Intel Core 5 220H vs Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus records an average benchmark score of 93785, placing it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs. The Intel Core 5 220H averages 28574, which sits in the 80th percentile.

Q: How do the two CPUs compare in multi-core rendering?

A: The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus dominates multi-core rendering. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 44253 versus 11198 for the Core 5 220H, a 74.7% advantage. The Cinebench R20 multi-core test shows a similar gap: 24461 versus 7812, a 68.1% difference.

Q: Which CPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus boosts to 5.50 GHz, while the Core 5 220H reaches 4.90 GHz. The Ultra 7 also has a higher base clock at 3.70 GHz compared to 2.70 GHz.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has 24 cores and 24 threads. The Core 5 220H has 12 cores and 16 threads. The Ultra 7 does not use Hyper-Threading, while the Core 5 does.

Q: Which processor has more PCIe lanes?

A: The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus provides 20 Gen 5 lanes (CPU only), while the Core 5 220H provides 8 Gen 5 lanes (CPU only). This gives the Ultra 7 significantly more expansion bandwidth.

Q: Do these processors use the same socket?

A: No. The Core 5 220H uses Intel BGA 1744, a mobile socket. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus uses Intel Socket 1851, a desktop socket.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core 5 220H and Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus represent fundamentally different design generations. The Core 5 220H is built on Raptor Lake architecture (Raptor Lake-H codename) and belongs to the Core 5 (Raptor Lake Refresh) generation. It is manufactured on Intel's 10 nm process at Intel's own foundry. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus uses Arrow Lake Refresh architecture (Arrow Lake codename), part of the Core Ultra Series 2 generation. It is built on a 3 nm process at TSMC, which accounts for its substantially smaller physical footprint: 243 mm² die size with 17,800 million transistors.

The core configurations differ markedly. The Core 5 220H has 12 cores and 16 threads, indicating a hybrid layout with performance and efficiency cores where some cores support simultaneous multi-threading. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has 24 cores and 24 threads, meaning all cores are physical with no multi-threading. This is a deliberate design choice in the Arrow Lake architecture, favoring raw core count over thread duplication.

Cache hierarchies also diverge. The Core 5 220H has 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3. The Ultra 7 doubles the L3 pool and offers larger per-core caches across all levels.

Memory support differs as well. The Core 5 220H supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus supports only DDR5, also dual-channel, but with a rated memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. The Ultra 7 additionally supports ECC memory, while the Core 5 does not.

The integrated graphics solutions differ. The Core 5 220H uses Iris Xe Graphics with 80 execution units. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units. The Ultra 7 has fewer EUs but a newer graphics architecture.

Socket and market positioning separate these parts entirely. The Core 5 220H is a mobile processor on BGA 1744, part of Intel's laptop lineup. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is a desktop processor on Socket 1851. The Core 5 220H has a TDP of 45 W, while the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has a TDP of 125 W. The Ultra 7 also has an unlocked multiplier, enabling overclocking, whereas the Core 5 220H is locked.

Release timing also differs. The Core 5 220H was released on 2024-12-17. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus was released on 2026-03-10.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a complete sweep for the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus across all 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons. The Core 5 220H does not win a single test. The magnitude of the Ultra 7's advantage varies by workload, from a modest 24% in single-core rendering to a crushing 86.7% in prime number finding.

In Cinebench multi-core tests, the Ultra 7 shows overwhelming strength. The R15 multi-core result is 6656 versus 1835, a 72.4% lead. The R20 multi-core result is 24461 versus 7812, a 68.1% lead. The R23 multi-core result is 44253 versus 11198, a 74.7% lead. These figures indicate that the Ultra 7's 24 physical cores provide massive scaling advantage over the Core 5's 12-core, 16-thread configuration.

Single-core performance also favors the Ultra 7, though by a narrower margin. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the Ultra 7 scores 354 against 262, a 26% difference. In R20 single-core, it scores 3453 against 1102, a 68.1% difference. In R23 single-core, it scores 2439 against 1853, a 24% difference. The R20 single-core gap is unusually large relative to the other single-core tests, suggesting different workload sensitivities within the Cinebench suite.

