Intel Core 5 223PQE vs Intel Core 7 150UL Comparison

Intel Core 5 223PQE and Intel Core 7 150UL are both desktop processors on the Intel Socket 1700 platform, but they target different segments of the market. The Core 5 223PQE is a Bartlett Lake part with 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Core 7 150UL is a Raptor Lake-PS part with 10 cores and 12 threads. Benchmark results for both processors are recorded in the database, with each holding a percentile ranking of 50 among all CPUs. The data shows no head-to-head benchmark entries and no wins for either item, so the analysis relies on the specification differences and architectural details available in the recorded data.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 5 223PQE wins in scenarios that demand high single-thread responsiveness and raw computational throughput per core. Its base clock of 4.00 GHz and boost clock of 5.50 GHz are substantially higher than the Core 7 150UL’s base clock of 1.70 GHz and boost clock of 5.00 GHz. This means the Core 5 223PQE delivers faster instruction execution for workloads that are not heavily parallelized, such as interactive applications, light compilation tasks, or latency-sensitive operations. The data also shows the Core 5 223PQE has a larger L3 cache of 24 MB shared, compared to 12 MB shared on the Core 7 150UL, which reduces memory access stalls and improves performance in cache-bound tasks. Its TDP of 125 W indicates the part is designed for sustained high-power operation, which aligns with desktop workloads that can use the extra thermal headroom.

The Intel Core 7 150UL wins in efficiency and multi-threaded task scheduling due to its hybrid core arrangement. With 10 cores and 12 threads, it has more physical cores than the Core 5 223PQE, but fewer threads because of its core type mix. The Core 7 150UL’s TDP of 15 W is dramatically lower, suggesting it is built for low-power or always-on systems where heat generation and energy consumption are primary constraints. The integrated Iris Xe Graphics 96EU is a more capable graphics solution than the UHD Graphics 770 on the Core 5 223PQE, so the Core 7 150UL wins in scenarios where discrete GPU acceleration is absent and the iGPU handles display output, video decode, or light 3D rendering. Its PCIe Gen 4 interface with 8 lanes is less expansive than the Core 5 223PQE’s PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes, but for typical low-power desktops, the reduced bandwidth is not a limiting factor.

The Core 5 223PQE also wins in memory bandwidth availability, with a recorded 89.6 GB/s, while the Core 7 150UL has no memory bandwidth figure in the database. This suggests the Core 5 223PQE is positioned for memory-intensive workloads such as large dataset processing or high-resolution video editing where sustained data transfer matters. The Core 7 150UL, lacking that bandwidth number, likely does not match that throughput.

The Verdict

The data indicates the Core 5 223PQE is the choice for users who prioritize clock speed, cache size, and memory bandwidth over power efficiency. Its 5.50 GHz boost clock and 24 MB L3 cache provide a clear edge in single-threaded and cache-sensitive applications. The Core 5 223PQE also supports ECC memory, which the Core 7 150UL does not, making it suitable for reliability-focused builds such as entry-level servers or workstations where data integrity is non-negotiable. Its PCIe Gen 5 support with 16 lanes enables faster connectivity for modern GPUs and NVMe storage, assuming the rest of the system supports that generation.

The Core 7 150UL is the choice for low-power, space-constrained desktop systems where the 15 W TDP and integrated Iris Xe Graphics 96EU deliver adequate performance without a discrete GPU. Its 10 cores and 12 threads give it a slight advantage in parallel workloads that can use more physical cores, even if the total thread count is lower than the Core 5 223PQE’s 16 threads. The Core 7 150UL does not support ECC memory, so it is not intended for mission-critical data environments. Its PCIe Gen 4 with 8 lanes is adequate for mainstream peripherals but not for high-bandwidth expansion. The Core 7 150UL also has a longer production history, with a release date of April 2024, while the Core 5 223PQE is a newer part with a March 2026 release date, so the older part may have more mature platform support.

Neither processor holds a benchmark advantage in the recorded data, as both have an average benchmark score of 0 and no wins. The percentile ranking of 50 for both indicates they sit at the median of all CPUs in the database, so the verdict is not about raw performance supremacy but about use-case fit.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark entries for these two processors, so direct numerical comparisons are not available. Instead, the recorded specifications provide the basis for analysis. The largest single-thread advantage belongs to the Core 5 223PQE, with a boost clock of 5.50 GHz versus 5.00 GHz on the Core 7 150UL, a difference of 0.50 GHz. In base clock, the Core 5 223PQE runs at 4.00 GHz, which is 2.30 GHz higher than the Core 7 150UL’s 1.70 GHz. This gap suggests the Core 5 223PQE will outperform in lightly threaded tasks by a significant margin, though no percentage is recorded.

For multi-threaded workloads, the Core 7 150UL has 10 cores versus 8 cores on the Core 5 223PQE, but the Core 5 223PQE has 16 threads versus 12 threads. The thread count advantage of the Core 5 223PQE likely offsets the core count disadvantage in scenarios where simultaneous multithreading is effective, but the Core 7 150UL’s higher core count may win in workloads that scale linearly with physical cores and do not benefit from extra threads. The L3 cache difference is notable: 24 MB on the Core 5 223PQE versus 12 MB on the Core 7 150UL, a 12 MB gap that can improve hit rates for repeated data access patterns.

