Intel Core 5 223PQE vs Intel Core Ultra 7 255H Comparison

Intel Core 5 223PQE is a desktop processor with 8 cores, 16 threads, and a 125 W TDP, built on Intel's 10 nm process. Intel Core Ultra 7 255H is a mobile processor with 16 cores, 16 threads, and a 28 W TDP, built on TSMC's 3 nm process. The database contains no benchmark scores for the Core 5 223PQE, so its recorded percentile is 50, while the Ultra 7 255H holds a percentile of 83 and an average benchmark score of 33537. The Core 5 223PQE has no recorded rivals, whereas the Ultra 7 255H sits within 0.5% of several AMD and Intel mobile parts.

The Verdict

The recorded data positions the Intel Core Ultra 7 255H as the only processor in this comparison with measurable performance. Its average benchmark score of 33537 places it in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs, a clear indication of strong multi-threaded capability. The Intel Core 5 223PQE has zero recorded benchmark scores and an average score of 0, placing it at the 50th percentile by default. For any workload that relies on measured compute throughput, the Ultra 7 255H is the only option with supporting data.

The Ultra 7 255H uses 16 cores with 16 threads, a configuration that favors parallel tasks. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 5 240 with an average score of 33542 (a 0% difference), the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS at 33667 (-0.4%), the AMD Ryzen 5 7645HX at 33668 (-0.4%), and the Intel Core i5-12600HX at 33375 (+0.5%). These deltas show the Ultra 7 255H delivers performance essentially on par with those mobile processors, with no more than a half-percent swing in either direction.

The Core 5 223PQE offers no benchmark data, so any claim about its performance would be unsupported. The data shows the Ultra 7 255H is the practical choice for users who need verified results, while the Core 5 223PQE remains a desktop part without recorded measurements in this database.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different manufacturing nodes. The Core 5 223PQE uses Intel's 10 nm process and is fabricated by Intel. The Ultra 7 255H uses TSMC's 3 nm process and is fabricated by TSMC. This node difference contributes to the Ultra 7 255H's lower thermal design power of 28 W compared to the Core 5 223PQE's 125 W.

The Core 5 223PQE belongs to the Bartlett Lake codename and the Core 5 (Bartlett Lake) generation. The Ultra 7 255H belongs to the Arrow Lake architecture, with the Arrow Lake-H codename and the Ultra 7 (Arrow Lake-H) generation. The Core 5 223PQE targets the desktop market segment with an Intel Socket 1700, while the Ultra 7 255H targets the mobile market segment with an Intel BGA 2049 socket.

Core counts differ substantially. The Core 5 223PQE has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Ultra 7 255H has 16 cores and 16 threads. The Ultra 7 255H therefore doubles the physical core count but maintains the same thread count, indicating a design without simultaneous multithreading. The Core 5 223PQE achieves 16 threads from 8 cores, implying hyper-threading.

Cache hierarchies differ as well. The Core 5 223PQE has 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. The Ultra 7 255H has 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. The Ultra 7 255H provides more L1 and L2 per core, while total L3 remains identical at 24 MB.

Memory support diverges. The Core 5 223PQE supports DDR4 and DDR5, while the Ultra 7 255H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Both use dual-channel memory buses. The Core 5 223PQE has a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, while the Ultra 7 255H reaches 102.4 GB/s, a 14.3% advantage for the mobile part. Both processors support ECC memory.

PCIe connectivity differs in lane count. The Core 5 223PQE provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Ultra 7 255H provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics also differ: the Core 5 223PQE uses UHD Graphics 770, while the Ultra 7 255H uses Arc Graphics 140T.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database lists no head-to-head benchmark entries for these two processors, and the Core 5 223PQE has no individual benchmark records. The Ultra 7 255H has nineteen recorded scores across Cinebench, Geekbench, and Passmark tests.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Ultra 7 255H scores 1515, and in single-core it scores 251. Cinebench R20 multi-core reaches 6381, with a single-core score of 900. Cinebench R23 multi-core comes in at 9240, and single-core at 1843. These results show a balanced scaling from R15 through R23, with the multi-core scores increasing consistently as the workload complexity grows.

Geekbench results for the Ultra 7 255H show a multi-core score of 14024 and a single-core score of 2335. The multi-core figure is roughly six times the single-core figure, consistent with the 16-core, 16-thread design.

Passmark tests for the Ultra 7 255H cover a range of specialized workloads. Data compression scores 298850, data encryption scores 23395, and extended instructions scores 23755. Floating point math scores 98796, integer math scores 77975, and find prime numbers scores 303. Random string sorting scores 36058. The multithread score is 30703, physics scores 2254, and single-thread scores 4317 (listed twice in the database as passmark_single_thread and passmark_singlethread).

