Intel Core 5 223PQE vs Intel Core Ultra 9 285 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 dominates the recorded benchmark data across every single test in the database. The Core 5 223PQE has no benchmark scores listed, so the comparison is entirely one-sided based on the available measurements. The Ultra 9 285 shows its strength in both single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads, with particularly large margins in multi-core rendering and compute-heavy tasks.

The Ultra 9 285 posts a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 48945, which places it in the 95th percentile of all CPUs in the database. Its single-core Cinebench R23 score of 6909 is equally strong. The chip also handles memory-intensive operations well, as shown by a Passmark data compression score of 602121 and a random string sorting score of 73651.

The Core 5 223PQE, by contrast, has no recorded benchmark results in the database. This means its performance profile cannot be quantified against the Ultra 9 285 or any other processor. The database shows its percentile rank at 50, but with an average benchmark score of zero, this reflects missing data rather than actual performance parity.

For use-case planning, the data indicates the Ultra 9 285 is suitable for workloads that demand high multi-threaded throughput, such as rendering, scientific computing, and content creation. Its Passmark integer math score of 164869 and floating point math score of 194988 confirm strong compute capability. The chip also shows solid single-thread performance through a Passmark single thread score of 4881, making it viable for lightly threaded applications as well.

The Core 5 223PQE is an active desktop processor with a launch date in March 2026, but without benchmark data, the database cannot assign it a performance position. Its specifications suggest it targets a different segment, but the absence of measurements means no direct comparison is possible.

The Verdict

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 is the clear choice for anyone prioritizing raw performance. Its 95th percentile ranking against all CPUs in the database places it among the top performers, and its nearest rivals all score within a narrow band of its average benchmark score of 75488. The AMD EPYC 8224P trails by 0.1 percent, the AMD EPYC 4545P leads by 0.2 percent, and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 9755X3D and AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 9755 each lead by 0.3 percent. This clustering indicates the Ultra 9 285 sits at the very top of the performance hierarchy in the database.

The Core 5 223PQE cannot be recommended on performance grounds because no benchmark data exists for it. The database records its percentile at 50, which is the median position, but this is not backed by any measured scores. Users considering this processor must rely on its specifications alone, which show a lower core count and an older process node.

The Ultra 9 285 uses a 3 nm process from TSMC, while the Core 5 223PQE uses a 10 nm process from Intel. This process advantage translates into higher efficiency per transistor, even though the Ultra 9 285 has a lower TDP of 65 compared to 125 for the Core 5 223PQE. The Ultra 9 285 also has more cores, 24 versus 8, and more cache, 36 MB shared L3 versus 24 MB shared L3.

For builders who need maximum compute performance, the data points firmly to the Ultra 9 285. The Core 5 223PQE remains an unquantified option in the database, and its launch MSRP of $319 reflects a different market position than the Ultra 9 285's launch MSRP of $579.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark section in the database contains no entries, meaning there are no direct comparative tests between the Core 5 223PQE and the Ultra 9 285. The wins count stands at zero for both processors in this category.

However, the Ultra 9 285 has a full suite of individual benchmark results that show its capabilities. In Cinebench R15, it scores 4933 in multi-core and 696 in single-core. Cinebench R20 shows 20556 multi-core and 2901 single-core. Cinebench R23 shows 48945 multi-core and 6909 single-core. These scores demonstrate a strong scaling pattern across different rendering workloads.

The Passmark suite adds further detail. The Ultra 9 285 scores 602121 in data compression, 46949 in data encryption, 45357 in extended instructions, 459 in find prime numbers, 194988 in floating point math, 164869 in integer math, 56602 in multithread, 3598 in physics, 73651 in random string sorting, and 4881 in single thread. The multithread score of 56602 confirms the chip's ability to exploit its 24 cores effectively.

