Intel Core i9-14900KS vs Intel Core Ultra 5 338H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data records 17 head-to-head comparisons between the Intel Core i9-14900KS and the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H. The desktop processor wins 16 of those tests, with the mobile chip claiming a single, narrow victory. The overall picture is one of overwhelming performance superiority for the i9-14900KS, though the margins vary substantially by workload.

The largest win for the i9-14900KS appears in Cinebench R23 single-core, where it scores 7199 against 2044 for the Ultra 5 338H, a delta of 252.2%. This is a massive gap for a single-threaded test and indicates that the desktop part's peak boost capability translates directly into application performance. The multi-core Cinebench R23 result tells a similar story: 50995 versus 16331, a 212.3% advantage. Cinebench R15 multi-core shows a 105.3% delta (5140 vs 2504), while R15 single-core shows 137.7% (725 vs 305). Cinebench R20 results are close to the R15 pattern: multi-core at 109.7% (21417 vs 10213) and single-core at 109.8% (3023 vs 1441).

PassMark integer math is another area of extreme separation. The i9-14900KS posts 212644 versus 64934, a 227.5% delta. Data compression shows 803368 versus 276539, a 190.5% margin. Random string sorting follows at 163.4% (89789 vs 34082). Data encryption shows 47717 versus 21367, a 123.3% delta. Extended instructions score 45524 versus 23906, a 90.4% advantage. Floating point math is less extreme but still decisive: 153975 versus 84067, an 83.2% delta. PassMark multi-thread shows 60012 versus 28717, a 109% delta, while physics shows 3381 versus 2697, a 25.4% margin.

The single-thread PassMark scores are closer. The i9-14900KS records 4815 against 4180 for the Ultra 5 338H, a 15.2% delta. This is the narrowest margin among the i9-14900KS wins outside of physics, which suggests that the newer Panther Lake architecture has improved per-clock efficiency substantially, even if it cannot match the absolute peak frequency of the Raptor Lake refresh part.

The one test won by the Ultra 5 338H is PassMark find prime numbers. There, the mobile chip scores 304 against 244, a delta of -19.7% from the perspective of the i9-14900KS. This is a reversal of the overall trend and indicates that the Panther Lake core handles this particular integer workload with greater efficiency, likely due to architectural improvements in the core design rather than raw clock speed.

Aggregate benchmark averages reinforce the dominance. The i9-14900KS holds an average benchmark score of 81127, while the Ultra 5 338H sits at 33989. That places the desktop part in the 96th percentile of all CPUs in the database, whereas the mobile part lands in the 84th percentile. The nearest rivals for each chip are instructive. The i9-14900KS is essentially tied with the Intel Xeon w5-3535X (81115, delta 0%) and the AMD Ryzen 9 8940HX (81103, delta 0%), with the AMD Ryzen AI Max+ PRO 395 slightly behind at 80762 (delta 0.5%). The Ultra 5 338H sits in a much lower performance band, matching the Intel Core Ultra 7 165H (34083, delta -0.3%) and sitting just ahead of the Intel Core i7-12800HX (33875, delta 0.3%).

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from entirely different design lineages. The i9-14900KS uses the Raptor Lake architecture, specifically the Raptor Lake-R variant, built on Intel's 10 nm process. The Ultra 5 338H uses the newer Panther Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process. The process node difference explains part of the efficiency gap between them, though the benchmark data shows that the older architecture retains a large raw performance advantage.

Core counts differ sharply. The i9-14900KS has 24 cores and 32 threads, while the Ultra 5 338H has 12 cores and 12 threads. That means the desktop part supports hyper-threading across its cores, while the mobile part does not, so thread count scales exactly with core count. The cache hierarchy is also different. The i9-14900KS uses 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ultra 5 338H uses 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. The larger per-core L1 and L2 on the Panther Lake part suggest a more capable core design, which likely contributes to its better showing in the find prime numbers test.

Clock speeds are strongly in favor of the desktop chip. The i9-14900KS has a base clock of 3.20 GHz and a boost clock of 6.20 GHz. The Ultra 5 338H has a base of 1.90 GHz and a boost of 4.70 GHz. The nearly 1.5 GHz boost advantage for the i9-14900KS explains much of its single-thread dominance, particularly in Cinebench R23 single-core where it leads by 252.2%. Power envelopes are also very different: the i9-14900KS has a TDP of 150 watts, while the Ultra 5 338H draws just 25 watts. That six-fold difference in power budget allows the desktop chip to sustain far higher clocks under load.

The memory subsystems are distinct. The i9-14900KS supports DDR4 and DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration, while the Ultra 5 338H supports only LPDDR5X, also dual-channel, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 136.5 GB/s. The desktop part also supports ECC memory; the mobile part does not. PCIe connectivity differs as well. The i9-14900KS provides Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes, while the Ultra 5 338H provides Gen 5 with only 4 CPU lanes, which is typical for a mobile processor.

