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

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents an overwhelmingly one-sided comparison. The Intel Core i9-14900KS wins 16 of the 17 recorded head-to-head tests, with the Intel Core Ultra 5 336H securing a single victory. The magnitude of the i9-14900KS advantage varies dramatically by workload type, ranging from a narrow 20% lead in single-threaded PassMark tests to a 242.6% blowout in integer math.

Starting with the Cinebench suite, the results are remarkably consistent. Across all three Cinebench versions (R15, R20, and R23), the i9-14900KS maintains a 112.6% lead in both multicore and singlecore tests, with the sole exception being Cinebench R23 singlecore at 112.5%. In concrete terms, the i9-14900KS scores 50,995 in Cinebench R23 multicore versus 23,991 for the Ultra 5 336H, and 7,199 versus 3,387 in the singlecore variant. This near-uniform percentage across different Cinebench versions indicates that the performance gap scales consistently with rendering workload intensity.

The PassMark suite reveals a more varied picture. The largest delta appears in integer math, where the i9-14900KS scores 212,644 against 62,070, a 242.6% advantage. Data compression shows a 186.6% lead, with scores of 803,368 and 280,340 respectively. Random string sorting follows at 161%, with 89,789 versus 34,402. These three tests all involve heavy data manipulation and benefit substantially from the i9-14900KS's larger core count and thread count.

Encryption workloads show a 124.1% gap, with the i9-14900KS posting 47,717 against 21,291. Floating point math yields an 86.8% difference (153,975 versus 82,415), while extended instructions show an 85.5% gap (45,524 versus 24,542). The multithread PassMark score shows a 110.2% delta (60,012 versus 28,545), aligning closely with the Cinebench multicore results.

The physics test presents the smallest multicore margin at 26.1%, with scores of 3,381 and 2,682. Single-thread performance shows the narrowest overall gap at 20%, with the i9-14900KS scoring 4,815 against 4,013. This suggests that for lightly threaded workloads, the architectural efficiency of the newer Panther Lake design partially compensates for the i9-14900KS's clock speed advantage.

The single Ultra 5 336H victory comes in the find prime numbers test, where it scores 299 against 244, a -18.4% delta from the i9-14900KS perspective. This is a specialized workload that measures prime number generation efficiency, and the Ultra 5 336H's newer architecture appears to handle this specific algorithm more efficiently despite its lower overall performance envelope.

Where Each One Wins

The i9-14900KS dominates across the vast majority of computational categories. Its wins span content creation workloads evidenced by the Cinebench scores, data compression and encryption tasks, floating point and integer arithmetic, multithreaded execution, physics calculations, random string sorting, and single-thread performance. The desktop processor's 24 cores and 32 threads provide substantial parallelism that directly translates to these benchmark advantages.

The Ultra 5 336H's single win in prime number finding is noteworthy precisely because it is the exception. This test typically measures the efficiency of modular arithmetic and loop optimization. The Panther Lake architecture's 3 nm process node may contribute to improved instruction-level efficiency that benefits this specific workload, even though the overall core count and thread count are lower at 16 cores and 16 threads.

For single-threaded general performance, the i9-14900KS maintains a 20% lead despite the Ultra 5 336H's newer architecture. The i9-14900KS boosts to 6.20 GHz, while the Ultra 5 336H reaches only 4.60 GHz. This clock advantage appears to outweigh any IPC improvements from the newer Panther Lake design in most single-threaded scenarios, though the 20% gap is considerably smaller than the multicore deltas.

The physics test, which often reflects gaming-related computational patterns, shows a moderate 26.1% advantage for the i9-14900KS. This is a significant margin but smaller than the compute-heavy workloads, suggesting that the Ultra 5 336H's architecture handles physics simulations more efficiently per unit of raw performance.

The multithreaded scores align closely with the core and thread configuration differences. The i9-14900KS offers 32 threads versus 16 for the Ultra 5 336H, and the 110.2% multithread delta closely mirrors the 112.6% Cinebench multicore deltas. This consistency indicates that scaling across threads is efficient for both processors, with the i9-14900KS simply having more resources to deploy.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear hierarchy. The Intel Core i9-14900KS is the superior processor across virtually every measured workload, with an average benchmark score of 81,127 placing it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs. The Ultra 5 336H averages 34,485, placing it in the 84th percentile. The i9-14900KS's nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon w5-3535X at 81,115, the AMD Ryzen 9 8940HX at 81,103, the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 at 80,762, and the Intel Xeon 638 at 80,723, all within 0.5% of its average score.

