Intel Core i9-14901E vs Intel Core Ultra 5 338H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a clear split between the Intel Core i9-14901E and the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H. The i9-14901E claims 13 wins across the recorded tests, while the Ultra 5 338H takes 4. The margin of victory matters as much as the count.

The most dramatic difference appears in Cinebench R23. In the multicore test, the i9-14901E scores 25753 against 16331 for the Ultra 5 338H, a 57.7% advantage. The single-core R23 result is even more lopsided: 3635 versus 2044, a 77.8% gap. These are the two largest deltas in the entire comparison. The i9-14901E also leads in Cinebench R15 multicore by 3.6% (2595 versus 2504) and in R15 single-core by 20% (366 versus 305). Cinebench R20 shows a 5.9% lead for the i9-14901E in both multicore (10816 versus 10213) and single-core (1526 versus 1441).

PassMark results reinforce the i9-14901E's dominance in integer-heavy work. The integer math score favors the i9-14901E at 112736 versus 64934, a 73.6% lead. Random string sorting goes to the i9-14901E by 14.8% (39138 versus 34082). Multithread performance sits 5.5% higher for the i9-14901E (30298 versus 28717). Physics tests show a 12.8% advantage (3041 versus 2697). Data compression favors the i9-14901E by 4.4% (288777 versus 276539). Single-thread PassMark results land at 4354 for the i9-14901E, a 4.2% edge over 4180.

The Ultra 5 338H wins where its architecture shows different strengths. Data encryption goes to the Ultra 5 338H at 21367 versus 18571, a 13.1% margin. Extended instructions favor the Ultra 5 338H by 27.8% (23906 versus 17249). Prime number finding sees the Ultra 5 338H ahead by 37.8% (304 versus 189). Floating point math edges toward the Ultra 5 338H at 84067 versus 81089, a 3.5% lead. These wins cluster around specialized instruction paths and encryption workloads rather than general compute.

The Verdict

The data points to two different design philosophies. The Intel Core i9-14901E is the stronger processor for raw throughput, threaded rendering, and integer workloads. Its Cinebench R23 multicore advantage of 57.7% and integer math lead of 73.6% are decisive. The passmark multithread score of 30298 versus 28717, combined with a 4.2% single-thread win, indicates the i9-14901E delivers higher performance across most general-purpose tasks.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H counters in encryption, extended instructions, prime number finding, and floating point math. These are narrower but real wins. The 27.8% lead in extended instructions and 37.8% in prime number finding suggest the Ultra 5 338H handles specific compute patterns more efficiently. However, those wins do not translate into overall benchmark supremacy. The average benchmark score for the i9-14901E is 37911, while the Ultra 5 338H sits at 33989. The percentile ranking also separates them: 86th for the i9-14901E versus 84th for the Ultra 5 338H.

The nearest rivals for each processor frame the comparison further. The i9-14901E lands within 0.3% of the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370, the AMD Ryzen 7 9700X, the Intel Core 5 211E, and the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132. The Ultra 5 338H sits near the Intel Core Ultra 7 165H, Intel Core i7-12800HX, Intel Xeon 6353P, and AMD EPYC 4244P, with deltas between 0.3% and 0.7%. The i9-14901E competes in a higher performance band.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural lineages. The i9-14901E uses Raptor Lake, specifically Raptor Lake-R, built on a 10 nm process with a die size of 257 mm². The Ultra 5 338H uses Panther Lake, built on a 3 nm process. The process node difference is substantial, with the Ultra 5 338H using a significantly smaller transistor geometry.

Core counts differ in both number and configuration. The i9-14901E has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Ultra 5 338H has 12 cores but only 12 threads, meaning it does not use simultaneous multithreading. This explains some of the performance distribution: the i9-14901E's 16 threads help in heavily threaded Cinebench tests, while the Ultra 5 338H's 12 physical cores handle parallel work without thread duplication.

Cache hierarchies diverge sharply. The i9-14901E carries 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3. The Ultra 5 338H has 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, but only 18 MB of shared L3. The i9-14901E's larger L3 pool likely supports its strong multicore scores. The Ultra 5 338H compensates with larger per-core L1 and L2 allocations.

Memory support also separates them. The i9-14901E supports DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel bus. The Ultra 5 338H supports LPDDR5X, also dual-channel, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 136.5 GB/s. The i9-14901E has no listed memory bandwidth figure in the database. ECC memory is supported on the i9-14901E but not on the Ultra 5 338H.

