Intel Core 5 315 vs Intel Core 7 150U Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits these two mobile processors into clearly defined roles. The Intel Core 5 315 wins 11 of the 17 recorded head-to-head comparisons, while the Intel Core 7 150U takes 6. The Core 5 315 dominates in compute-heavy workloads that stress the processor's execution engine, while the Core 7 150U shows its strength in integer-heavy tasks and single-threaded legacy workloads.

The Core 5 315 delivers its largest advantages in extended instruction handling, prime number calculation, and floating-point math. These are workloads that benefit from a modern execution pipeline and efficient instruction processing. The data shows a 50.2% lead in extended instructions and a 93.1% lead in prime number finding, which indicates a substantially stronger arithmetic capability per clock.

The Core 7 150U counters with wins in integer math, data compression, random string sorting, and the older Cinebench R15 tests. Its 37.9% advantage in integer math is the single largest margin either processor achieves in the PassMark suite. Data compression also favors the Core 7 150U by 7.9%, suggesting that its thread arrangement handles certain data manipulation tasks more effectively.

In multi-threaded rendering, the results are mixed. The Core 5 315 wins Cinebench R23 multicore by a decisive 46.1%, but the Core 7 150U wins Cinebench R15 multicore by 13.1%. The gap between these two tests reflects how different rendering engines scale with thread counts and cache configurations. The newer R23 workload clearly favors the Core 5 315 architecture.

Single-threaded performance splits along generational lines. The Core 7 150U wins Cinebench R15 singlecore by 27.6% and Cinebench R23 singlecore by 2.3%, yet the Core 5 315 wins PassMark single-thread by 14.6%. This divergence suggests that the two processors respond differently to the specific instruction mixes in each benchmark.

The overall average benchmark score places the Core 5 315 at 18188 versus 17395 for the Core 7 150U, a difference of roughly 4.6%. The Core 5 315 also holds a 72nd percentile ranking among all CPUs, one point above the Core 7 150U's 71st percentile.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel design eras. The Core 5 315 uses the Wildcat Lake codename and is built on a 3 nm process node. The Core 7 150U uses the Raptor Lake-U codename with a 10 nm process node. Both are manufactured by Intel, but the process advantage for the Core 5 315 is substantial.

Core and thread counts differ significantly. The Core 5 315 has 6 cores and 6 threads, meaning no hyper-threading. The Core 7 150U has 10 cores and 12 threads, indicating a hybrid arrangement with performance and efficiency cores. Despite having fewer threads, the Core 5 315 wins the majority of multi-threaded benchmarks, which points to a much higher per-core throughput.

Clock speeds favor the Core 7 150U on paper. Its base clock is 1.80 GHz with a boost clock of 5.40 GHz, compared to 1.50 GHz base and 4.40 GHz boost for the Core 5 315. Both processors carry a 15 W TDP, so the power envelope is identical, but the Core 5 315 achieves competitive or superior performance with lower clock speeds.

Cache layouts are also divergent. The Core 5 315 has 192 KB of L1, 2.5 MB of L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. The Core 7 150U lists 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3. The larger shared L3 on the Core 7 150U does not translate into a multi-threaded advantage in Cinebench R23, where the Core 5 315 leads by 46.1%.

Memory support differs as well. The Core 5 315 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a single-channel memory bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Core 7 150U supports DDR4 and DDR5 over a dual-channel bus, though no bandwidth figure is recorded. The Core 5 315 uses a single-channel configuration yet still outperforms in memory-sensitive compute tests.

Integrated graphics differ between the two. The Core 5 315 has Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores, while the Core 7 150U has Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units. The Core 7 150U likely has more graphics horsepower based on execution unit count, but no graphics benchmarks are recorded in the data.

PCIe connectivity favors the Core 7 150U with Gen 4 and 8 lanes from the CPU, compared to Gen 4 and 6 lanes for the Core 5 315. Sockets differ as well: the Core 5 315 uses Intel BGA 1516, while the Core 7 150U uses Intel BGA 1744. The Core 5 315 has a launch MSRP of $340; no launch MSRP is recorded for the Core 7 150U.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest single win for either processor is the Core 5 315's 93.1% lead in PassMark find prime numbers, scoring 112 versus 58. This is a pure arithmetic workload, and the margin indicates that the Wildcat Lake core design executes integer-heavy mathematical loops far more efficiently.