PassMark tests reveal where each processor excels. The largest deltas appear in specialized compute tasks. PassMark find prime numbers shows 615 for the Ultra 7 versus 82 for the Core 5, an 86.7% advantage. This test is highly sensitive to integer throughput and cache efficiency, both areas where the Ultra 7's architecture excels. PassMark extended instructions shows 63506 versus 14642, a 76.9% gap. PassMark floating point math shows 229491 versus 51671, a 77.5% gap.

Data-oriented workloads also show large differences. PassMark data compression scores 804322 for the Ultra 7 versus 247921 for the Core 5, a 69.2% lead. PassMark data encryption scores 59097 versus 15216, a 74.3% lead. PassMark random string sorting scores 96945 versus 28438, a 70.7% lead.

The smallest gaps appear in integer math and single-thread tests. PassMark integer math shows 175986 versus 73555, a 58.2% difference. PassMark single thread shows 5068 versus 3405, a 32.8% difference. PassMark physics shows 4064 versus 1478, a 63.6% difference. PassMark multithread shows 68574 versus 21884, a 68.1% difference.

The nearest rival data places these processors in different performance strata. The Core 5 220H's nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 7203P at 28583 average score (0% delta), the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850HS at 28549 (0.1% delta), and the Intel Xeon E-2436 at 28530 (0.2% delta). The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus's nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon 6520P at 93786 (0% delta), the AMD EPYC 4564P at 95183 (-1.5% delta), and the AMD EPYC 9175F at 95615 (-1.9% delta). The Ultra 7 competes with server-class silicon, while the Core 5 sits among mid-range mobile and workstation parts.

The Verdict

The benchmark data indicates a decisive performance hierarchy between these two processors. The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus outperforms the Intel Core 5 220H in every recorded test, with an average benchmark score of 93785 versus 28574. This places the Ultra 7 in the 96th percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 5 220H sits in the 80th percentile.

The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is engineered for high-throughput desktop workloads. Its 24 physical cores, 36 MB of L3 cache, 5.50 GHz boost clock, and 125 W TDP deliver multi-core results that range from 58.2% to 86.7% better than the Core 5 220H depending on the specific workload. Its nearest performance rivals are server processors like the Intel Xeon 6520P and AMD EPYC 4564P, which indicates it belongs in a class above mainstream desktop parts.

The Core 5 220H is a mobile processor designed for laptops. Its 12 cores, 16 threads, 45 W TDP, and 4.90 GHz boost clock produce competitive results within its power envelope. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850HS and Intel Xeon E-2436, placing it in the upper-mid range of mobile and entry workstation processors. It supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, which gives platform flexibility that the Ultra 7 lacks.

For workloads that demand maximum multi-threaded throughput, data compression, encryption, or extended instruction performance, the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is the clear choice. The data shows no scenario where the Core 5 220H closes the gap. Even in the Ultra 7's weakest relative area, single-thread performance, it still leads by 24% to 32.8% depending on the test.

The Core 5 220H remains relevant for mobile applications where the 125 W TDP of the Ultra 7 would be impractical. Its 45 W TDP and BGA 1744 socket make it suitable for thin-and-light laptops. The Ultra 7's 125 W TDP and Socket 1851 design target desktop towers with robust cooling.

The launch MSRP for the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is $299. The launch MSRP for the Core 5 220H is $342. The Ultra 7 offers superior performance at a lower launch price, though the two parts serve different physical platforms and cannot be directly swapped in a system.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the Intel Core 5 220H and the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus:

| Specification | Intel Core 5 220H | Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 12 | 24 |

| Threads | 16 | 24 |

| Base Clock | 2.70 GHz | 3.70 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.90 GHz | 5.50 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 125 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1744 | Intel Socket 1851 |

| Codename | Raptor Lake-H | Arrow Lake Refresh |

| Generation | Core 5 (Raptor Lake Refresh) | Ultra 7 (Arrow Lake) |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Die Size | Not specified | 243 mm² |

| Transistors | Not specified | 17,800 million |

| L1 Cache | 80 KB (per core) | 192 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 2 MB (per core) | 3 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 18 MB (shared) | 36 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR5 |

| Memory Bandwidth | Not specified | 115.2 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 8 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 20 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Iris Xe Graphics 80EU | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Release Date | 2024-12-17 | 2026-03-10 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | Yes |

| Launch MSRP | $342 | $299 |