PCIe connectivity differs. The i9-14901E provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU. The Ultra 5 338H provides Gen 5 with only 4 lanes from the CPU. Integrated graphics differ as well: the i9-14901E uses UHD Graphics 770, while the Ultra 5 338H uses Arc B370.

Specification Differences

The socket types are incompatible. The i9-14901E uses Intel Socket 1700, a desktop platform. The Ultra 5 338H uses Intel BGA 2540, a mobile package. This aligns with their market segments: Desktop for the i9-14901E, Mobile for the Ultra 5 338H.

Clock speeds favor the i9-14901E. Its base clock is 2.80 GHz with a boost of 5.60 GHz. The Ultra 5 338H runs at 1.90 GHz base and 4.70 GHz boost. The i9-14901E's higher boost clock of 5.60 GHz contributes to its single-core Cinebench leads.

Thermal design power differs by a wide margin. The i9-14901E has a TDP of 65, while the Ultra 5 338H draws only 25. The Ultra 5 338H delivers its performance at a much lower thermal envelope, which matters for mobile integration. The i9-14901E's higher TDP reflects its desktop positioning and larger power budget.

Release dates place them in different periods. The i9-14901E entered the database with a release date of 2024-06-30, while the Ultra 5 338H arrived later with 2026-01-04. Both remain in active production. Neither processor has a locked multiplier, so overclocking is not available on either.

Memory support remains a key differentiator. The i9-14901E accepts DDR4 and DDR5, giving platform flexibility. The Ultra 5 338H is limited to LPDDR5X, which is typical for mobile designs. The i9-14901E supports ECC memory; the Ultra 5 338H does not.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-core Cinebench R23 score?

A: The Intel Core i9-14901E scores 3635 in Cinebench R23 single-core, compared to 2044 for the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H. That is a 77.8% lead for the i9-14901E.

Q: Where does the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H beat the i9-14901E?

A: The Ultra 5 338H wins in PassMark data encryption (21367 versus 18571), extended instructions (23906 versus 17249), prime number finding (304 versus 189), and floating point math (84067 versus 81089).

Q: How do the core and thread counts compare?

A: The i9-14901E has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Ultra 5 338H has 12 cores and 12 threads. The i9-14901E uses simultaneous multithreading, while the Ultra 5 338H does not.

Q: What is the thermal design power difference?

A: The i9-14901E has a TDP of 65, while the Ultra 5 338H has a TDP of 25. The Ultra 5 338H operates at a much lower thermal envelope.

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: The i9-14901E has 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ultra 5 338H has 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The i9-14901E carries twice the L3 capacity.

Q: What memory types does each support?

A: The i9-14901E supports DDR4 and DDR5 with dual-channel access. The Ultra 5 338H supports LPDDR5X with dual-channel access and a recorded bandwidth of 136.5 GB/s.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i9-14901E wins in threaded rendering workloads, as shown by its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 25753 and its 57.7% advantage. Its Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multicore wins all exceed 3.6% margins, with the R23 result being the standout. Integer-heavy compute tasks clearly favor the i9-14901E, given the 73.6% integer math lead. Data compression, multithread PassMark, physics simulation, and random string sorting all belong to the i9-14901E. For workloads that depend on high clock speeds, the 5.60 GHz boost clock delivers a 4.2% single-thread PassMark win and a 20% Cinebench R15 single-core win.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H wins in encryption workloads, with a 13.1% lead in data encryption. Extended instruction processing favors the Ultra 5 338H by 27.8%, and prime number finding by 37.8%. Floating point math is also in the Ultra 5 338H's column, though by a narrower 3.5% margin. These wins point to specialized instruction handling and efficient execution of specific mathematical operations. The Ultra 5 338H achieves these results with a 25 TDP and 12 physical cores, making it the more power-conscious option for mobile platforms.

The i9-14901E holds the overall performance crown according to the database, with an average benchmark score of 37911 and a 86th percentile ranking. The Ultra 5 338H sits at 33989 and the 84th percentile. The i9-14901E is the choice for desktop users prioritizing multicore throughput, integer math, and single-thread speed. The Ultra 5 338H suits workloads where encryption, extended instructions, and floating point math matter more than raw threaded output, and where the 25 TDP and mobile BGA 2540 socket fit the system design.