Integrated graphics are present on both, but they are different generations. The i9-14900KS uses UHD Graphics 770, while the Ultra 5 338H uses Arc B370. The database does not include graphics benchmarks for either part, so no performance comparison can be made from this data.

The sockets are completely incompatible. The i9-14900KS is a desktop part on Intel Socket 1700, while the Ultra 5 338H is a mobile part on Intel BGA 2540. The i9-14900KS has an unlocked multiplier, the Ultra 5 338H does not. Production status is listed as Active for both. The i9-14900KS launched on 2024-03-13 with a launch MSRP of $689. The Ultra 5 338H launched on 2026-01-04 with no launch MSRP recorded in the database.

The Verdict

The recorded data makes the choice straightforward for workloads that prioritize raw compute throughput. The i9-14900KS leads in 16 of 17 head-to-head benchmarks, with margins ranging from 15.2% to 252.2%. It is the stronger processor for multi-threaded rendering, integer math, data compression, encryption, and most single-thread tasks. Its 96th percentile standing among all CPUs, alongside an average benchmark score of 81127, places it in a performance tier far above the Ultra 5 338H.

The Ultra 5 338H, by contrast, occupies the 84th percentile with an average score of 33989. It wins only the find prime numbers test, and even there the margin is modest. Its advantages are not visible in the performance scores; they are structural. It uses a 3 nm process, draws only 25 watts, and ships in a mobile BGA package. For a system constrained by power or physical footprint, the Ultra 5 338H is the only viable option of the two, since the i9-14900KS cannot be installed in a mobile chassis and demands a 150 watt power envelope.

The single-thread PassMark result is the closest contest in the dataset. A 15.2% delta indicates that the Panther Lake core is competitive on a per-clock basis, even if it lacks the headroom of the Raptor Lake refresh flagship. The Cinebench R23 single-core gap of 252.2% is the starkest indicator of the difference in boost capability, and it should be treated as the defining metric for anyone comparing these two parts for latency-sensitive single-threaded work.

There is no scenario in the data where the Ultra 5 338H outperforms the i9-14900KS in aggregate throughput. The decision rests entirely on platform and power requirements, not on benchmark scores.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across every major specification field. The i9-14900KS uses 24 cores and 32 threads; the Ultra 5 338H uses 12 cores and 12 threads. Base clocks are 3.20 GHz versus 1.90 GHz, and boost clocks are 6.20 GHz versus 4.70 GHz. TDP is 150 watts versus 25 watts. The socket is Intel Socket 1700 versus Intel BGA 2540. Architecture is Raptor Lake versus Panther Lake, with process nodes of 10 nm versus 3 nm.

Cache layouts differ in both size and distribution. The i9-14900KS has 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 36 MB shared L3. The Ultra 5 338H has 192 KB L1 per core, 2.5 MB L2 per core, and 18 MB shared L3. Memory support is DDR4 and DDR5 for the desktop part versus LPDDR5X for the mobile part. The mobile part has a recorded memory bandwidth of 136.5 GB/s; no bandwidth figure is recorded for the desktop part. ECC memory support is present on the i9-14900KS and absent on the Ultra 5 338H. PCIe is Gen 5 with 16 lanes for the desktop part and Gen 5 with 4 lanes for the mobile part. Integrated graphics are UHD Graphics 770 versus Arc B370. The market segment is Desktop versus Mobile. The multiplier is unlocked on the i9-14900KS and locked on the Ultra 5 338H. The release dates are 2024-03-13 and 2026-01-04 respectively. The launch MSRP of $689 is recorded only for the i9-14900KS.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core i9-14900KS boosts to 6.20 GHz, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H boosts to 4.70 GHz.

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

A: The i9-14900KS scores 50995, and the Ultra 5 338H scores 16331, giving the desktop part a 212.3% advantage.

Q: Does the Ultra 5 338H win any benchmark?

A: Yes, it wins the PassMark find prime numbers test with 304 against 244, a delta of -19.7% from the i9-14900KS perspective.

Q: What are the core and thread counts?

A: The i9-14900KS has 24 cores and 32 threads. The Ultra 5 338H has 12 cores and 12 threads.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. ECC memory support is listed as true for the i9-14900KS and false for the Ultra 5 338H.

Q: What are the power envelopes?

A: The i9-14900KS has a TDP of 150 watts, and the Ultra 5 338H has a TDP of 25 watts.

Q: Which processor has a higher percentile ranking?

A: The i9-14900KS ranks in the 96th percentile of all CPUs, while the Ultra 5 338H ranks in the 84th percentile.