Intel Core i9-14901TE vs Intel Core Ultra 5 228V Comparison

Intel Core i9-14901TE vs Intel Core Ultra 5 228V

The Intel Core i9-14901TE and the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V represent two distinct approaches to CPU design within Intel's current lineup. The i9-14901TE is a desktop processor built on the Raptor Lake architecture, while the Core Ultra 5 228V is a mobile processor using the newer Lunar Lake architecture. The database records a complete benchmark suite for the Core Ultra 5 228V, while the i9-14901TE has no recorded benchmark scores, meaning quantitative comparisons rely on the architectural and specification data available for both parts.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core i9-14901TE has a boost clock of 5.50 GHz, which is 1.00 GHz higher than the Core Ultra 5 228V's 4.50 GHz boost clock.

Q: How do the core counts compare between the two processors?

A: Both processors have 8 cores, but the i9-14901TE supports 16 threads through Hyper-Threading, while the Core Ultra 5 228V has 8 threads total.

Q: What is the difference in process node technology?

A: The i9-14901TE uses Intel's 10 nm process node, while the Core Ultra 5 228V uses a 3 nm process node fabricated by TSMC.

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: The i9-14901TE has 36 MB of shared L3 cache, significantly more than the Core Ultra 5 228V's 8 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: What are the TDP ratings for each processor?

A: The i9-14901TE has a TDP of 45 watts, while the Core Ultra 5 228V has a much lower TDP of 17 watts.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The i9-14901TE supports ECC memory, whereas the Core Ultra 5 228V does not support ECC memory.

Architecture Differences

The two processors diverge fundamentally in their architectural design philosophy. The i9-14901TE uses the Raptor Lake architecture, specifically the Raptor Lake-R refresh, built on Intel's 10 nm process node. The Core Ultra 5 228V uses the Lunar Lake architecture, fabricated on TSMC's 3 nm process node. This process difference is substantial, with the 3 nm node representing a newer manufacturing technology compared to the 10 nm node used by the older Raptor Lake design.

The die size for the i9-14901TE is recorded at 257 mm², while the Core Ultra 5 228V has no recorded die size in the database. Cache hierarchies differ notably between the two. The i9-14901TE has 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 2 MB of L2 cache per core, with 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 5 228V has 192 KB of L1 cache per core and 2.5 MB of L2 cache per core, with only 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The per-core L1 and L2 caches are larger on the Lunar Lake part, but the shared L3 cache is much smaller.

Threading support represents another major architectural difference. The i9-14901TE supports 16 threads from its 8 cores, indicating simultaneous multithreading capability. The Core Ultra 5 228V has 8 threads from 8 cores, meaning it does not use simultaneous multithreading. The base clock of the i9-14901TE is 2.30 GHz, slightly higher than the 2.10 GHz base clock of the Core Ultra 5 228V. The boost clock difference is more pronounced, with the i9-14901TE reaching 5.50 GHz compared to 4.50 GHz for the Core Ultra 5 228V.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The i9-14901TE includes UHD Graphics 770, while the Core Ultra 5 228V includes Arc 130V graphics. The memory support also differs, with the i9-14901TE supporting DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the Core Ultra 5 228V's memory support is listed as unknown and depends on the motherboard. Both processors use dual-channel memory buses. The PCIe configurations differ significantly: the i9-14901TE has Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Core Ultra 5 228V has Gen 5 with 4 lanes (CPU only). The i9-14901TE supports ECC memory, which the Core Ultra 5 228V does not.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark results between these two processors, and the i9-14901TE has no recorded benchmark scores at all. However, the Core Ultra 5 228V has a complete benchmark suite that provides insight into its performance profile. The Core Ultra 5 228V achieves an average benchmark score of 21,440 and sits at the 75th percentile of all CPUs in the database.

The Core Ultra 5 228V's closest rival is the AMD Ryzen 5 2600, which has an average score of 21,484, putting the Core Ultra 5 228V at a 0.2 percent deficit. The Intel Core i9-11900H scores 21,367 on average, which is 0.3 percent lower than the Core Ultra 5 228V. The Intel Xeon D-1746TER has an average score of 21,635, which is 0.9 percent higher than the Core Ultra 5 228V. The AMD EPYC 9454 scores 21,223, which is 1 percent lower than the Core Ultra 5 228V.

In single-threaded workloads, the Core Ultra 5 228V scores 3,836 on the PassMark single-thread test. Its Cinebench R23 single-core score is 1,758, while its Cinebench R20 single-core score is 916, and its Cinebench R15 single-core score is 267. These scores place it competitively among its nearest rivals, which include desktop and mobile processors from previous generations.

In multi-threaded workloads, the Core Ultra 5 228V scores 18,227 on the PassMark multithread test. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score is 9,932, Cinebench R20 multicore is 6,491, and Cinebench R15 multicore is 1,502.5. The PassMark physics test yields 1,538 points, while the floating-point math test produces 53,310 points. The integer math test scores 39,679, and the data compression test scores 173,924. Data encryption scores 13,032, and extended instructions score 14,801. The find prime numbers test scores 168, and random string sorting scores 21,254.

Without benchmark data for the i9-14901TE, direct performance comparisons cannot be made from measured results. The database shows no wins for either processor in head-to-head testing, as no such tests are recorded. The i9-14901TE's 5.50 GHz boost clock and 16 threads suggest strong potential for multi-threaded workloads, but the lack of recorded measurements prevents confirmation.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every major specification category. The i9-14901TE is a desktop processor in the Core 14th Gen series, while the Core Ultra 5 228V is a mobile processor in the Core Ultra Series 2. Their sockets are incompatible: the i9-14901TE uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Core Ultra 5 228V uses Intel BGA 2833.