Since the Core 5 223PQE has no benchmark entries, the database cannot produce a comparative analysis between the two. The only meaningful comparison comes from their specifications, which show the Ultra 9 285 with three times the core count, a higher boost clock of 5.60 GHz versus 5.50 GHz, and a larger L3 cache. The Core 5 223PQE does have a higher base clock of 4.00 GHz versus 2.50 GHz, but this advantage is unlikely to offset the core count difference in multi-threaded workloads.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 has 24 cores, while the Intel Core 5 223PQE has 8 cores.

Q: What is the boost clock difference between the two?

A: The Core 5 223PQE boosts to 5.50 GHz, and the Core Ultra 9 285 boosts to 5.60 GHz.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Core 5 223PQE and the Core Ultra 9 285 support ECC memory.

Q: Which processor has a higher benchmark score?

A: The Core Ultra 9 285 has an average benchmark score of 75488 and ranks in the 95th percentile. The Core 5 223PQE has no recorded benchmark scores in the database.

Q: What socket does each processor use?

A: The Core 5 223PQE uses Intel Socket 1700, and the Core Ultra 9 285 uses Intel Socket 1851.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The Core Ultra 9 285 has 36 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Core 5 223PQE has 24 MB of shared L3 cache.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural generations and process nodes. The Core 5 223PQE uses the Bartlett Lake codename and belongs to the Core 5 (Bartlett Lake) generation. It is built on a 10 nm process at Intel's own foundry. The Core Ultra 9 285 uses the Arrow Lake architecture with the Arrow Lake-S codename, belongs to the Ultra 9 (Arrow Lake) generation, and is built on a 3 nm process at TSMC.

The transistor count reflects this generational gap. The Ultra 9 285 integrates 17,800 million transistors on a die size of 243 mm². The Core 5 223PQE has no recorded transistor count or die size in the database.

The core topology differs significantly. The Core 5 223PQE has 8 cores and 16 threads, indicating hyper-threading support. The Ultra 9 285 has 24 cores and 24 threads, which means no hyper-threading, but the raw core count more than compensates. This configuration aligns with newer Intel designs that prioritize physical cores over thread duplication.

Cache architecture also diverges. 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 9 285 has 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3. The larger per-core cache on the Ultra 9 285 supports its higher instruction throughput.

Both processors support PCIe Gen 5, but with different lane counts. The Core 5 223PQE provides 16 lanes from the CPU, while the Ultra 9 285 provides 20 lanes. This gives the Ultra 9 285 more headroom for expansion cards and storage devices.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The Core 5 223PQE uses UHD Graphics 770, while the Ultra 9 285 uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU. The Arc-based solution represents a newer graphics architecture.

Specification Differences

The specifications reveal a clear generational divide. The Core 5 223PQE has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Ultra 9 285 has 24 cores and 24 threads. Base clocks differ at 4.00 GHz versus 2.50 GHz, but boost clocks are close at 5.50 GHz versus 5.60 GHz.

Thermal design power differs substantially. The Core 5 223PQE has a TDP of 125, while the Ultra 9 285 has a TDP of 65. This means the Ultra 9 285 delivers significantly more performance potential per watt, despite having three times the cores.

Memory support shows a generation shift. The Core 5 223PQE supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the Ultra 9 285 supports only DDR5. Both use dual-channel memory buses. Memory bandwidth favors the Ultra 9 285 at 102.4 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s.

The PCIe configuration differs in lane count. The Core 5 223PQE provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU, and the Ultra 9 285 provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU. Both support ECC memory.

The sockets are incompatible. The Core 5 223PQE uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Ultra 9 285 uses Intel Socket 1851. This means motherboard choice is locked to the processor generation.

The Ultra 9 285 has a launch MSRP of $579, while the Core 5 223PQE has a launch MSRP of $319. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The Core 5 223PQE was released in March 2026, while the Ultra 9 285 was released in December 2024. The production status for both is listed as active. The part numbers differ, with SA4QC for the Core 5 223PQE and SRQD4 for the Ultra 9 285.