Intel Core 5 130UL vs Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus Comparison

The Intel Core 5 130UL and the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus occupy different tiers of the desktop processor market. The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus is a high-end part with an average benchmark score of 66,159, placing it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs in the database. The Core 5 130UL, by contrast, sits in the 50th percentile with an average benchmark score of zero, indicating that no benchmark results are recorded for it in the database. This absence of data for the Core 5 130UL is central to any comparison: the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has a full set of 17 recorded benchmark scores, while the Core 5 130UL has none. Consequently, all quantitative performance analysis in this document is based on the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus and its nearest rivals.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark entries for these two processors. The Core 5 130UL has no recorded benchmark scores at all, so direct numerical comparisons are impossible. What the data does show is the performance profile of the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus across multiple workloads, which can be evaluated against its nearest rivals in the database.

The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus delivers strong multi-core results. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 42,718 points. This is a high figure, consistent with an 18-core, 18-thread processor. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, it scores 17,941, and in Cinebench R15 multi-core, it scores 4,305. These scores rank it above the vast majority of CPUs in the database, as reflected in its 93rd percentile standing.

Single-core performance is also competitive. The Cinebench R23 single-core score is 6,030, the Cinebench R20 single-core score is 2,532, and the Cinebench R15 single-core score is 607. In PassMark tests, the single-thread score is 4,698. These numbers indicate a processor with high clock speeds, which is supported by its 5.30 GHz boost clock.

The nearest rivals in the database provide context. The Intel Core 9 273PQE has an average score of 66,099, which is 0.1% lower than the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus. The AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D scores 65,914, 0.4% lower. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus scores 66,855, which is 1% higher, and the AMD EPYC 4465P scores 66,925, 1.1% higher. The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus is therefore essentially tied with the Core 9 273PQE and the Ryzen 9 7950X3D, while trailing the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus and the EPYC 4465P by narrow margins.

PassMark tests reveal specific strengths. The data compression score is 553,155, which is an extremely high result. Data encryption scores 41,292, extended instructions score 42,880, and find prime numbers scores 452. Floating point math scores 159,824, integer math scores 123,030, and multithread scores 50,146. Physics scores 3,183, and random string sorting scores 67,209. These results show a processor that is particularly effective in compression and floating point workloads, with the data compression score being the standout figure among the PassMark tests.

Because the Core 5 130UL has no scores, the head-to-head section cannot identify wins for either processor. The data only supports an analysis of the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus in isolation. The Core 5 130UL remains a processor with unknown measured performance, defined only by its specifications.

FAQ

Q: Does the Intel Core 5 130UL have any recorded benchmark scores in the database?

A: No. The Core 5 130UL has an empty benchmarks array and an average benchmark score of zero. The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus, by contrast, has 17 recorded benchmark scores and an average benchmark score of 66,159.

Q: How does the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus compare to its nearest rival, the Intel Core 9 273PQE?

A: The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has an average score of 66,159, while the Core 9 273PQE has an average score of 66,099. The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus is 0.1% higher.

Q: What is the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus single-core performance in Cinebench R23?

A: The Cinebench R23 single-core score is 6,030. The Cinebench R20 single-core score is 2,532, and the Cinebench R15 single-core score is 607.

Q: Which rival is the closest competitor to the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus in the database?

A: The Intel Core 9 273PQE is the closest, with a score 0.1% lower. The AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D is 0.4% lower, the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is 1% higher, and the AMD EPYC 4465P is 1.1% higher.

Q: Does the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus support ECC memory?

A: Yes. The ECC memory field is true for the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus. The Core 5 130UL does not support ECC memory.

Q: What is the production status of both processors?

A: Both processors are listed as Active in the database. The Core 5 130UL was released on 2024-04-07, and the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus was released on 2026-03-10.

The Verdict

The data shows a clear split between these two processors. The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus is a high-performance part with a 93rd percentile ranking and an average benchmark score of 66,159. Its 18 cores, 18 threads, and 5.30 GHz boost clock place it in the upper tier of desktop CPUs. Its nearest rivals are all within 1.1% of its average score, confirming that it is a competitive high-end processor. The Core 5 130UL is a low-power part with 10 cores, 12 threads, a 1.60 GHz base clock, and a 4.70 GHz boost clock. It has no recorded benchmark scores, so the database cannot confirm its performance level.

For users who need measured multi-core performance, the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus is the only option with data. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 42,718 and PassMark multithread score of 50,146 indicate strong parallel processing capability. For applications that rely on data compression, the score of 553,155 in that PassMark test is particularly notable. The Core 5 130UL has a 15 W TDP, which suggests a focus on efficiency, but no benchmarks exist to verify its real-world speed.

The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus also offers a 5.30 GHz boost clock, 30 MB of shared L3 cache, and support for DDR5 memory with a memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. It supports ECC memory and PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes. The Core 5 130UL supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, has 12 MB of shared L3 cache, and uses PCIe Gen 4 with 8 lanes. The Core 5 130UL includes integrated graphics with Iris Xe Graphics 80EU, while the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has no integrated graphics.