Because the Core 5 223PQE has no recorded scores, no direct comparison can be made. The data shows the Ultra 7 255H's performance profile in isolation, and it demonstrates strong multi-threaded throughput relative to its mobile rivals. The nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 5 240, matches the Ultra 7 255H with a 0% delta, while the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS and AMD Ryzen 5 7645HX both lead by 0.4%, and the Intel Core i5-12600HX trails by 0.5%.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 5 223PQE | Intel Core Ultra 7 255H |

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

| Cores | 8 | 16 |

| Threads | 16 | 16 |

| Base clock | 4.00 GHz | 2.00 GHz |

| Boost clock | 5.50 GHz | 5.10 GHz |

| TDP | 125 W | 28 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel BGA 2049 |

| Codename | Bartlett Lake | Arrow Lake-H |

| Process node | 10 nm (Intel) | 3 nm (TSMC) |

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

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

| L3 cache | 24 MB (shared) | 24 MB (shared) |

| Memory support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR5, LPDDR5X |

| Memory bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | 102.4 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 lanes | Gen 5, 20 lanes |

| Integrated graphics | UHD Graphics 770 | Arc Graphics 140T |

| Market segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Release date | 2026-03-08 | 2025-01-12 |

| Launch MSRP | $319 | null |

The Core 5 223PQE has a base clock of 4.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz, both higher than the Ultra 7 255H's 2.00 GHz base and 5.10 GHz boost. The higher clocks on the desktop part are offset by its lower core count and higher TDP. The Ultra 7 255H compensates with more cores, a smaller process node, and higher memory bandwidth.

Both processors are locked (multiplier unlocked: false). The Core 5 223PQE has a part number of SA4QC, while the Ultra 7 255H has a part number of SRQAN. Both are listed as active in production.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 255H has 16 cores, while the Intel Core 5 223PQE has 8 cores. Both have 16 threads.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference?

A: The Ultra 7 255H has an average benchmark score of 33537, placing it in the 83rd percentile. The Core 5 223PQE has an average benchmark score of 0 and a 50th percentile, with no recorded benchmark entries.

Q: How does the Ultra 7 255H compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 240 scores 33542 (0% delta), the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS scores 33667 (-0.4%), the AMD Ryzen 5 7645HX scores 33668 (-0.4%), and the Intel Core i5-12600HX scores 33375 (+0.5%). The Ultra 7 255H is effectively on par with all four.

Q: Which processor supports more memory types?

A: The Core 5 223PQE supports DDR4 and DDR5, while the Ultra 7 255H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. The Ultra 7 255H has higher memory bandwidth at 102.4 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s.

Q: What is the TDP difference?

A: The Core 5 223PQE has a TDP of 125 W, while the Ultra 7 255H has a TDP of 28 W. The Ultra 7 255H consumes substantially less power.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Core 5 223PQE boosts to 5.50 GHz, while the Ultra 7 255H boosts to 5.10 GHz. The Core 5 223PQE also has a higher base clock at 4.00 GHz versus 2.00 GHz.

Where Each One Wins

The Ultra 7 255H wins every category where recorded data exists. It has 16 cores versus 8, a smaller 3 nm process versus 10 nm, higher memory bandwidth at 102.4 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s, more PCIe lanes at 20 versus 16, a much lower TDP at 28 W versus 125 W, and a higher average benchmark score of 33537 versus 0. Its 83rd percentile ranking reflects a processor that performs competitively against other mobile parts in the database.

The Core 5 223PQE wins only in specifications that do not involve measured performance. It has a higher base clock of 4.00 GHz versus 2.00 GHz and a higher boost clock of 5.50 GHz versus 5.10 GHz. It supports DDR4 in addition to DDR5, which the Ultra 7 255H does not. It also has a lower launch MSRP of $319, while the Ultra 7 255H has no recorded launch MSRP. These advantages are purely architectural and do not translate into any benchmark wins in the database.

For multi-threaded workloads such as the Passmark multithread score of 30703 or Cinebench R23 multi-core at 9240, the Ultra 7 255H's 16 physical cores provide the measured throughput. For single-thread tasks, its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1843 and Geekbench single-core score of 2335 indicate capable performance, though the Core 5 223PQE's higher clocks could theoretically favor it in such tasks, but no data confirms this. The Ultra 7 255H's mobile design, with its 28 W TDP and BGA socket, suits portable systems, while the Core 5 223PQE's desktop socket and 125 W TDP suit stationary builds. The data supports the Ultra 7 255H as the processor with verified performance, while the Core 5 223PQE remains a desktop part without recorded measurements.