Intel Core i9-14901E vs Intel Core Ultra 5 225 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits these two desktop processors into clearly different use-case profiles. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 wins 12 of 17 head-to-head comparisons, but the Intel Core i9-14901E takes the victories that matter most for heavily threaded productivity. The Ultra 5 225 dominates single-thread and modern instruction-heavy workloads, while the i9-14901E leads in legacy multi-core rendering and integer math.

The Ultra 5 225 is the stronger choice for workloads that benefit from newer architecture efficiencies. Its single-core results are consistently ahead: Cinebench R23 single-core scores 3655 versus 3635, a 0.6% lead, and PassMark single-thread scores 4412 versus 4354, a 1.3% lead. The margin is small but consistent across every single-threaded test in the database. More striking is the lead in extended instructions: 27162 versus 17249, a 57.5% advantage. The Ultra 5 225 also dominates prime number finding with 358 versus 189, an 89.4% gap, and encryption with a 20% lead (22285 versus 18571).

The i9-14901E wins where raw thread count matters. The largest single gap appears in PassMark integer math: 112736 versus 65345, a 42% advantage. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows the same pattern: 10816 versus 6317, a 41.6% lead for the i9. Physics simulation also favors the i9-14901E with 3041 versus 2342, a 23% advantage. Random string sorting goes to the i9-14901E as well, 39138 versus 36590, a 6.5% edge.

The data indicates a clear split: the Ultra 5 225 excels in instruction-heavy, single-thread, and modern workload scenarios; the i9-14901E excels in traditional multi-threaded rendering and integer computation.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent different Intel design philosophies. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 uses the Arrow Lake architecture on a 3 nm process from TSMC, while the Intel Core i9-14901E uses Raptor Lake on Intel's 10 nm process. The Ultra 5 225 is a 10-core, 10-thread part with 20 MB of shared L3 cache. The i9-14901E has 8 cores but 16 threads thanks to Hyper-Threading, and a larger 36 MB shared L3 cache.

Cache organization differs substantially. The Ultra 5 225 allocates 192 KB L1 per core and 3 MB L2 per core. The i9-14901E uses 80 KB L1 per core and 2 MB L2 per core. The i9-14901E compensates with nearly double the shared L3: 36 MB versus 20 MB.

Clock speeds tell a different story. The Ultra 5 225 has a 3.30 GHz base clock and 4.90 GHz boost. The i9-14901E has a lower 2.80 GHz base but a much higher 5.60 GHz boost. Both are 65 W TDP parts, but the i9-14901E reaches higher peak frequencies.

Memory support diverges. The Ultra 5 225 supports only DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. The i9-14901E supports both DDR4 and DDR5, dual-channel, with no listed bandwidth figure. The i9-14901E also supports ECC memory; the Ultra 5 225 does not.

PCIe lanes and integrated graphics differ. The Ultra 5 225 offers 20 Gen 5 lanes (CPU only) with Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 16 EU. The i9-14901E has 16 Gen 5 lanes and UHD Graphics 770. The Ultra 5 225 measures 243 mm² die size with 17,800 million transistors; the i9-14901E has a 257 mm² die size with no transistor count listed. Process node difference is significant: 3 nm versus 10 nm.

The Verdict

The data favors the Intel Core Ultra 5 225 for most general workloads. It wins 12 of 17 head-to-head tests, including all single-thread tests, all but one multi-thread test in Cinebench R23, and every PassMark test except integer math, physics, and random string sorting. Its extended instruction lead of 57.5% and prime number lead of 89.4% show a modern architecture that executes advanced instructions far more efficiently.

However, the i9-14901E is the better choice for specific multi-threaded rendering workloads. Cinebench R20 multi-core is the starkest example: 10816 versus 6317, a 41.6% advantage for the i9-14901E. This is the largest edge either processor holds in any benchmark. Physics simulation and integer math also favor the i9-14901E by 23% and 42%, respectively.

For buyers who run older multi-threaded applications that scale well with threads, the i9-14901E is the data-backed choice. For those who run modern workloads, encryption, compression, or single-thread-dependent software, the Ultra 5 225 is the better part. The Ultra 5 225 also holds a slight edge in overall database percentile: 85th percentile versus 86th for the i9-14901E, though the i9-14901E has a higher average benchmark score (37911 versus 36938).