The Core 5 223PQE’s memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s is a recorded figure, while the Core 7 150UL has no such number, implying a lower or unspecified bandwidth. The Core 5 223PQE also supports ECC memory, a feature absent on the Core 7 150UL. The PCIe interface differs, with the Core 5 223PQE using Gen 5 with 16 lanes and the Core 7 150UL using Gen 4 with 8 lanes, so the Core 5 223PQE has a theoretical doubling of bandwidth per lane and double the lane count. The integrated graphics differ as well: UHD Graphics 770 on the Core 5 223PQE versus Iris Xe Graphics 96EU on the Core 7 150UL, with the latter having more execution units and likely higher graphics throughput.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core 5 223PQE has a boost clock of 5.50 GHz, while the Intel Core 7 150UL has a boost clock of 5.00 GHz.

Q: How many cores and threads does each processor have?

A: The Core 5 223PQE has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Core 7 150UL has 10 cores and 12 threads.

Q: Does either processor support ECC memory?

A: The Core 5 223PQE supports ECC memory. The Core 7 150UL does not support ECC memory.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The Core 5 223PQE has a TDP of 125 W, and the Core 7 150UL has a TDP of 15 W.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The Core 5 223PQE has 24 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Core 7 150UL has 12 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: What are the integrated graphics options?

A: The Core 5 223PQE uses UHD Graphics 770, and the Core 7 150UL uses Iris Xe Graphics 96EU.

Q: Which processor has a higher memory bandwidth figure?

A: The Core 5 223PQE records 89.6 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The Core 7 150UL has no memory bandwidth figure in the database.

Q: What is the PCIe support for each?

A: The Core 5 223PQE supports PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The Core 7 150UL supports PCIe Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only).

Architecture Differences

The Core 5 223PQE is based on the Bartlett Lake codename, while the Core 7 150UL uses the Raptor Lake-PS codename with a Raptor Lake architecture. Both processors are manufactured on a 10 nm process node by Intel, but the underlying design differs. Bartlett Lake is a newer generation, with the Core 5 223PQE’s generation listed as “Core 5 (Bartlett Lake)” and a release date of March 2026. Raptor Lake-PS is an earlier design, with the Core 7 150UL’s generation listed as “Core 7 (Raptor Lake-PS)” and a release date of April 2024.

The L1 cache is identical at 80 KB per core for both. The L2 cache differs: the Core 5 223PQE has 2 MB per core, while the Core 7 150UL has 1.25 MB per core. This means the Core 5 223PQE has more L2 cache per core, which can reduce latency for frequently accessed data. The L3 cache is also different, as noted, with 24 MB shared on the Core 5 223PQE and 12 MB shared on the Core 7 150UL.

The Core 5 223PQE supports ECC memory, while the Core 7 150UL does not. This architectural choice indicates the Core 5 223PQE is designed for error-correcting memory environments, such as small servers or scientific computing, whereas the Core 7 150UL targets consumer or low-power applications where ECC is unnecessary. The memory bus is dual-channel for both, and both support DDR4 and DDR5 memory types.

The integrated graphics architecture differs: UHD Graphics 770 on the Core 5 223PQE versus Iris Xe Graphics 96EU on the Core 7 150UL. The Iris Xe Graphics 96EU has more execution units, suggesting a stronger iGPU for media tasks or light gaming, while the UHD Graphics 770 is a more basic solution. The Core 5 223PQE’s PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes is a newer standard than the Core 7 150UL’s PCIe Gen 4 with 8 lanes, providing higher bandwidth for expansion cards.

The TDP difference is stark: 125 W for the Core 5 223PQE and 15 W for the Core 7 150UL. This reflects divergent thermal design goals, with the Core 5 223PQE intended for high-performance desktops with active cooling, and the Core 7 150UL for fanless or low-noise systems. The Core 5 223PQE has a part number of SA4QC, while the Core 7 150UL has an unknown part number.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specification fields. The core count is 8 for the Core 5 223PQE and 10 for the Core 7 150UL. The thread count is 16 for the Core 5 223PQE and 12 for the Core 7 150UL. The base clock is 4.00 GHz for the Core 5 223PQE and 1.70 GHz for the Core 7 150UL. The boost clock is 5.50 GHz for the Core 5 223PQE and 5.00 GHz for the Core 7 150UL. The TDP is 125 W for the Core 5 223PQE and 15 W for the Core 7 150UL.

The L2 cache size per core is 2 MB for the Core 5 223PQE and 1.25 MB for the Core 7 150UL. The L3 cache is 24 MB shared for the Core 5 223PQE and 12 MB shared for the Core 7 150UL. The memory bandwidth is 89.6 GB/s for the Core 5 223PQE and not specified for the Core 7 150UL. ECC memory support is true for the Core 5 223PQE and false for the Core 7 150UL. The PCIe interface is Gen 5 with 16 lanes for the Core 5 223PQE and Gen 4 with 8 lanes for the Core 7 150UL.

The integrated graphics are UHD Graphics 770 on the Core 5 223PQE and Iris Xe Graphics 96EU on the Core 7 150UL. The codename is Bartlett Lake for the Core 5 223PQE and Raptor Lake-PS for the Core 7 150UL. The generation is “Core 5 (Bartlett Lake)” for the former and “Core 7 (Raptor Lake-PS)” for the latter. The release date is March 2026 for the Core 5 223PQE and April 2024 for the Core 7 150UL. The launch MSRP for the Core 5 223PQE is $319, while the Core 7 150UL has no recorded launch MSRP. Both are active production parts and have a multiplier that is not unlocked. The market segment for both is desktop, and both use Intel Socket 1700. The process node is 10 nm for both, and the foundry is Intel for both. The L1 cache is 80 KB per core for both, and the memory bus is dual-channel for both. Memory support is DDR4 and DDR5 for both.