Intel Core i9-14901E vs Intel Core Ultra 5 336H Comparison

The Intel Core i9-14901E and the Intel Core Ultra 5 336H represent two distinct design philosophies within Intel's lineup: a high-frequency desktop part with a focus on raw single-thread and integer throughput, versus a power-lean mobile processor with a newer process node and a different core layout. The recorded data shows a clear split, with the i9-14901E winning 13 of the 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, while the Core Ultra 5 336H takes 4 wins in specific, specialized workloads.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i9-14901E dominates in nearly every general-purpose and rendering workload. Across the entire Cinebench suite, from R15 through R23, it holds a consistent 7.3% advantage over the Core Ultra 5 336H in both multi-core and single-core tests. Its multi-core scores, such as 25,753 in Cinebench R23 versus 23,991 for the Ultra 5, indicate that its 8 cores and 16 threads, running at a 5.60 GHz boost clock, deliver more sustained throughput in threaded tasks than the Ultra 5's 16 cores and 16 threads at a 4.60 GHz boost clock. The i9-14901E also wins the PassMark multithread test with a score of 30,298 against 28,545, a 6.1% margin, and the PassMark physics test with 3,041 versus 2,682, a 13.4% edge.

The most striking victory for the i9-14901E comes in PassMark integer math, where it scores 112,736 versus 62,070 for the Ultra 5 336H. That is an 81.6% difference, the largest single delta in the entire comparison. This suggests the desktop chip's higher clock speed and older, but less complex, core architecture provide a significant advantage in workloads that are heavily dependent on integer arithmetic. It also wins in random string sorting by 13.8% (39,138 vs 34,402) and data compression by 3% (288,777 vs 280,340), indicating faster handling of memory-intensive data manipulation.

The Core Ultra 5 336H, conversely, wins where the workload leverages its newer architecture and larger per-core L2 cache. Its most decisive victory is in PassMark extended instructions, scoring 24,542 against 17,249 for the i9-14901E, a 29.7% advantage. This indicates support for newer instruction set extensions that the older Raptor Lake design cannot match. It also wins in find prime numbers (299 vs 189, a 36.8% gap), data encryption (21,291 vs 18,571, a 12.8% edge), and floating point math (82,415 vs 81,089, a 1.6% margin). The encryption and extended instruction wins point to a more modern execution engine that can accelerate cryptographic and vectorized tasks.

The Verdict

The data points to the Intel Core i9-14901E as the stronger processor for users whose primary concern is raw computational speed in standard productivity, rendering, and general multitasking. Its uniform 7.3% lead across all Cinebench versions and its massive 81.6% win in integer math make it the clear choice for software that relies on high clock speeds and strong single-core performance. Its 86th percentile ranking versus all CPUs, compared to the Ultra 5's 84th percentile, reinforces this position.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H is not a general-purpose winner, but it is the better part for specific, modern workloads. Its 29.7% lead in extended instructions and 36.8% lead in prime number calculation show that for code that can use AVX-512 or similar modern instruction sets, the Ultra 5 is substantially faster. Its 12.8% win in data encryption also makes it a more efficient choice for security-related processing. This processor is the appropriate pick for a mobile platform where its 25 W TDP and 3 nm process node are key advantages, but the benchmark data cannot support a claim that it is faster overall.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results are remarkably consistent. The i9-14901E scores 2,595 in Cinebench R15 multi-core versus 2,418 for the Ultra 5, and 366 versus 341 in single-core. In Cinebench R20, the margins persist: 10,816 versus 10,076 multi-core, and 1,526 versus 1,422 single-core. Cinebench R23 shows 25,753 versus 23,991 multi-core and 3,635 versus 3,387 single-core. Every one of these six tests shows a 7.3% delta, indicating a fixed architectural clock-for-clock advantage for the desktop chip in this rendering engine.

