7 368H has 16 cores and 16 threads.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core i9-14900HX boosts to 5.80 GHz. The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H boosts to 5.00 GHz.

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

A: The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H wins Cinebench R15 single-core by 22.6% and Cinebench R23 single-core by 45.2%. The i9-14900HX wins Cinebench R20 single-core by 31.7%.

Q: How much L3 cache does each processor have?

A: The Intel Core i9-14900HX has 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H has 18 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Core i9-14900HX supports ECC memory. The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H does not.

Q: What is the power draw difference?

A: The Intel Core i9-14900HX has a 55 TDP. The Intel Core Ultra X7 368H has a 25 TDP, which is lower by 30.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every recorded specification field.

• Cores: 24 (i9-14900HX) versus 16 (Ultra X7 368H)
• Threads: 32 (i9-14900HX) versus 16 (Ultra X7 368H)
• Base Clock: 2.20 GHz (i9-14900HX) versus 2.00 GHz (Ultra X7 368H)
• Boost Clock: 5.80 GHz (i9-14900HX) versus 5.00 GHz (Ultra X7 368H)
• TDP: 55 (i9-14900HX) versus 25 (Ultra X7 368H)
• Socket: Intel BGA 1964 (i9-14900HX) versus Intel BGA 2540 (Ultra X7 368H)
• Architecture: Raptor Lake (i9-14900HX) versus Panther Lake (Ultra X7 368H)
• Process Node: 10 nm (i9-14900HX) versus 3 nm (Ultra X7 368H)
• L1 Cache: 80 KB per core (i9-14900HX) versus 192 KB per core (Ultra X7 368H)
• L2 Cache: 2 MB per core (i9-14900HX) versus 2.5 MB per core (Ultra X7 368H)
• L3 Cache: 36 MB shared (i9-14900HX) versus 18 MB shared (Ultra X7 368H)
• Memory Support: DDR4, DDR5 (i9-14900HX) versus LPDDR5X (Ultra X7 368H)
• Memory Bandwidth: Not recorded (i9-14900HX) versus 153.6 GB/s (Ultra X7 368H)
• ECC Memory: True (i9-14900HX) versus False (Ultra X7 368H)
• PCIe: Gen 5, 16 Lanes (i9-14900HX) versus Gen 5, 4 Lanes (Ultra X7 368H)
• Integrated Graphics: UHD Graphics 770 (i9-14900HX) versus Arc B390 (Ultra X7 368H)
• Multiplier Unlocked: True (i9-14900HX) versus False (Ultra X7 368H)
• Release Date: 2024-01-07 (i9-14900HX) versus 2026-01-04 (Ultra X7 368H)
• Die Size: 257 mm² (i9-14900HX) versus not recorded (Ultra X7 368H)

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The i9-14900HX dominates multi-threaded workloads across the board. Its largest margin comes in Passmark integer math, where it scores 157375 against 88083, a 78.7% advantage. Passmark data compression follows closely at 72.6% (539965 versus 312927). Cinebench R15 multi-core shows a 60.8% lead (4574 versus 2844). Passmark random string sorting delivers a 59.8% edge (60861 versus 38093). Passmark multithread adds a 32.8% win (43778 versus 32956). Cinebench R20 multi-core records 15616 versus 11852, a 31.8% margin. Passmark data encryption shows 32619 versus 25228, a 29.3% lead. Passmark extended instructions adds 21.7% (31247 versus 25669). Cinebench R23 multi-core narrows to 6.5% (30055 versus 28221). Passmark floating point math closes further at 6.2% (112273 versus 105681).

The Ultra X7 368H wins the remaining tests. Its biggest victory is Cinebench R23 single-core, scoring 3984 versus 2181.5, a 45.2% margin. Cinebench R15 single-core shows 401 versus 310.5, a 22.6% win. Passmark find prime numbers delivers 321 versus 193, a 39.9% edge. Passmark physics adds 2857 versus 2638, a 7.7% win.

Notably, the i9-14900HX wins Cinebench R20 single-core by 31.7% (2204 versus 1673), contradicting the single-core trend from R15 and R23. The passmark single-thread test also favors the i9, with 4175 versus 4005, a 4.2% margin. The overall head-to-head record stands at 13 wins for the i9-14900HX and 4 wins for the Ultra X7 368H.

The average benchmark scores reflect this pattern. The i9-14900HX averages 56004, placing it near the AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 (56273, 0.5% higher) and AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470 (56306, 0.5% higher). The Ultra X7 368H averages 40518, sitting close to the Intel Core 7 253PE (40557, 0.1% higher) and Intel Core 5 223PE (40585, 0.2% higher). The i9-14900HX also edges out the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX by 1% (56555 versus 56004).

The data paints a clear picture of two different design philosophies. The i9-14900HX leverages its 24 cores, 32 threads, and 36 MB L3 to crush multi-threaded tasks. The Ultra X7 368H uses its 3 nm process, larger per-core cache, and lower TDP to deliver exceptional single-core Cinebench results and efficiency. Users requiring maximum parallel throughput should favor the i9-14900HX; users prioritizing single-core Cinebench scores and lower power consumption should consider the Ultra X7 368H.