The verdict from the data is straightforward: the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus is a high-end processor with verified benchmark results, while the Core 5 130UL is a lower-power processor without any recorded performance data. Any decision between them that relies on measured performance must favor the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus, because it is the only one with scores in the database.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every major specification. The Core 5 130UL has 10 cores and 12 threads. The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has 18 cores and 18 threads. The Core 5 130UL has a base clock of 1.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz. The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has a base clock of 4.20 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. The Core 5 130UL has a TDP of 15 W. The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has a TDP of 125 W.

The sockets differ. The Core 5 130UL uses Intel Socket 1700. The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus uses Intel Socket 1851. The Core 5 130UL supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory. The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus supports DDR5 only. The Core 5 130UL has a memory bus of dual-channel, and the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus also has a dual-channel memory bus, but the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has a recorded memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s, while the Core 5 130UL has no recorded memory bandwidth.

ECC memory support differs. The Core 5 130UL does not support ECC memory. The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus supports ECC memory. PCIe support differs: the Core 5 130UL uses PCIe Gen 4 with 8 lanes, while the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus uses PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes. The Core 5 130UL has integrated graphics (Iris Xe Graphics 80EU). The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has no integrated graphics. The multiplier is locked on the Core 5 130UL and unlocked on the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus.

The release dates differ. The Core 5 130UL was released on 2024-04-07. The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus was released on 2026-03-10. The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has a launch MSRP of $184. The Core 5 130UL has no recorded launch MSRP. The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has a part number of SA4V3, while the Core 5 130UL has a part number listed as unknown.

Architecture Differences

The architecture differences are substantial. The Core 5 130UL is based on Raptor Lake, with the codename Raptor Lake-PS. Its generation is listed as Core 5 (Raptor Lake-PS). It is manufactured on a 10 nm process node by Intel. The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has no architecture field listed, but its codename is Arrow Lake Refresh, and its generation is Ultra 5 (Arrow Lake). It is manufactured on a 3 nm process node by TSMC. The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has 17,800 million transistors and a die size of 243 mm². The Core 5 130UL has no recorded transistor count or die size.

Cache configurations differ significantly. The Core 5 130UL has an L1 cache of 80 KB per core, an L2 cache of 1.25 MB per core, and an L3 cache of 12 MB shared. The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has an L1 cache of 192 KB per core, an L2 cache of 3 MB per core, and an L3 cache of 30 MB shared. The larger per-core caches and the larger shared L3 cache on the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus are consistent with its higher performance tier.

The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2, while the Core 5 130UL has no series listed. The foundry differs: Intel for the Core 5 130UL, TSMC for the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus. The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus uses a 3 nm process, which is a smaller node than the 10 nm process used by the Core 5 130UL. The Core 5 130UL has no recorded memory bandwidth, while the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has a memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. The Core 5 130UL supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus supports only DDR5.

Where Each One Wins

The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus wins in every category where measured data exists. Its 18 cores and 18 threads, combined with a 5.30 GHz boost clock and 30 MB of shared L3 cache, produce strong multi-core scores. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 42,718 and the PassMark multithread score of 50,146 are the relevant figures for heavily threaded workloads. The data compression score of 553,155 is the highest individual PassMark result for this processor, indicating a particular strength in compression tasks. Floating point math at 159,824 and integer math at 123,030 also show strong general compute performance.

The Core 5 130UL has no benchmark scores, so it cannot claim any measured wins. Its specifications suggest a different use case: a 15 W TDP, a 1.60 GHz base clock, and integrated graphics point toward low-power or basic display tasks. It supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, which gives it flexibility in memory choice. Its PCIe Gen 4 with 8 lanes is less capable than the PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes on the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus.

The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus also wins on connectivity. PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes supports faster expansion devices. ECC memory support is present, which is absent on the Core 5 130UL. The memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s is recorded, while the Core 5 130UL has no recorded bandwidth. The unlocked multiplier on the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus allows overclocking, while the Core 5 130UL has a locked multiplier.

The Core 5 130UL has one specification advantage: integrated graphics. The Iris Xe Graphics 80EU provides a display output without a discrete graphics card. The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has no integrated graphics. The Core 5 130UL also has a much lower TDP of 15 W compared to 125 W, which suggests lower power consumption, though no power consumption measurements are recorded in the database. The Core 5 130UL supports DDR4 memory, which may be useful in systems with existing DDR4 modules, while the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus is limited to DDR5.

In summary, the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus is the clear winner in all measured performance categories, with verified scores across Cinebench and PassMark tests. The Core 5 130UL has no measured performance data and can only be assessed through its specifications. For workloads that require multi-core throughput, single-core speed, or high memory bandwidth, the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus is the processor with data to support it. For low-power systems that need integrated graphics and DDR4 compatibility, the Core 5 130UL has specification-level advantages, but no benchmarks confirm its actual performance.