Intel Core i9-14900KS vs Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-core performance?

A: The Intel Core i9-14900KS wins every single-core benchmark in the comparison. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 7199 versus 2187.5 for the Core Ultra 9 285HX, a 229.1% advantage. The PassMark single-thread test also favors the i9-14900KS, 4815 to 4618, a 4.3% lead.

Q: How do the two chips compare in multi-threaded workloads?

A: The i9-14900KS takes the majority of multi-core tests. It leads in Cinebench R20 multi-core by 5.8% (21417 vs 20236) and in Cinebench R23 multi-core by 40% (50995 vs 36429.5). However, the Core Ultra 9 285HX wins Cinebench R15 multi-core, scoring 5656.5 versus 5140, a 9.1% margin.

Q: Which processor has a higher core and thread count?

A: Both processors have 24 cores. The i9-14900KS has 32 threads, while the Core Ultra 9 285HX has 24 threads, meaning the i9-14900KS supports simultaneous multithreading and the Ultra 9 does not.

Q: What is the difference in thermal design power between the two?

A: The i9-14900KS has a TDP of 150 watts, whereas the Core Ultra 9 285HX has a TDP of 55 watts. This indicates the Ultra 9 is designed for significantly lower power draw, consistent with its mobile market segment.

Q: Which processor shows better performance in integer math?

A: The i9-14900KS is substantially ahead in PassMark integer math, scoring 212644 versus 155076 for the Core Ultra 9 285HX, a 37.1% difference. This is one of the largest wins for the desktop chip.

Q: Where does the Core Ultra 9 285HX outperform the i9-14900KS?

A: The Ultra 9 285HX wins in PassMark floating point math (194998 vs 153975, a 21% lead), find prime numbers (460 vs 244, a 47% lead), extended instructions (49148 vs 45524, a 7.4% lead), data encryption (48567 vs 47717, a 1.8% lead), physics (3476 vs 3381, a 2.7% lead), and Cinebench R15 multi-core.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core i9-14900KS is built on Raptor Lake architecture (codename Raptor Lake-R) using a 10 nm process node manufactured by Intel. It is a desktop part on the Intel Socket 1700 platform. The Core Ultra 9 285HX uses Arrow Lake architecture (codename Arrow Lake-HX) on a 3 nm process node from TSMC, and it is a mobile processor on Intel BGA 2114. The Ultra 9 285HX integrates 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die, while the i9-14900KS has a 257 mm² die size with no transistor count recorded.

Cache layouts differ notably. The i9-14900KS has 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ultra 9 285HX has 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and the same 36 MB of shared L3. This means the Ultra 9 has larger per-core L1 and L2 allocations, which can aid certain workloads.

Memory support also diverges. The i9-14900KS supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, while the Ultra 9 285HX supports only DDR5, also dual-channel, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. Both processors support ECC memory. PCIe connectivity differs: the i9-14900KS offers Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Ultra 9 285HX offers Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics differ as well: the i9-14900KS includes UHD Graphics 770, while the Ultra 9 285HX includes Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU.

The i9-14900KS has a base clock of 3.20 GHz and a boost clock of 6.20 GHz. The Ultra 9 285HX has a base clock of 2.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz. Both have unlocked multipliers. The i9-14900KS was released in March 2024, while the Ultra 9 285HX came in January 2025. The i9-14900KS has a launch MSRP of $689; the Ultra 9 285HX has no recorded launch MSRP.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a clear split between the two processors. The i9-14900KS wins 11 of the 17 recorded comparisons, while the Ultra 9 285HX takes 6.

Starting with the most dramatic difference, Cinebench R23 single-core heavily favors the i9-14900KS. The score of 7199 versus 2187.5 represents a 229.1% advantage. Similarly, Cinebench R15 single-core shows the i9-14900KS ahead by 124.1% (725 vs 323.5). These are not marginal differences; they are the largest gaps in the entire dataset.

In multi-core Cinebench tests, the results are mixed. The i9-14900KS leads in R20 multi-core by 5.8% (21417 vs 20236) and in R23 multi-core by 40% (50995 vs 36429.5). However, the Ultra 9 285HX wins R15 multi-core with 5656.5 versus 5140, a 9.1% margin. This inversion suggests the Ultra 9 handles the older R15 workload more efficiently, while the i9-14900KS scales better in newer multi-threaded tests.

PassMark results show the i9-14900KS dominating integer math, scoring 212644 versus 155076, a 37.1% lead. Random string sorting also favors the desktop chip, 89789 versus 77196, a 16.3% margin. Data compression goes to the i9-14900KS as well, 803368 versus 631885, a 27.1% advantage. PassMark multithread and single-thread tests both favor the i9-14900KS, with 5.5% and 4.3% leads respectively.

