Intel Core Ultra 9 185H vs Apple M4 (10-Core)

We compared two laptop CPUs: the 2.3 GHz Intel Core Ultra 9 185H with 16-cores against the 4.46 GHz Apple M4 (10-Core) with 10-cores. On this page, you'll find out which processor has better performance in benchmarks, games and other useful information.

Review

General overview and comparison of the processors
Single-Core Performance
Performance in single-threaded apps and benchmarks
Multi-Core Performance
Measure performance when all cores are involved
Power Efficiency
The efficiency score of power consumption
Integrated Graphics
iGPU capabilities for gaming and 3D-intensive tasks
DeviceFacts Final Score
Choose your main usage scenario to recalculate the Final Score and see which CPU suits your needs.
πŸ”Œ Usage Scenario:

Key Differences

What are the key differences between (10-Core) and 185H
Advantages of Intel Core Ultra 9 185H
  • Supports up to 96 GB LPDDR5-7467 RAM
  • Has 6 more physical cores
  • More powerful Arc Graphics (8-Cores) integrated graphics: 4.8 vs 3.8 TFLOPS
  • More than 10Β° C higher critical temperature
Advantages of Apple M4 (10-Core)
  • More modern manufacturing process – 3 versus 7 nanometers
  • 54% faster in a single-core Geekbench v6 test - 3777 vs 2446 points
  • Newer - released 5 months later

Test in Benchmarks

Comparing the performance of CPUs across various tasks

Cinebench

Reputable cross-platform benchmark for high-performance processors
Cinebench 2024 (Single)
Cinebench 2024 (Multi)
Cinebench 2026 (Multi) - 3211
Cinebench Scores (156th and 158th place)

GeekBench v6

The new version of this benchmark emulates common operations often used in real-world apps
Geekbench 6 (Single-Core)
Geekbench 6 (Multi-Core)
File compression 1270 MB/sec 1500 MB/sec
Clang compilation 102.8 Klines/sec 120.2 Klines/sec
HTML 5 Browser 342.7 pages/sec 329.3 pages/sec
PDF Renderer 389.7 Mpixels/sec 362.1 Mpixels/sec
Text processing 245.1 pages/sec 352.1 pages/sec
Background blur 45.2 images/sec 69.8 images/sec
Photo processing 131.5 images/sec 114.4 images/sec
Ray tracing 23.3 Mpixels/sec 18.1 Mpixels/sec
Sources: GeekBench [1], [2] – 492 samples

PassMark

Synthetic test that focuses on raw computational performance for low-level functions
Passmark CPU (Single-Core)
Passmark CPU (Multi-Core)
28998
23603
Integer math 97.4 GOps/sec 54.2 GOps/sec
Floating point math 72.2 GOps/sec 49.6 GOps/sec
Find prime numbers 123M Primes/sec 263M Primes/sec
Random string sorting 39M Strings/sec 34.3M Strings/sec
Data encryption 19.5 GBytes/sec 15.1 GBytes/sec
Data compression 334.6 MBytes/sec 280.5 MBytes/sec
Physics 1940 Frames/sec 2527 Frames/sec
Extended instructions 19.9B Matrices/sec 13.6B Matrices/sec
Sources: PassMark [3], [4] – 4148 & 2752 samples

Blender

3D rendering test that measures CPU performance in 3D modeling tasks (uses all cores)
Blender CPU
229.85

Performance Per Watt

Shows the score you get per each watt of PL1 TDP
Cinebench 2024 / Watt 15.2 PPW 40.9 PPW
Geekbench 6 Multi / Watt 209.4 PPW 617.4 PPW
Passmark CPU Mark / Watt 446.1 PPW 983.5 PPW
Blender / Watt 3.08 PPW 9.58 PPW
These are rough calculations, as most CPUs surpass PL1 TDP wattage even in multicore workloads.

Recent User Tests

The latest benchmark tests that have been submitted by users
Intel Core Ultra 9 185H
DateBenchmarkResult
πŸ“˜ 2025-12-28 (Nicholas)Cinebench 202492 / 795
πŸ“˜ 2024-12-29 (Remembered2U)Cinebench 2024107 / 987
πŸ“˜ 2024-11-03 (Anish)Cinebench 2024103 / 886
πŸ“˜ 2024-10-01 (Guest #3)Cinebench 2024108 / 1088
Apple M4 (10-Core)
DateBenchmarkResult
πŸ“˜ 2026-06-13 (doannguuyenmfs)Geekbench 6 CPU3703 / 15450
πŸ“˜ 2026-04-18 (Avacada)Geekbench 6 CPU3906 / 15577
πŸ“˜ 2026-03-05 (Dovlet)Geekbench 6 CPU3916 / 15202
πŸ“˜ 2025-12-31 (gmamorim)Geekbench 6 CPU3730 / 15258
πŸ“˜ 2025-12-28 (LC)Cinebench 2024174 / 993

