Core Ultra 9 386H vs Core i9 13905H
Head-to-head specifications
| Metric | Core Ultra 9 386H | Core i9 13905H | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cinebench 2024 single-core | 125 | 119 | +5.0% |
| Cinebench 2024 multi-core | 1,240 | 1,098 | +12.9% |
| Cores | 16 (4P+12E) | 14 (6P+8E) | — |
| TDP (base W) | 15 | 35 | — |
| PassMark CPU Mark | 35,476 | 29,679 | +19.5% |
- Core Ultra 9 386H is faster than Core i9 13905H by 5.0% in single-core and faster by 12.9% in multi-core (Cinebench 2024).
- Core Ultra 9 386H draws less power (15W vs 35W base TDP).
Verdict: Core Ultra 9 386H or Core i9 13905H?
Core Ultra 9 386H advantages
- Single-core speed (+5%)
- Multi-core speed (+11%)
- Power efficiency (+57%)
Core i9 13905H advantages
- No decisive advantage on the tracked metrics.
Which should you choose?
- Choose the Core Ultra 9 386H if you mainly game or want snappy everyday responsiveness.
- Choose the Core Ultra 9 386H if you render video, compile code or run heavy multitasking.
Core Ultra 9 386H vs Core i9 13905H: which should you choose?
Core Ultra 9 386H — 16-core Intel processor (4P+12E) scoring 125 single-core and 1240 multi-core in Cinebench 2024, with a 15 W TDP.
Core i9 13905H — 14-core Intel processor (6P+8E) scoring 119 single-core and 1098 multi-core in Cinebench 2024, with a 35 W TDP.
Core Ultra 9 386H vs Core i9 13905H: Core Ultra 9 386H leads in multi-core performance. Core Ultra 9 386H is faster than Core i9 13905H by 5.0% in single-core and faster by 12.9% in multi-core (Cinebench 2024). Core Ultra 9 386H draws less power (15W vs 35W base TDP).
Gaming and single-threaded work
Games and everyday responsiveness lean on single-core speed. The Core Ultra 9 386H leads there with a single-core score of 125 versus 119, so it is the marginally better pick for high-refresh gaming — though at typical resolutions the GPU usually decides frame rates.
Content creation and multitasking
For rendering, compilation, video export and other all-core workloads, the Core Ultra 9 386H is stronger, posting 1,240 multi-core against 1,098 in Cinebench 2024. Its 16 cores (4 performance + 12 efficiency) give it real headroom for heavy parallel jobs.
Power and platform
The Core Ultra 9 386H is the more efficient chip at 15 W versus 35 W, which means less heat, quieter cooling and lower running costs under sustained load.
The verdict
Both are credible choices in the processor comparison space; the specification table above lays out every metric so you can weigh the trade-offs that matter to you. Pick the one whose strengths line up with how you will actually use it.
Frequently asked questions
Is the Core Ultra 9 386H better than the Core i9 13905H?
Core Ultra 9 386H is the clearly stronger overall choice, winning most of the dimensions that matter. Core Ultra 9 386H is faster than Core i9 13905H by 5.0% in single-core and faster by 12.9% in multi-core (Cinebench 2024).
What is the main difference between the Core Ultra 9 386H and the Core i9 13905H?
Core Ultra 9 386H is faster than Core i9 13905H by 5.0% in single-core and faster by 12.9% in multi-core (Cinebench 2024). Core Ultra 9 386H draws less power (15W vs 35W base TDP).
Which should I choose?
Choose the Core Ultra 9 386H if you mainly game or want snappy everyday responsiveness. Choose the Core Ultra 9 386H if you render video, compile code or run heavy multitasking.
Methodology
Processors are compared on Cinebench 2024 single-core and multi-core scores from published leaderboard results, alongside core configuration (performance + efficiency cores), base TDP, L3 cache, PassMark CPU Mark, 1080p gaming scores and street pricing where measured. Cinebench reflects rendering-style workloads; gaming performance depends heavily on the GPU and the specific title, so treat single-core standing as directional. Figures reflect the leaderboard snapshot on the page date.