Intel Core 5 220H vs Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus Comparison
Intel Core 5 220H
Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus
PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS
Analysis: Intel Core 5 220H vs Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus
Head-to-Head Benchmarks
The recorded data shows a comprehensive victory for the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus across all 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons. The Intel Core 5 220H does not register a single win in any test. The margins are substantial and consistent, ranging from a 27.5% deficit in single-threaded PassMark tests to a massive 73.8% gap in Cinebench R23 multi-core.
Starting with the Cinebench suite, the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus delivers 4305 points in Cinebench R15 multi-core against 1835 for the Core 5 220H, a 57.4% advantage. In single-core R15, the desktop part scores 607 versus 262, a 56.8% lead. The R20 results follow the same pattern: 17941 versus 7812 in multi-core (56.5% ahead) and 2532 versus 1102 in single-core (56.5% ahead). The largest multi-core margin appears in Cinebench R23, where the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus scores 42718 compared to 11198 for the Core 5 220H, a 73.8% difference. The single-core R23 result shows a 69.3% gap, with 6030 against 1853.
PassMark tests reinforce this dominance. The data compression test shows 553155 for the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus versus 247921 for the Core 5 220H, a 55.2% delta. Data encryption favors the desktop chip at 41292 against 15216, a 63.2% margin. Extended instructions score 42880 versus 14642, a 65.9% gap. The prime number test reveals the widest relative difference: 452 versus 82, an 81.9% deficit for the mobile part. Floating point math shows 159824 against 51671, a 67.7% lead. Integer math is the closest PassMark test, with 123030 versus 73555, a 40.2% gap. The multithread score stands at 50146 versus 21884, a 56.4% margin. Physics tests show 3183 against 1478, a 53.6% lead. Random string sorting records 67209 versus 28438, a 57.7% gap. The single-thread PassMark score of 4698 versus 3405 represents the smallest relative advantage at 27.5%, which appears twice in the data due to duplicate test naming.
The average benchmark score reinforces the split. The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus holds an average of 66159 across tests, while the Core 5 220H averages 28574. This places the desktop processor at the 93rd percentile among all CPUs in the database, whereas the mobile chip sits at the 80th percentile.
The Verdict
The data indicates a clear performance hierarchy. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus outperforms the Intel Core 5 220H in every recorded workload category. The closest margin is 27.5% in single-threaded PassMark tests, while the largest margin reaches 73.8% in Cinebench R23 multi-core. No benchmark in the database shows the Core 5 220H ahead.
For users prioritizing multi-threaded workloads, the choice is unambiguous. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 42718 for the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus represents a 73.8% improvement over the Core 5 220H. The PassMark multithread score of 50146 versus 21884 confirms this pattern. Data compression, encryption, extended instructions, and physics all show the desktop part leading by margins between 53.6% and 65.9%.
For single-threaded performance, the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus still leads, but the margin narrows. The PassMark single-thread score shows a 27.5% advantage, while Cinebench R23 single-core shows a 69.3% gap. The larger Cinebench margins suggest that the architectural differences affect both single-core and multi-core performance substantially.
The nearest rival data provides context. The Core 5 220H sits near the AMD EPYC 7203P (0% delta), the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850HS (0.1% ahead), the Intel Xeon E-2436 (0.2% ahead), and the Intel Core i5-12600 (0.3% behind). The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus sits near the Intel Core 9 273PQE (0.1% ahead), the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D (0.4% ahead), the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus (1% behind), and the AMD EPYC 4465P (1.1% behind). These clusters indicate that each processor performs at the expected level for its class, with the desktop part occupying a much higher tier.
Architecture Differences
The two processors come from different architectural lineages. The Core 5 220H uses Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-H codename, part of the Core 5 series from the Raptor Lake Refresh generation. The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2, using the Arrow Lake Refresh codename from the Ultra 5 (Arrow Lake) generation.
The process nodes differ significantly. The Core 5 220H is fabricated on Intel's 10 nm process, while the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus uses a 3 nm process from TSMC. The foundry also differs: Intel produces the mobile chip, while TSMC manufactures the desktop chip. The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus contains 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die, figures not recorded for the Core 5 220H.
Core and thread counts diverge. The Core 5 220H offers 12 cores and 16 threads, while the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus provides 18 cores and 18 threads. The desktop part has six additional cores but two fewer threads, indicating no hyper-threading on the Arrow Lake design. The Core 5 220H runs at a 2.70 GHz base clock with a 4.90 GHz boost clock. The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus operates at 4.20 GHz base and 5.30 GHz boost, representing higher clocks across the range.
Cache hierarchies differ substantially. The Core 5 220H has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has 192 KB L1 per core, 3 MB L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3 cache. Every level favors the desktop part.
The Core 5 220H supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, with no recorded bandwidth figure. The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus supports only DDR5 in dual-channel mode, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. ECC memory support also differs: the Core 5 220H does not support ECC, while the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus does.
PCIe capabilities differ. The Core 5 220H provides PCIe Gen 5 with 8 CPU lanes. The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus offers PCIe Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes. The mobile chip includes integrated Iris Xe Graphics 80EU, while the desktop part has no integrated graphics, listed as N/A.
The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has an unlocked multiplier, while the Core 5 220H does not. Socket types differ: the mobile chip uses Intel BGA 1744, and the desktop chip uses Intel Socket 1851. The TDP values show 45 watts for the Core 5 220H and 125 watts for the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus.