The Core 5 315 also dominates in PassMark extended instructions with a 50.2% lead, scoring 13143 against 8748. This benchmark exercises SIMD and specialized instruction paths, where the newer 3 nm design has a clear advantage. Floating-point math follows the same pattern: 42441 versus 34405, a 23.4% lead.

Cinebench R23 multicore shows the Core 5 315 at 12981 against 8883 for the Core 7 150U, a 46.1% margin. This is the most dramatic rendering result in the dataset. Interestingly, the Core 7 150U wins Cinebench R15 multicore by 13.1%, scoring 1505.5 against 1308. The older R15 workload does not stress the Core 5 315's architecture the same way.

The Core 7 150U takes its largest win in PassMark integer math with 51057 against 31690, a 37.9% margin. This result is a significant counterweight to the Core 5 315's arithmetic wins and suggests the Core 7 150U's higher thread count helps in certain integer workloads.

Single-threaded results are split. The Core 7 150U wins Cinebench R15 singlecore by 27.6% (254 versus 184) and Cinebench R23 singlecore by 2.3% (1875.5 versus 1832). The Core 5 315 wins PassMark single-thread by 14.6% (4021 versus 3508). The PassMark result aligns with the Core 5 315's other PassMark wins, while the Cinebench results favor the Core 7 150U's higher boost clock.

PassMark multithread gives the Core 5 315 a narrow 3.9% win, scoring 15272 against 14700. Cinebench R20 multicore also goes to the Core 5 315 by 3.9%, at 5452 versus 5248. These margins are close, indicating that the two processors are broadly comparable in mixed multi-threaded workloads despite their architectural differences.

The Core 5 315 wins PassMark data encryption by 10.9% (11119 versus 10025) and PassMark physics by 14.9% (1163 versus 1012). The Core 7 150U wins PassMark data compression by 7.9% (158622 versus 146143) and random string sorting by 3.9% (18269 versus 17551).

The Verdict

The recorded data supports a clear division of roles. The Intel Core 5 315 is the stronger processor for modern compute workloads that exercise extended instructions, floating-point math, prime number calculation, and the newer Cinebench R23 rendering engine. Its 46.1% lead in R23 multicore and 50.2% lead in extended instructions make it the better choice for software that leverages current instruction sets and optimized code paths.

The Intel Core 7 150U remains competitive in integer-heavy workloads and legacy single-threaded benchmarks. Its 37.9% win in integer math and 27.6% win in Cinebench R15 singlecore show that the older Raptor Lake design still handles certain tasks well. The larger cache and higher boost clock contribute to these results.

For users running modern rendering applications, scientific computing, or encryption workloads, the Core 5 315 delivers measurably better performance. For legacy software, integer-centric data processing, or compression tasks, the Core 7 150U holds an edge. The overall average benchmark score favors the Core 5 315 at 18188 versus 17395, and its 72nd percentile ranking versus 71st for the Core 7 150U confirms the slight overall advantage.

The Core 5 315's 3 nm process node and 6 MB of shared L3 are sufficient to overcome the Core 7 150U's extra 4 cores and larger 12 MB cache in most tests. The data does not support a universal recommendation for either processor; the choice depends entirely on workload mix.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core rendering?

A: The Intel Core 5 315 wins Cinebench R23 multicore by 46.1% with a score of 12981 versus 8883, but the Core 7 150U wins Cinebench R15 multicore by 13.1%. The result depends on the rendering workload.

Q: How do the two processors compare in single-threaded performance?

A: The Core 7 150U wins Cinebench R15 singlecore by 27.6% and Cinebench R23 singlecore by 2.3%, while the Core 5 315 wins PassMark single-thread by 14.6%.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core 7 150U has 10 cores and 12 threads. The Intel Core 5 315 has 6 cores and 6 threads.

Q: What is the process node difference?

A: The Core 5 315 is built on a 3 nm process node, while the Core 7 150U uses a 10 nm process node. Both are manufactured by Intel.

Q: Which processor wins in integer math?

A: The Intel Core 7 150U wins PassMark integer math by 37.9%, scoring 51057 against 31690 for the Core 5 315.

Q: What is the overall benchmark score difference?

A: The Core 5 315 has an average benchmark score of 18188, while the Core 7 150U scores 17395. The Core 5 315 ranks in the 72nd percentile of all CPUs, one point above the Core 7 150U.