i5-9400F vs Ultra 7 255H
Aggregate performance score
Core Ultra 7 255H outperforms Core i5-9400F by a whopping 205% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Core Ultra 7 255H and Core i5-9400F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 343 | 1135 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 22 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 9.08 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | no data | Intel Core i5 |
| Power efficiency | 14.93 | 8.66 |
| Architecture codename | no data | Coffee Lake-R (2018−2019) |
| Release date | 1 January 2025 (less than a year ago) | 8 January 2019 (6 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $182 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Core Ultra 7 255H and Core i5-9400F basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.
| Physical cores | 16 (Hexadeca-Core) | 6 (Hexa-Core) |
| Performance-cores | 6 | no data |
| Efficient-cores | 8 | no data |
| Low Power Efficient-cores | 2 | no data |
| Threads | 16 | 6 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 2.9 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 5.1 GHz | 4.1 GHz |
| Bus type | no data | DMI 3.0 |
| Bus rate | no data | 4 × 8 GT/s |
| Multiplier | no data | 29 |
| L1 cache | no data | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | no data | 256K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 24 MB | 9 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | no data | 14 nm |
| Die size | no data | 149 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 72 °C |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | + |
Compatibility
Information on Core Ultra 7 255H and Core i5-9400F compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.
| Number of CPUs in a configuration | 1 | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | FCBGA2049 | FCLGA1151 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 115 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core Ultra 7 255H and Core i5-9400F. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2 | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2 |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Speed Shift | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | 2.0 |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | - |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | + |
| Turbo Boost Max 3.0 | + | no data |
| Deep Learning Boost | + | - |
| Supported AI Software Frameworks | OpenVINO™, WindowsML, DirectML, ONNX RT, WebNN | - |
Security technologies
Core Ultra 7 255H and Core i5-9400F technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | - |
| EDB | + | + |
| Secure Key | + | + |
| MPX | - | + |
| Identity Protection | - | + |
| SGX | no data | Yes with Intel® ME |
| OS Guard | + | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core Ultra 7 255H and Core i5-9400F are enumerated here.
| VT-d | + | + |
| VT-x | + | + |
| EPT | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core Ultra 7 255H and Core i5-9400F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR5-6400 | DDR4-2666 |
| Maximum memory size | 128 GB | 128 GB |
| Max memory channels | 2 | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 42.671 GB/s |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel® Arc™ 140T GPU | no data |
| Quick Sync Video | + | - |
| Graphics max frequency | 2.25 GHz | no data |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Core Ultra 7 255H and Core i5-9400F integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | 4 | no data |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by Core Ultra 7 255H and Core i5-9400F integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.
| Max resolution over HDMI 1.4 | 4096 x 2304 @ 60Hz (HDMI 2.1 TMDS) 7680 x 4320 @ 60Hz (HDMI2.1 FRL) | no data |
| Max resolution over eDP | 3840x2400 @ 120Hz | no data |
| Max resolution over DisplayPort | 7680 x 4320 @ 60Hz | no data |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by Core Ultra 7 255H and Core i5-9400F integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | 12.2 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core Ultra 7 255H and Core i5-9400F.
| PCIe version | no data | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 28 | 16 |
| PCI support | 5.0 and 4.0 | no data |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.
Passmark
Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 18.02 | 5.91 |
| Recency | 1 January 2025 | 8 January 2019 |
| Physical cores | 16 | 6 |
| Threads | 16 | 6 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 115 Watt | 65 Watt |
Ultra 7 255H has a 204.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, and 166.7% more physical cores and 166.7% more threads.
i5-9400F, on the other hand, has 76.9% lower power consumption.
The Core Ultra 7 255H is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i5-9400F in performance tests.
Be aware that Core Ultra 7 255H is a notebook processor while Core i5-9400F is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core Ultra 7 255H and Core i5-9400F, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
