Intel Core i9-14901E vs Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive overall win for the Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX, taking 15 of the 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons. The Intel Core i9-14901E manages only two wins, but those two wins are substantial and reveal a specific strength profile.

The i9-14901E’s largest victory comes in Cinebench R23 single-core, where it scores 3635 against the Ultra 9’s 2187.5, a 66.2% advantage. It also wins Cinebench R15 single-core, scoring 366 versus 323.5, a 13.1% lead. These results indicate that for workloads that rely on a single thread, the Raptor Lake part holds a clear edge, likely due to its higher 5.60 GHz boost clock compared to the Ultra 9’s 5.50 GHz.

Every other benchmark favors the Ultra 9 285HX, and the margins are often large. In multi-threaded Cinebench tests, the Ultra 9 dominates: Cinebench R15 multi-core shows 5656.5 versus 2595, a 54.1% difference. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows 20236 versus 10816, a 46.6% gap. Cinebench R23 multi-core shows 36429.5 versus 25753, a 29.3% lead. These results confirm that the 24-core Arrow Lake processor provides far more parallel throughput than the 8-core Raptor Lake part.

PassMark tests follow the same pattern. The Ultra 9 leads in data compression by 54.3% (631885 versus 288777), in data encryption by 61.8% (48567 versus 18571), in extended instructions by 64.9% (49148 versus 17249), and in floating point math by 58.4% (194998 versus 81089). The integer math gap is smaller but still significant at 27.3% (155076 versus 112736). The multithread score shows a 46.8% advantage for the Ultra 9 (56902 versus 30298).

Even where the i9-14901E might be expected to compete, the Ultra 9 pulls ahead. In PassMark single-thread, the Ultra 9 scores 4618 against 4354, a 5.7% margin. This contradicts the Cinebench single-core results, indicating that the two suites measure different aspects of single-thread performance. The Ultra 9 also wins in physics (3476 versus 3041, a 12.5% lead) and random string sorting (77196 versus 39138, a 49.3% lead). The overall average benchmark score tells the same story: the Ultra 9 sits at 76155, while the i9-14901E sits at 37911. The Ultra 9 also holds a 95th percentile rank across all CPUs, compared to the i9-14901E’s 86th percentile.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel lineups and manufacturing generations. The i9-14901E belongs to the Core 14th Gen series, built on Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-R codename. The Ultra 9 285HX belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2, built on Arrow Lake architecture with the Arrow Lake-HX codename.

The process nodes differ substantially. The i9-14901E uses Intel’s 10 nm node, while the Ultra 9 uses TSMC’s 3 nm node. The die sizes are similar, 257 mm² for the i9 and 243 mm² for the Ultra 9, but the transistor counts tell a different story. The Ultra 9 packs 17,800 million transistors, while the i9’s transistor count is not recorded in the database.

Core counts are the most obvious architectural split. The i9-14901E has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Ultra 9 has 24 cores and 24 threads. The Ultra 9 uses a different thread model, with no hyper-threading. Cache configurations also differ. The i9 has 80 KB of L1 per core and 2 MB of L2 per core, while the Ultra 9 has 192 KB of L1 per core and 3 MB of L2 per core. Both share 36 MB of L3 cache.

Memory support differs. The i9-14901E supports DDR4 and DDR5, while the Ultra 9 supports only DDR5. Both use dual-channel memory buses, but the Ultra 9 records a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s, while the i9’s bandwidth is not listed. Both support ECC memory.

The integrated graphics are different: the i9 uses UHD Graphics 770, while the Ultra 9 uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU. PCIe lanes also differ: the i9 provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Ultra 9 provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only).

The sockets are incompatible. The i9-14901E uses Intel Socket 1700 for desktop, while the Ultra 9 uses Intel BGA 2114 for mobile. The i9 has a locked multiplier, while the Ultra 9 has an unlocked multiplier. The Ultra 9 is marked as mobile segment, the i9 as desktop. The i9 released on 2024-06-30, and the Ultra 9 on 2025-01-12.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core i9-14901E has a boost clock of 5.60 GHz, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX has a boost clock of 5.50 GHz. Both have a base clock of 2.80 GHz.

Q: How do the core and thread counts compare?