The Ultra 9 285HX counters in specialized workloads. Floating point math is a strong point, with 194998 versus 153975, a 21% lead. Find prime numbers shows a 47% advantage (460 vs 244), the largest win for the Ultra 9. Extended instructions go to the Ultra 9 by 7.4% (49148 vs 45524). Data encryption is close, with the Ultra 9 ahead by 1.8% (48567 vs 47717). Physics also favors the Ultra 9, 3476 versus 3381, a 2.7% margin.

The overall average benchmark score reinforces the i9-14900KS position. Its average is 81127, placing it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs. The Ultra 9 285HX averages 76155, in the 95th percentile. The nearest rival to the i9-14900KS is the Intel Xeon w5-3535X with an average score of 81115 (0% delta), followed by the AMD Ryzen 9 8940HX at 81103 (0% delta). The Ultra 9 285HX's closest competitor is the AMD Ryzen 9 8945HX at 76212 (a -0.1% delta).

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across several key specification fields.

• Architecture: Raptor Lake (Raptor Lake-R) for the i9-14900KS versus Arrow Lake (Arrow Lake-HX) for the Ultra 9 285HX.
• Process Node: 10 nm (Intel) versus 3 nm (TSMC).
• Transistors: Not recorded for the i9-14900KS versus 17,800 million for the Ultra 9 285HX.
• Die Size: 257 mm² for the i9-14900KS versus 243 mm² for the Ultra 9 285HX.
• Socket: Intel Socket 1700 versus Intel BGA 2114.
• Threads: 32 for the i9-14900KS versus 24 for the Ultra 9 285HX.
• Base Clock: 3.20 GHz versus 2.80 GHz.
• Boost Clock: 6.20 GHz versus 5.50 GHz.
• TDP: 150 W versus 55 W.
• L1 Cache: 80 KB per core versus 192 KB per core.
• L2 Cache: 2 MB per core versus 3 MB per core.
• Memory Support: DDR4 and DDR5 versus DDR5 only.
• Memory Bandwidth: Not recorded versus 102.4 GB/s.
• PCIe Lanes: 16 (Gen 5, CPU only) versus 20 (Gen 5, CPU only).
• Integrated Graphics: UHD Graphics 770 versus Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU.
• Market Segment: Desktop versus Mobile.
• Release Date: March 2024 versus January 2025.
• Launch MSRP: $689 versus not recorded.
• Part Number: SRN7R versus SRVFJ.

Where Each One Wins

The i9-14900KS is the clear choice for single-threaded performance. Its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 7199 is more than triple the Ultra 9 285HX's 2187.5, and the R15 single-core margin is similarly lopsided. Any workload that relies on one or two fast cores, such as older games or lightly threaded applications, will prefer the i9-14900KS.

The i9-14900KS also dominates in integer-heavy tasks. PassMark integer math shows a 37.1% lead, and data compression is 27.1% ahead. Random string sorting, which is often memory-latency sensitive, goes to the i9-14900KS by 16.3%. These results point to productivity and general computing tasks favoring the desktop chip.

The Ultra 9 285HX excels in floating point and vectorized workloads. PassMark floating point math is 21% higher, and extended instructions are 7.4% higher. Find prime numbers, a test that rewards efficient integer loops with lower latency, shows a 47% advantage for the Ultra 9. This suggests the Arrow Lake architecture, with its larger L1 and L2 caches, handles iterative and math-heavy code more efficiently.

The Ultra 9 285HX also wins in Cinebench R15 multi-core, which may indicate better efficiency in older render workloads. Its 55 W TDP versus the 150 W TDP of the i9-14900KS makes it far more suitable for sustained mobile operation, where power and thermals are constrained. The 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth is a recorded advantage that the i9-14900KS lacks in the data.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the recorded data, the Intel Core i9-14900KS is the stronger processor for most users. It wins 11 of 17 head-to-head benchmarks, has a higher average benchmark score (81127 vs 76155), and sits in the 96th percentile versus the Ultra 9 285HX's 95th. The i9-14900KS is the pick for anyone prioritizing raw single-core speed, integer math, compression, and overall multi-threaded rendering in Cinebench R20 and R23.

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX is the better option for workloads that stress floating point math, extended instructions, and prime number calculations. Its 55 W TDP and mobile socket make it the only realistic choice for a laptop or compact system. The 20 PCIe Gen 5 lanes and higher memory bandwidth are additional advantages for mobile platforms that need expandability.

For a desktop builder focused on maximum performance, the i9-14900KS is the data-backed recommendation. For a mobile user who needs strong math throughput and efficiency, the Ultra 9 285HX is the appropriate pick. The two chips serve different markets, and the benchmark results reflect that split clearly.