The process nodes differ, with the i9-14901TE using a 10 nm node from Intel's foundry, while the Core Ultra 5 228V uses a 3 nm node from TSMC. The die size of the i9-14901TE is 257 mm², but the Core Ultra 5 228V has no recorded die size. Both processors have 8 cores, but the i9-14901TE has 16 threads while the Core Ultra 5 228V has 8 threads.

Base clocks are close, with the i9-14901TE at 2.30 GHz and the Core Ultra 5 228V at 2.10 GHz. The boost clocks show a larger gap, with the i9-14901TE at 5.50 GHz and the Core Ultra 5 228V at 4.50 GHz. The TDP difference is substantial: the i9-14901TE has a 45-watt TDP, while the Core Ultra 5 228V has a 17-watt TDP.

Cache configurations differ at every level. The i9-14901TE has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 5 228V has 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 2.5 MB of L2 cache per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The i9-14901TE supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory with ECC support, while the Core Ultra 5 228V's memory support is unknown and depends on the motherboard, with no ECC support.

The PCIe configurations differ, with the i9-14901TE offering Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only) and the Core Ultra 5 228V offering Gen 5 with 4 lanes (CPU only). Their integrated graphics differ: UHD Graphics 770 on the i9-14901TE versus Arc 130V on the Core Ultra 5 228V. The i9-14901TE has a market segment of Desktop, while the Core Ultra 5 228V has a market segment of Mobile. Their release dates differ, with the i9-14901TE released on June 30, 2024, and the Core Ultra 5 228V released on September 23, 2024. Both processors are currently active in production and neither has an unlocked multiplier. Neither processor has a recorded launch MSRP in the database.

Where Each One Wins

The i9-14901TE appears positioned for desktop workloads that benefit from high clock speeds and substantial cache. Its 5.50 GHz boost clock is 1.00 GHz higher than the Core Ultra 5 228V's boost clock, which suggests an advantage in lightly threaded applications that rely on single-core frequency. The 36 MB of shared L3 cache is 4.5 times larger than the 8 MB found on the Core Ultra 5 228V, which can benefit workloads with large working sets that fit in cache. The 16 threads from 8 cores provide better thread-level parallelism than the Core Ultra 5 228V's 8 threads, potentially improving performance in multi-threaded productivity tasks.

The i9-14901TE's 45-watt TDP indicates a higher power envelope, which allows for sustained high-frequency operation. Its support for DDR4 and DDR5 memory gives flexibility in system configuration, and ECC memory support is a distinguishing feature for reliability-sensitive applications. The 16 PCIe Gen 5 lanes provide more expansion bandwidth than the Core Ultra 5 228V's 4 lanes, which matters for systems with multiple high-bandwidth devices.

The Core Ultra 5 228V appears positioned for mobile workloads where power efficiency is critical. Its 17-watt TDP is less than half that of the i9-14901TE, indicating suitability for thin-and-light systems. The 3 nm process node from TSMC represents a newer manufacturing technology than the 10 nm node used by the i9-14901TE, which can translate to better performance per watt. The larger per-core L1 and L2 caches on the Core Ultra 5 228V, 192 KB and 2.5 MB respectively, may benefit latency-sensitive single-threaded workloads despite the smaller shared L3 cache.

The Core Ultra 5 228V has recorded benchmark scores that place it at the 75th percentile of all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 21,440. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 5 2600, Intel Core i9-11900H, Intel Xeon D-1746TER, and AMD EPYC 9454, with performance differences ranging from 1 percent ahead to 0.9 percent behind. The i9-14901TE has no recorded benchmark scores and its percentile is listed at 50, which reflects the absence of measurements rather than a direct performance comparison.

The Verdict

The data shows two processors built for different purposes. The Intel Core i9-14901TE is a desktop processor with higher clock speeds, more threads, larger L3 cache, and more PCIe lanes. Its 5.50 GHz boost clock and 16 threads make it suited for desktop systems that prioritize raw processing capability. The 45-watt TDP, while higher than the mobile part, is modest for a desktop processor with a 5.50 GHz boost clock. The 257 mm² die size and 10 nm process indicate a larger, more power-hungry design than the Lunar Lake part.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V is a mobile processor with a much lower 17-watt TDP and a 3 nm process node. Its recorded benchmark scores demonstrate competitive performance at the 75th percentile of all CPUs, with an average score of 21,440. Its nearest rivals in the database, such as the AMD Ryzen 5 2600 and Intel Core i9-11900H, have similar average scores within 1 percent, showing that the Core Ultra 5 228V delivers solid performance despite its power efficiency focus.

The absence of benchmark data for the i9-14901TE means the database cannot confirm its actual performance relative to the Core Ultra 5 228V. The specification differences suggest the i9-14901TE would win in multi-threaded workloads due to its 16 threads and 36 MB of L3 cache, while the Core Ultra 5 228V would win in power-constrained environments due to its 17-watt TDP and 3 nm process. The i9-14901TE's ECC memory support and DDR4/DDR5 compatibility make it suitable for desktop systems requiring those features, while the Core Ultra 5 228V's mobile socket and Arc 130V graphics target portable systems.

Users selecting between these two processors should base their decision on the platform requirements and workload characteristics. The i9-14901TE targets desktop Socket 1700 systems with high-frequency compute needs and ECC memory support. The Core Ultra 5 228V targets mobile BGA 2833 systems with power efficiency as a priority, backed by recorded benchmark scores that show it performs competitively within its power class.