The Ultra 5 336H sits in a different performance tier entirely. Its nearest rivals are the Intel Core i7-13700HX at 34,554 (-0.2% delta), the Intel Core i5-13450HX at 34,333 (0.4% delta), the AMD Ryzen 7 3700X at 34,260 (0.7% delta), and the AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 at 34,222 (0.8% delta). This places it in competition with mid-range desktop and mobile processors from previous generations, not with flagship desktop parts.

The i9-14900KS achieves its results with a 150 W TDP, a base clock of 3.20 GHz, and a boost clock of 6.20 GHz. The Ultra 5 336H operates at 25 W TDP, with 1.90 GHz base and 4.60 GHz boost clocks. This power disparity explains much of the performance difference, as the i9-14900KS is designed for high-performance desktop systems with substantial cooling and power delivery, while the Ultra 5 336H targets mobile platforms where efficiency takes priority.

For users requiring maximum multi-threaded throughput, content creation performance, or data processing capability, the i9-14900KS is the clear choice based on the recorded benchmarks. The Ultra 5 336H suits scenarios where the single prime-number-finding win matters, or where the power envelope is the primary constraint, though the data shows it trails substantially in all other measured categories.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the Intel Core i9-14900KS in Cinebench R23 multicore?

A: The i9-14900KS scores 50,995, which is 112.6% higher than the Ultra 5 336H's 23,991.

Q: Does the Intel Core Ultra 5 336H win any benchmark tests?

A: Yes, it wins the PassMark find prime numbers test with a score of 299, which is 18.4% better than the i9-14900KS's 244.

Q: What is the smallest performance gap between the two processors?

A: The smallest gap is in PassMark single-thread performance, where the i9-14900KS leads by 20% with a score of 4,815 versus 4,013.

Q: How do the two processors compare in data compression workloads?

A: The i9-14900KS scores 803,368 in PassMark data compression, which is 186.6% higher than the Ultra 5 336H's 280,340.

Q: What are the core and thread configurations of each processor?

A: The i9-14900KS has 24 cores and 32 threads, while the Ultra 5 336H has 16 cores and 16 threads.

Q: How does the integrated graphics differ between the two?

A: The i9-14900KS uses UHD Graphics 770, while the Ultra 5 336H uses Intel Xe3 Graphics.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent fundamentally different design philosophies and market segments. The Intel Core i9-14900KS belongs to the Core 14th Gen family, using the Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-R codename. It is built for the Intel Socket 1700 platform as a desktop processor. The Ultra 5 336H belongs to the Core Ultra Series 3 family, using the Panther Lake architecture with the Panther Lake codename, designed for the Intel BGA 2540 socket as a mobile processor.

The manufacturing process differs substantially. The i9-14900KS uses a 10 nm process node with a die size of 257 mm², while the Ultra 5 336H uses a 3 nm process node with no recorded die size. Both are fabricated by Intel. This process advantage for the Ultra 5 336H explains how it achieves competitive single-thread efficiency in the prime number test despite significantly lower clock speeds.

Core and cache configurations reveal the scale difference. The i9-14900KS offers 24 cores and 32 threads, with 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ultra 5 336H provides 16 cores and 16 threads with 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 2.5 MB of L2 cache per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The i9-14900KS has no hyperthreading advantage in its thread count, though its 32 threads versus 16 for the Ultra 5 336H reflects both higher core count and hyperthreading support.

Memory support differs in important ways. The i9-14900KS supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, while the Ultra 5 336H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. The Ultra 5 336H has a recorded memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s, while no bandwidth figure is recorded for the i9-14900KS. The i9-14900KS supports ECC memory, while the Ultra 5 336H does not.

PCI Express capabilities also differ. The i9-14900KS provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the Ultra 5 336H provides Gen 5 with 12 lanes. The i9-14900KS has an unlocked multiplier, allowing overclocking, while the Ultra 5 336H has a locked multiplier. The i9-14900KS launched with an MSRP of $689, while no launch MSRP is recorded for the Ultra 5 336H.

The release dates place these processors roughly two years apart, with the i9-14900KS released on March 13, 2024, and the Ultra 5 336H released on January 4, 2026. The i9-14900KS carries part number SRN7R, while the Ultra 5 336H carries part number SA4RD. Both are listed as active in production status.