Market segments differ as expected. The Core 5 220H is a mobile processor, and the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus is a desktop processor. Release dates show the Core 5 220H launching on 2024-12-17 and the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus on 2026-03-10. The launch MSRP for the Core 5 220H is $342, and the launch MSRP for the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus is $184.
FAQ
Q: Which processor has more cores?
A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has 18 cores, while the Intel Core 5 220H has 12 cores. The thread counts are 18 and 16, respectively.
Q: What is the largest benchmark margin between the two?
A: The largest margin appears in the PassMark find prime numbers test, where the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus scores 452 against 82 for the Core 5 220H, a 81.9% difference. The Cinebench R23 multi-core test shows a 73.8% gap.
Q: Do both processors support the same memory types?
A: No. The Core 5 220H supports DDR4 and DDR5, while the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus supports only DDR5. Both use dual-channel memory buses, but the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus records a memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s, while no bandwidth figure is recorded for the Core 5 220H.
Q: Does the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus have integrated graphics?
A: No, the integrated graphics field for the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus is listed as N/A. The Core 5 220H includes Iris Xe Graphics 80EU.
Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?
A: The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus boosts to 5.30 GHz, while the Core 5 220H boosts to 4.90 GHz. The base clocks are 4.20 GHz and 2.70 GHz, respectively.
Q: Are both processors currently in production?
A: Yes, both the Core 5 220H and the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus have an active production status in the database.
Where Each One Wins
The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus wins every recorded benchmark, so the use-case split follows directly from the magnitude of those wins. Multi-threaded rendering workloads benefit most from the desktop chip. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 42718 versus 11198 represents a 73.8% advantage, the largest among Cinebench tests. The R15 and R20 multi-core tests show 57.4% and 56.5% leads, respectively.
Data-heavy tasks also favor the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus. The data compression score of 553155 against 247921 shows a 55.2% lead. Data encryption shows a 63.2% margin, with 41292 versus 15216. Extended instructions score 42880 versus 14642, a 65.9% gap. The prime number finding test shows an 81.9% advantage, the largest in the entire dataset.
Floating point and integer math both favor the desktop part, but the margins differ. Floating point math shows a 67.7% lead (159824 versus 51671), while integer math shows a narrower 40.2% gap (123030 versus 73555). This suggests the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus handles floating point workloads with a larger relative advantage than integer workloads.
The physics test shows a 53.6% lead for the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus, with 3183 against 1478. Random string sorting shows a 57.7% gap, with 67209 versus 28438. The multithread score of 50146 versus 21884 represents a 56.4% lead.
The smallest advantage appears in single-threaded PassMark tests, where the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus scores 4698 against 3405, a 27.5% margin. Even in this closest category, the desktop chip maintains a clear lead. Cinebench single-core tests show larger margins, with 56.8% in R15, 56.5% in R20, and 69.3% in R23, all favoring the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus.
For the Core 5 220H, no benchmark category shows a win. The mobile processor does offer integrated graphics, which the desktop chip lacks, making it the only option of the two for systems requiring an iGPU without a separate graphics card. The mobile chip also supports DDR4 memory, which may matter for systems with existing DDR4 modules, though the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus records a higher memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s.
The Core 5 220H operates at a 45 watt TDP, which is substantially lower than the 125 watt TDP of the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus, making it suitable for thermally constrained mobile platforms. The desktop chip requires an external GPU due to the absence of integrated graphics, but it delivers superior performance in every recorded workload.
Specification Differences
The two processors differ across nearly every recorded specification. Core count: 12 for the Core 5 220H versus 18 for the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus. Thread count: 16 versus 18. Base clock: 2.70 GHz versus 4.20 GHz. Boost clock: 4.90 GHz versus 5.30 GHz. TDP: 45 watts versus 125 watts.
Socket types differ: Intel BGA 1744 for the mobile chip, Intel Socket 1851 for the desktop chip. Process nodes differ: 10 nm for the Core 5 220H, 3 nm for the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus. Foundries differ: Intel versus TSMC. The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus records 17,800 million transistors and a 243 mm² die size, while no such figures are recorded for the Core 5 220H.
Cache specifications differ at every level. L1 cache: 80 KB per core versus 192 KB per core. L2 cache: 2 MB per core versus 3 MB per core. L3 cache: 18 MB shared versus 30 MB shared.
Memory support differs: DDR4 and DDR5 for the Core 5 220H, DDR5 only for the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus. Memory bandwidth is recorded at 115.2 GB/s for the desktop chip, with no figure for the mobile chip. ECC support is absent on the Core 5 220H and present on the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus.
PCIe configurations differ: Gen 5 with 8 CPU lanes for the mobile chip, Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes for the desktop chip. Integrated graphics: Iris Xe Graphics 80EU on the Core 5 220H, N/A on the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus.
Market segments differ: mobile versus desktop. Release dates differ: 2024-12-17 for the Core 5 220H, 2026-03-10 for the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus. Launch MSRP: $342 for the Core 5 220H, $184 for the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus. Multiplier unlock status: locked on the mobile chip, unlocked on the desktop chip. Part numbers also differ: SRQ6SQ5MM for the Core 5 220H, SA4V3 for the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus.