Intel Core 5 315 vs Intel Core i5-14400 Comparison

Intel Core 5 315 vs Intel Core i5-14400: the data shows a decisive victory for the desktop i5-14400 in nearly every workload, winning 14 of 17 head-to-head benchmarks. The mobile-focused Core 5 315, built on a newer 3 nm node with a Wildcat Lake design, counters with superior single-thread synthetic scores and a prime-number finding advantage, but these wins are narrow and do not offset the i5-14400's massive multi-threaded lead.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i5-14400 has an average benchmark score of 32115, while the Intel Core 5 315 scores 18188. The i5-14400 ranks in the 82nd percentile of all CPUs, compared to the 72nd percentile for the Core 5 315.

Q: How do the two compare in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Intel Core i5-14400 scores 21315 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, which is 39.1% higher than the Core 5 315's score of 12981. This gap is consistent across all Cinebench versions (R15, R20, R23), with the i5-14400 leading by roughly 39% in each multi-core test.

Q: Does the Core 5 315 win any benchmarks?

A: Yes, the Core 5 315 wins three benchmarks: PassMark find prime numbers (112 vs 80, a 40% advantage), PassMark single thread (4021 vs 3741, a 7.5% advantage), and PassMark singlethread (same scores). These are the only tests where it beats the i5-14400.

Q: What are the memory support differences?

A: The Core 5 315 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a single-channel memory bus and 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The i5-14400 supports DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel memory bus; its memory bandwidth is not recorded in the database.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core i5-14400 has 10 cores and 16 threads. The Intel Core 5 315 has 6 cores and 6 threads. The i5-14400 also has a higher base clock (2.50 GHz vs 1.50 GHz) and boost clock (4.70 GHz vs 4.40 GHz).

Q: What is the difference in integrated graphics?

A: The Core 5 315 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The i5-14400 uses UHD Graphics 730. The database does not include graphics benchmark scores for either, so no performance comparison is possible from this data.

The Verdict

The database is unambiguous: the Intel Core i5-14400 is the stronger processor for almost all tasks. Its 82nd percentile ranking, an average score of 32115, and 14 benchmark wins out of 17 place it firmly ahead of the Core 5 315, which manages 72nd percentile and 3 wins. The i5-14400's leads are large, often exceeding 30%, especially in multi-threaded and integer-heavy workloads.

The Core 5 315 is a mobile part (Intel BGA 1516 socket, 15 W TDP) designed for efficiency, while the i5-14400 is a desktop part (Intel Socket 1700, 65 W TDP) built for performance. The data shows the i5-14400 is the pick for anyone needing raw compute, rendering, or data processing. The Core 5 315's only meaningful advantages are in single-thread PassMark tests and prime-number finding, where it leads by 7.5% and 40% respectively. Those wins are too narrow and too isolated to recommend it over the i5-14400 for general use, though its lower power envelope and newer process node may appeal in mobile contexts. The recorded scores do not support any scenario where the Core 5 315 outperforms the i5-14400 in sustained multi-core work.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The i5-14400 dominates the Cinebench suite. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it scores 2148 against 1308, a 39.1% lead. Single-core R15 shows 303 vs 184, also a 39.3% gap. The pattern repeats in R20 multi-core (8952 vs 5452, 39.1% lead) and R20 single-core (1263 vs 769, 39.1% lead). Cinebench R23 multi-core gives the i5-14400 21315 vs 12981, a 39.1% advantage, and single-core R23 shows 3009 vs 1832, another 39.1% gap. These consistent deltas indicate a fundamental performance difference, not a workload-specific quirk.

PassMark tests amplify the i5-14400's advantage in several areas. Data compression shows the largest margin: 314995 vs 146143, a 53.6% lead for the i5-14400. Integer math is even more lopsided: 82017 vs 31690, a 61.4% gap. Random string sorting favors the i5-14400 by 45.7% (32346 vs 17551). Floating point math sees a 31% lead (61549 vs 42441). Extended instructions and data encryption show 33.7% and 33.5% leads respectively. Multi-threaded PassMark gives 25080 vs 15272, a 39.1% gap, and physics shows 1396 vs 1163, a 16.7% lead.