FAQ

Q: Which processor has higher single-thread performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 wins all single-thread tests. Cinebench R23 single-core scores 3655 versus 3635 (0.6% lead), and PassMark single-thread scores 4412 versus 4354 (1.3% lead).

Q: Which processor is better for heavily multi-threaded rendering?

A: The Intel Core i9-14901E wins Cinebench R20 multi-core by a large margin: 10816 versus 6317, a 41.6% deficit. This is the single largest win among all head-to-head benchmarks.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Ultra 5 225 has 10 cores and 10 threads, while the i9-14901E has 8 cores and 16 threads. The i9-14901E uses Hyper Threading to achieve more threads despite fewer cores.

Q: Do these processors support the same memory types?

A: No. The Ultra 5 225 supports only DDR5 with a 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. The i9-14901E supports both DDR4 and DDR5, and also supports ECC memory.

Q: Which processor has the larger cache?

A: The i9-14901E has 36 MB of shared L3 cache, versus 20 MB for the Ultra 5 225. However, the Ultra 5 225 has larger per-core L1 (192 KB vs 80 KB) and L2 (3 MB vs 2 MB).

Q: Which processor shows better performance in encryption?

A: The Ultra 5 225 leads PassMark data encryption with 22285 versus 18571, a 20% advantage. It also leads data compression by 4.9% (302811 versus 288777).

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest win for the Ultra 5 225 is in PassMark extended instructions: 27162 versus 17249, a 57.5% lead. Prime number finding is even more one-sided, 358 versus 189, an 89.4% advantage. These two results show the Ultra 5 225's modern core design executes advanced instruction sets at much higher throughput.

The largest win for the i9-14901E is Cinebench R20 multi-core, where it scores 10816 versus 6317, a 41.6% deficit. This is the same margin seen in single-core R20: 1526 versus 891, also 41.6%. These results are striking because Cinebench R23 multi-core shows the opposite pattern: 25891 for the Ultra 5 225 versus 25753 for the i9-14901E, a 0.5% lead for the Ultra 5 225. The i9-14901E dominates R20 but loses R23 by a hair, indicating the two processors trade blows depending on the workload generation.

In PassMark multi-thread, the Ultra 5 225 wins 30459 versus 30298, a 0.5% lead. Floating-point math favors the Ultra 5 225, 92038 versus 81089, a 13.5% lead. Integer math heavily favors the i9-14901E, 112736 versus 65345, a 42% deficit. Physics simulation goes to the i9-14901E, 3041 versus 2342, a 23% lead. Random string sorting goes to the i9-14901E, 39138 versus 36590, a 6.5% lead.

The overall database average scores put the i9-14901E slightly ahead: 37911 versus 36938, a difference of about 2.6%. The Ultra 5 225 sits at the 85th percentile of all CPUs; the i9-14901E sits at the 86th percentile.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two processors:

| Field | Intel Core Ultra 5 225 | Intel Core i9-14901E |

|-------|----------------------|------------------------|

| Cores | 10 | 8 |

| Threads | 10 | 16 |

| Base clock | 3.30 GHz | 2.80 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.90 GHz | 5.60 GHz |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1851 | Intel Socket 1700 |

| Architecture | Arrow Lake | Raptor Lake |

| Process node | 3 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Transistors | 17,800 million | Not listed |

| Die size | 243 mm² | 257 mm² |

| L1 cache | 192 KB (per core) | 80 KB (per core) |

| L2 cache | 3 MB (per core) | 2 MB (per core) |

| L3 cache | 20 MB (shared) | 36 MB (shared) |

| Memory support | DDR5 | DDR4, DDR5 |

| Memory bandwidth | 102.4 GB/s | Not listed |

| ECC memory | false | true |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 20 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated graphics | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 16EU | UHD Graphics 770 |

| Release date | 2025-01-06 | 2024-06-30 |

| Launch MSRP | $246 | None listed |

The two processors share a 65 W TDP, a desktop market segment, an active production status, and a locked multiplier. Both are Intel parts, but their sockets are incompatible: Socket 1851 for the Ultra 5 225 and Socket 1700 for the i9-14901E.