A: The i9-14901E has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Ultra 9 285HX has 24 cores and 24 threads, with no hyper-threading.

Q: Which CPU wins in single-core Cinebench R23?

A: The i9-14901E wins Cinebench R23 single-core with a score of 3635 versus 2187.5, a 66.2% advantage. However, the Ultra 9 wins PassMark single-thread with 4618 versus 4354, a 5.7% lead.

Q: What is the L3 cache size for each processor?

A: Both processors have 36 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the i9-14901E and the Ultra 9 285HX support ECC memory.

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Ultra 9 285HX has an average benchmark score of 76155, which is roughly double the i9-14901E’s 37911. The Ultra 9 also ranks in the 95th percentile versus the i9’s 86th percentile.

Specification Differences

The table below lists only the fields where the two processors differ, based on the recorded data.

| Specification | Intel Core i9-14901E | Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX |

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

| Series | Core 14th Gen | Core Ultra Series 2 |

| Cores | 8 | 24 |

| Threads | 16 | 24 |

| Boost Clock | 5.60 GHz | 5.50 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 55 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel BGA 2114 |

| Architecture | Raptor Lake | Arrow Lake |

| Codename | Raptor Lake-R | Arrow Lake-HX |

| Generation | Core i9 (Raptor Lake Refresh) | Ultra 9 (Arrow Lake-HX) |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Transistors | Not recorded | 17,800 million |

| Die Size | 257 mm² | 243 mm² |

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

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

| Memory Support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR5 |

| Memory Bandwidth | Not recorded | 102.4 GB/s |

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

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 770 | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Release Date | 2024-06-30 | 2025-01-12 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | Yes |

| Part Number | Q49ESRNJH | SRVFJ |

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i9-14901E wins in two specific areas: Cinebench R15 single-core and Cinebench R23 single-core. The 66.2% lead in R23 single-core is the standout result. This makes the i9-14901E a better choice for legacy single-threaded applications or workloads that are strictly serial and cannot use multiple cores. Its 5.60 GHz boost clock appears to provide a real advantage in this narrow scenario.

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX wins everywhere else, including all multi-threaded Cinebench tests, all PassMark sub-tests, and even PassMark single-thread. The data indicates that the Ultra 9 is the stronger processor for modern, parallel workloads. The 24-core configuration delivers massive throughput gains in rendering, compression, encryption, and floating-point math. The smaller gaps in integer math (27.3%) and physics (12.5%) still favor the Ultra 9, showing that its advantage is not limited to highly parallel tasks.

For a desktop user who needs maximum single-core responsiveness in older software, the i9-14901E has a case. For any workload that can use more than a few threads, the Ultra 9’s margins are too large to ignore. The 54.3% lead in data compression and the 61.8% lead in encryption indicate that the Ultra 9 will finish such tasks in nearly half the time.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is clear: the Intel Core Ultra 9 285HX is the faster processor in nearly every measurable category. It wins 15 of 17 head-to-head tests, holds a 95th percentile rank, and scores an average of 76155 versus the i9-14901E’s 37911. The Ultra 9 doubles the average performance and provides anywhere from a 12.5% to 64.9% advantage across individual tests.

The i9-14901E is not without merit. Its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3635 is 66.2% ahead of the Ultra 9, and its R15 single-core score is 13.1% ahead. For users running applications that are strictly single-threaded and unable to scale, the i9-14901E is the stronger option. Its locked multiplier and desktop socket also position it differently, but the database shows no overclocking advantage for the i9.

The Ultra 9 285HX is the pick for almost any other scenario. Its 24 cores and 24 threads provide a significant multi-threaded advantage, and its PassMark single-thread score of 4618 even edges out the i9’s 4354. The 3 nm TSMC process and 17,800 million transistors indicate a more modern design. The 5.5 GHz boost clock is only slightly lower than the i9’s, yet the architectural improvements deliver far better overall throughput.

For a builder focused on multi-core rendering, data processing, or content creation, the Ultra 9 285HX is the clear recommendation. For a user whose primary application is a single-threaded benchmark or legacy software that cannot use multiple cores, the i9-14901E’s Cinebench single-core dominance makes it a defensible choice. The data, however, overwhelmingly favors the Ultra 9 for general and parallel workloads.