The Core 5 315's wins are smaller but distinct. In PassMark find prime numbers, it scores 112 vs 80, a 40% lead. In PassMark single thread, it scores 4021 vs 3741, a 7.5% lead. The same 7.5% margin appears in the duplicate singlethread test. These results suggest the Core 5 315 has a stronger per-thread execution in certain integer workloads, but the i5-14400's higher thread count and clock speeds overcome this in most scenarios.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every fundamental specification. The Core 5 315 has 6 cores and 6 threads; the i5-14400 has 10 cores and 16 threads. Base clocks are 1.50 GHz for the Core 5 315 and 2.50 GHz for the i5-14400, with boost clocks of 4.40 GHz and 4.70 GHz respectively. TDP ratings are 15 W for the mobile part and 65 W for the desktop part.

Socket types differ completely: the Core 5 315 uses Intel BGA 1516 (soldered mobile), while the i5-14400 uses Intel Socket 1700 (desktop LGA). The Core 5 315 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory on a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The i5-14400 supports DDR4 and DDR5 on a dual-channel bus, but its bandwidth is not recorded. ECC memory is supported only on the i5-14400 (true), not on the Core 5 315 (false). PCIe lanes differ: the Core 5 315 has Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes, while the i5-14400 has Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes. Integrated graphics are Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) on the Core 5 315 and UHD Graphics 730 on the i5-14400. The i5-14400 has a die size of 215 mm²; the Core 5 315's die size is not recorded. Launch MSRP for the i5-14400 is $221, and for the Core 5 315 it is $340. Release dates are 2024-01-07 for the i5-14400 and 2026-04-15 for the Core 5 315.

Architecture Differences

The Core 5 315 uses a Wildcat Lake architecture on a 3 nm process node, manufactured by Intel. Its cache layout is small: 192 KB L1, 2.5 MB L2, and 6 MB shared L3. The i5-14400 uses Raptor Lake-R (Raptor Lake architecture) on a 10 nm node, also by Intel. Its cache is larger: 80 KB per core L1, 1.25 MB per core L2, and 20 MB shared L3. The process node difference (3 nm vs 10 nm) explains the Core 5 315's lower power draw and smaller physical footprint, but the i5-14400's larger cache and more cores drive its benchmark superiority.

The i5-14400 is part of the Core 14th Gen series, while the Core 5 315 is a standalone "Core 5" generation entry. The i5-14400's architecture is Raptor Lake Refresh, a desktop design. The Core 5 315's codename is Wildcat Lake, a mobile design. Neither part has an unlocked multiplier. The i5-14400 supports ECC memory, the Core 5 315 does not. The i5-14400's dual-channel memory bus and PCIe Gen 5 lanes give it a platform advantage for desktop expansion, while the Core 5 315's single-channel bus and Gen 4 lanes reflect its mobile orientation.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i5-14400 wins in all multi-threaded and most single-threaded workloads. It leads by 39.1% in every Cinebench multi-core test (R15, R20, R23) and by 39.1% in every Cinebench single-core test. It is the clear choice for rendering, video encoding, compilation, and any task that scales across cores. Its PassMark wins include data compression (53.6% lead), integer math (61.4%), random string sorting (45.7%), floating point math (31%), extended instructions (33.7%), data encryption (33.5%), multi-thread (39.1%), and physics (16.7%). The i5-14400 also holds the higher percentile ranking (82nd vs 72nd) and a higher average score (32115 vs 18188).

The Intel Core 5 315 wins in exactly three recorded tests: PassMark find prime numbers (40% lead), PassMark single thread (7.5% lead), and the duplicate PassMark singlethread test (7.5% lead). These wins indicate a per-core efficiency advantage in specific integer operations, likely due to the newer 3 nm process and Wildcat Lake design. However, the i5-14400's superior single-core Cinebench scores (3009 vs 1832 in R23, a 39.1% lead) contradict the PassMark single-thread result, suggesting the Core 5 315's win is workload-specific rather than general. For prime number calculations or similar operations, the Core 5 315 delivers a 40% improvement, but for all other measured tasks, the i5-14400 is faster, often by wide margins. The data supports the i5-14400 for desktop users and the Core 5 315 only for niche mobile workloads where its 15 W TDP and single-thread PassMark advantage matter more than raw multi-core performance.