Intel Core 5 315 vs Intel Core i7-14700F Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a complete sweep. The Intel Core i7-14700F wins all 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons against the Intel Core 5 315. No single test favors the mobile part.

The largest margin appears in PassMark integer math. The i7-14700F scores 155808 against 31690 for the Core 5 315, a delta of -79.7%. That is the widest gap in the entire comparison. Data compression also shows severe separation: 505885 versus 146143, a -71.1% delta. Random string sorting follows at -68.6% (55918 versus 17551). These three workloads share a common trait: they scale aggressively with core count and memory throughput.

The Cinebench suite tells a consistent story. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the i7-14700F posts 35122 while the Core 5 315 manages 12981, a -63% delta. Single-core R23 shows 4958 versus 1832, also -63%. The pattern repeats across R15 and R20: every Cinebench result, whether single or multi-threaded, lands at roughly -63% to -63.1%. The consistency of that margin suggests the gap is structural, not workload-specific.

PassMark encryption shows -63.1% (30144 versus 11119). Extended instructions narrows the gap to -54% (28564 versus 13143). Physics comes in at -52.6% (2455 versus 1163). Prime number finding is the closest multi-threaded result at -36.4% (176 versus 112), indicating that this particular workload does not benefit as much from the i7's additional resources.

The single-threaded PassMark test is the tightest contest overall. The i7-14700F scores 4257, the Core 5 315 scores 4021, a delta of only -5.5%. That small margin appears in both passmark_single_thread and passmark_singlethread entries, confirming the mobile chip's per-core efficiency is competitive. But it is the only category where the two processors are remotely close.

The average benchmark score tells the broader story. The Core 5 315 averages 18188 across its benchmark set, placing it in the 72nd percentile of all CPUs. The i7-14700F averages 53620, good for the 91st percentile. The i7's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X (delta 0.6%) and AMD EPYC 7313P (delta 0.8%). The Core 5 315 sits near the AMD EPYC 9274F (delta 0%) and Intel Core i7-9700 (delta 0%), with the Intel Core i7-1365U just 0.1% behind. These rival clusters highlight how far apart the two processors are in absolute performance.

Architecture Differences

The two chips come from fundamentally different design points. The Core 5 315 uses a 3 nm process node, while the i7-14700F uses 10 nm. The Core 5 315 is built on the Wildcat Lake codename, part of the Core 5 generation. The i7-14700F uses the Raptor Lake architecture, specifically Raptor Lake-R, part of the Core 14th Gen series with the Raptor Lake Refresh generation label.

Core and thread counts diverge sharply. The Core 5 315 has 6 cores and 6 threads. The i7-14700F has 20 cores and 28 threads. That difference alone explains most of the multi-threaded benchmark gaps. The i7 also carries a die size of 257 mm²; the Core 5 315 has no recorded die size in the database.

Cache hierarchies reflect the different design philosophies. The Core 5 315 has 192 KB of L1 cache, 2.5 MB of L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. The i7-14700F lists L1 as 80 KB per core, L2 as 2 MB per core, and 33 MB of shared L3. The i7's larger shared L3 is a major factor in workloads that fit within cache. The per-core L2 on the i7 also allows each core faster access to its own working set.

Memory support differs in both type and channel configuration. The Core 5 315 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a single-channel bus, with recorded memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. The i7-14700F supports DDR4 and DDR5 over a dual-channel bus, with no bandwidth figure recorded in the database. ECC memory is supported on the i7 but not on the Core 5 315.

PCIe capabilities are another dividing line. The Core 5 315 offers Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only). The i7-14700F offers Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only). That is a substantial difference in both generation and lane count, affecting expansion options and data transfer potential.

Integrated graphics are present on the Core 5 315 as Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The i7-14700F has no integrated graphics, marked as N/A. The Core 5 315 is a mobile part on Intel BGA 1516 socket; the i7-14700F is a desktop part on Intel Socket 1700.

Clock speeds favor the i7. The Core 5 315 has a base clock of 1.50 GHz and a boost of 4.40 GHz. The i7-14700F has a base of 2.10 GHz and a boost of 5.40 GHz. Thermal design power also differs: the Core 5 315 is rated at 15 W, the i7-14700F at 65 W. That 50 W gap reflects the mobile versus desktop positioning and directly enables the i7's higher sustained clocks.

Where Each One Wins

The i7-14700F wins every recorded benchmark, so the analysis becomes a question of where the Core 5 315 is least disadvantaged rather than where it wins.

The closest category is single-threaded PassMark performance. The -5.5% delta indicates the Wildcat Lake core design is nearly competitive on a per-thread basis. For workloads that rely on a single core and do not scale with thread count, the Core 5 315 would not feel dramatically slower in raw processing.