The PassMark suite breaks the pattern. In integer math, the i9-14901E's 112,736 versus 62,070 is an 81.6% blowout, a result that dwarfs every other difference. The Ultra 5's response comes in extended instructions, where 24,542 versus 17,249 reverses the trend with a 29.7% margin. Data encryption also favors the Ultra 5 at 21,291 versus 18,571, a 12.8% gap, and find prime numbers shows a 36.8% gap (299 vs 189). The floating point math test is nearly a tie, with the Ultra 5 winning 82,415 to 81,089, a slim 1.6% margin. For the remaining PassMark tests, the i9-14901E wins multithread by 6.1%, physics by 13.4%, random string sorting by 13.8%, data compression by 3%, and single-thread by 8.5% (4,354 vs 4,013).

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H has 16 cores, while the Intel Core i9-14901E has 8 cores. Both have 16 threads.

Q: Is the Core i9-14901E faster in single-core performance?

A: Yes. The i9-14901E wins all single-core Cinebench tests by 7.3% and the PassMark single-thread test by 8.5% (4,354 vs 4,013).

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two?

A: The largest gap is in PassMark integer math, where the Core i9-14901E leads by 81.6% with a score of 112,736 versus 62,070.

Q: Where does the Core Ultra 5 336H show a clear advantage?

A: The Ultra 5 336H wins in PassMark extended instructions by 29.7%, find prime numbers by 36.8%, data encryption by 12.8%, and floating point math by 1.6%.

Q: What is the difference in power consumption?

A: The Core i9-14901E has a 65 W TDP, while the Core Ultra 5 336H has a 25 W TDP.

Q: Which processor uses a newer manufacturing process?

A: The Core Ultra 5 336H is built on a 3 nm process node, whereas the Core i9-14901E uses a 10 nm node.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different architectures. The i9-14901E uses the Raptor Lake architecture on a 10 nm process node, with a die size of 257 mm². The Ultra 5 336H uses the Panther Lake architecture on a 3 nm process node, which is a much more advanced manufacturing process. The process node difference is significant: the 3 nm node allows for smaller transistors and greater power efficiency, explaining the Ultra 5's 25 W TDP versus the desktop chip's 65 W TDP.

The core layouts also differ. The i9-14901E has 8 cores and 16 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 has 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 Ultra 5's larger per-core L1 and L2 caches, combined with its smaller total L3, suggests a design aimed at feeding many cores individually rather than relying on a large shared pool. The i9-14901E's larger 36 MB L3 cache likely helps in workloads where data sharing between cores is frequent.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The i9-14901E uses UHD Graphics 770, while the Ultra 5 336H uses Intel Xe3 Graphics, a newer generation of GPU architecture. The Ultra 5 also supports a different memory set, including LPDDR5X, and has a higher recorded memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s, whereas the i9-14901E supports both DDR4 and DDR5 but has no listed bandwidth figure. The socket types are incompatible: the i9-14901E uses Intel Socket 1700 for desktop motherboards, while the Ultra 5 336H uses Intel BGA 2540, a mobile package.

Specification Differences

The core count is the most obvious difference: 8 cores for the i9-14901E versus 16 cores for the Ultra 5 336H, though both have 16 threads. The i9-14901E has a higher base clock of 2.80 GHz versus 1.90 GHz, and a higher boost clock of 5.60 GHz versus 4.60 GHz. The TDP is also very different, with the desktop part at 65 W and the mobile part at 25 W.

The cache hierarchy is distinct. The i9-14901E has 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3. The Ultra 5 336H has 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. The memory support differs: the i9-14901E supports DDR4 and DDR5, while the Ultra 5 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. The Ultra 5 also has a listed memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s, which the i9-14901E lacks in the data.

The PCIe configurations are not identical. The i9-14901E provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Ultra 5 336H provides Gen 5 with 12 lanes (CPU only). ECC memory support is present on the i9-14901E but absent on the Ultra 5. The integrated graphics are different, with UHD Graphics 770 on the desktop chip and Intel Xe3 Graphics on the mobile chip. The process node, socket, and release dates also differ, with the i9-14901E released in 2024 and the Ultra 5 336H in 2026.