Specifications

Full technical specification of Intel Core Ultra 9 185H and Apple M4 (10-Core)

General

Vendor Intel Apple
Released December 14, 2023 May 7, 2024
Type Laptop Laptop
Instruction Set x86-64 ARMv9
Codename Meteor Lake Apple M4
Model number 185H APL1206
Integrated GPU Arc Graphics (8-Cores) Apple M4 GPU (10-core)
Rival Equivalent - AMD Ryzen 9 8945HS - Qualcomm Snapdragon X Elite (X1E-84-100)
Successor - Intel Core Ultra 9 288V - Apple M5 (10-Core)
Intel CPU rating (#83rd place)

CPU

Performance Cores
P-Cores 6 4
P-Threads 12 4
Base Frequency (P) 2.3 GHz 4.46 GHz
Turbo Boost Frequency (P) 5.1 GHz -
Efficient Cores
E-Cores 10 6
E-Threads 10 6
Base Frequency (E) 1.8 GHz 2.89 GHz
Turbo Boost Frequency (E) 3.8 GHz -
Total
Total Cores 16 10
Total Threads 22 10
Bus Frequency 100 MHz 100 MHz
Multiplier 23x 44x
L1 Cache 112K (per core) 192K (per core)
L2 Cache 2MB (per core) 16MB (shared)
L3 Cache 24MB (shared) -
Unlocked Multiplier No No

Package

Transistors - 28 billions
Fabrication Process 7 nm 3 nm
TDP (PL1) 35-65 W (configurable) 24 W
Max. Boost TDP (PL2) 115 W -
Socket FCBGA-2049 Apple M-Socket
Peak Temperature 110Β°C 100Β°C
Die Size - 169.4 mmΒ²
Laptop processors ranking (103rd and 28th place)

iGPU

Integrated Graphics Arc Graphics (8-Cores) Apple M4 GPU (10-core)
GPU Base Clock 300 MHz 500 MHz
GPU Boost Clock 2350 MHz 1470 MHz
Shading Units 1024 1280
TMUs 64 80
ROPs 32 40
Execution Units 128 160
TGP 28 W 18 W
iGPU FLOPS
4.8 TFLOPS
3.8 TFLOPS

Memory Support

Memory Types - LPDDR5-7467
- LPDDR5x-7467
- DDR5-5600
- LPDDR5X-7500
Max. Memory Size 96 GB 32 GB
Memory Channels 2 8
Max. Memory Bandwidth - 120 GB/s
ECC Support No No

Misc

Official Site Intel Core Ultra 9 185H official page -
PCI Express Version 5.0 -
PCI Express Lanes 28 -
Further details
Notes on M4 (10-Core):
    - SoC is designed using ARMv9.4-A architecture.

Cast your vote

Choose between two processors
130 (41.5%)
183 (58.5%)
Total votes: 313

Comments

So which CPU will you choose: Apple M4 (10-Core) or Intel Core Ultra 9 185H?
🌐 Register your profile and become part of DeviceFacts community!
Avatar
Nerd December 7, 2024 at 04:10 AM
I don't know many think Apple is best in this case the M4 is great NGL, but you have to consider the architecture Intel is on x86, which is in general way better in heavy lifting than saving up more power due to reduced instruction set on ARM (M4), and yes single core performance is no joke the RISC gets the job done, but for higher computation needs like running a Game Engine, pulling all cores for CPU renders, Code compile in multiple Threads, and not to mention other resource hungry apps like Adobe CC are very much benefited with CISC aka Complex Instruction Set which is x86 based. Keep in mind the RISC needs way optimization and will still fall behind the CISC in terms of Raw computation.
+20 Reply
Avatar
Meh June 4, 2024 at 10:09 AM
Man, the M4 chip is extremely efficient whilst providing a good performance. On the other hand, Intel relies too much in increasing power usage to deliver mediocre performance.
+32 Reply
Avatar
Intel October 30, 2024 at 06:40 PM
What a mediocre thought off course anybody in a sane judge would even think on double the wattage tp increase 5% performance at 35w has a negilible performance comapre to their peak power and with being said it compare in effiency with arm giving a whole day life battery
+19 Reply