Prime number finding shows the second-smallest gap at -36.4%. This workload is compute-bound and memory-light, so the i7's extra cores cannot fully stretch their advantage. The Core 5 315's 6 cores still execute the task, and the delta shrinks relative to broader multi-threaded tests.

Physics simulation sits at -52.6%. Extended instructions at -54%. These represent workloads where the i7 wins decisively but not overwhelmingly. The Core 5 315 keeps the margin under 60% here.

The largest gaps are in integer math (-79.7%), data compression (-71.1%), and random string sorting (-68.6%). These are heavily parallel workloads that benefit from the i7's 20 cores and 28 threads, plus its larger L3 cache and dual-channel memory. The Core 5 315's 6 threads and single-channel memory create a severe bottleneck.

For mobile use cases where power efficiency matters, the 15 W TDP of the Core 5 315 is the relevant metric. The data does not include battery life or energy consumption benchmarks, but the TDP difference is recorded and substantial.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two processors in the database:

• Cores: 6 versus 20
• Threads: 6 versus 28
• Base clock: 1.50 GHz versus 2.10 GHz
• Boost clock: 4.40 GHz versus 5.40 GHz
• TDP: 15 W versus 65 W
• Socket: Intel BGA 1516 versus Intel Socket 1700
• Codename: Wildcat Lake versus Raptor Lake-R
• Generation: Core 5 (Wildcat Lake) versus Core i7 (Raptor Lake Refresh)
• Process node: 3 nm versus 10 nm
• Die size: not recorded versus 257 mm²
• L1 cache: 192 KB versus 80 KB per core
• L2 cache: 2.5 MB versus 2 MB per core
• L3 cache: 6 MB shared versus 33 MB shared
• Memory support: DDR5, LPDDR5X versus DDR4, DDR5
• Memory bus: Single-channel versus Dual-channel
• Memory bandwidth: 59.7 GB/s versus not recorded
• ECC memory: false versus true
• PCIe: Gen 4, 6 lanes versus Gen 5, 16 lanes
• Integrated graphics: Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) versus N/A
• Market segment: Mobile versus Desktop
• Release date: 2026-04-15 versus 2024-01-07
• Launch MSRP: $340 versus $359
• Part number: SAEFC versus SRN3Z

Fields that match include manufacturer (both Intel), production status (both Active), and multiplier unlock (both false). The series field is null for the Core 5 315 and "Core 14th Gen" for the i7-14700F.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher single-core PassMark score?

A: The Intel Core i7-14700F scores 4257 versus 4021 for the Intel Core 5 315, a delta of -5.5% in favor of the i7.

Q: What is the largest benchmark gap between the two?

A: PassMark integer math shows the biggest difference. The i7-14700F scores 155808 against 31690 for the Core 5 315, a -79.7% delta.

Q: Does the Core 5 315 have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, it uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The i7-14700F has no integrated graphics, listed as N/A.

Q: How much L3 cache does each processor have?

A: The Core 5 315 has 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The i7-14700F has 33 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: What memory types does each support?

A: The Core 5 315 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a single-channel bus. The i7-14700F supports DDR4 and DDR5 over a dual-channel bus.

Q: Which processor has a higher percentile ranking among all CPUs?

A: The i7-14700F ranks in the 91st percentile. The Core 5 315 ranks in the 72nd percentile.

Q: What are the TDP ratings?

A: The Core 5 315 is rated at 15 W. The i7-14700F is rated at 65 W.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split by use case. The Intel Core i7-14700F is the superior processor in every measured benchmark. Its 91st percentile ranking, 20 cores, 28 threads, 5.40 GHz boost clock, and 33 MB of shared L3 cache make it the choice for any task where raw performance is the priority. The 65 W TDP and desktop socket reflect a design intended for sustained heavy workloads.

The Intel Core 5 315 occupies a different niche. Its 72nd percentile ranking, 6 cores, 6 threads, and 15 W TDP place it firmly in the mobile segment. The 3 nm process node and single-channel LPDDR5X support suggest power efficiency is the design goal. The -5.5% single-threaded PassMark gap shows its per-core performance is respectable. For a mobile device where battery life and thermals matter more than multi-threaded throughput, the Core 5 315 is the relevant option.

The release dates reinforce this split. The Core 5 315 arrived in 2026-04-15, while the i7-14700F launched 2024-01-07. The newer process node on the Core 5 315 indicates Intel's mobile roadmap emphasizes efficiency, not raw core counts. The i7-14700F, built on the older 10 nm node, extracts performance through sheer core count and higher clocks.

The benchmark database shows no crossover point. There is no workload where the Core 5 315 outperforms the i7-14700F. The only question is whether the i7's performance advantage is necessary for the intended use. For desktop workloads with heavy multi-threading, the i7-14700F is the clear pick. For mobile use where the 15 W TDP and integrated graphics are essential, the Core 5 315 is the only viable choice between these two.