Intel Core 5 315 vs Intel Core i9-14900HX Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded benchmark data shows a comprehensive victory for the Intel Core i9-14900HX across all 17 head-to-head comparisons. The Intel Core 5 315 does not claim a single win in any measured test. The magnitude of the differences varies substantially by workload, ranging from a narrow single-thread margin to a near-total multi-core dominance.

Starting with the Cinebench suite, the i9-14900HX leads in every render test. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i9 scores 4574 against the Core 5 315’s 1308, a 71.4 percent deficit for the smaller chip. The single-core R15 test shows a closer gap: 310.5 versus 184, still a 40.7 percent advantage for the i9. Moving to R20, the multi-core result is 15616 versus 5452, a 65.1 percent gap, and the single-core result mirrors that exact 65.1 percent delta with 2204 against 769. In Cinebench R23, the i9 delivers 30055 multi-core points while the Core 5 315 manages 12981, a 56.8 percent difference. The R23 single-core test narrows the margin to 16 percent, with 2181.5 versus 1832.

The Passmark suite reveals where the architectural gap is most pronounced. The largest delta appears in integer math: the i9-14900HX scores 157375, while the Core 5 315 scores 31690, a 79.9 percent disadvantage. Data compression shows a 72.9 percent gap (539965 versus 146143), and random string sorting shows a 71.2 percent gap (60861 versus 17551). Floating point math favors the i9 by 62.2 percent (112273 versus 42441), data encryption by 65.9 percent (32619 versus 11119), and extended instructions by 57.9 percent (31247 versus 13143). The passmark multithread test records 43778 for the i9 against 15272 for the Core 5 315, a 65.1 percent difference. Physics testing shows 2638 versus 1163, a 55.9 percent gap, and find prime numbers shows 193 versus 112, a 42 percent gap.

The closest contest appears in single-thread Passmark results. The i9-14900HX scores 4175, while the Core 5 315 scores 4021, a delta of only 3.7 percent. That narrow margin suggests that for lightly threaded tasks, the two processors are far more comparable than the multi-core results imply. Still, the i9 wins even there.

Where Each One Wins

Given that the Intel Core i9-14900HX wins all 17 head-to-head benchmarks, the use-case split is heavily skewed. The data indicates the i9 is the appropriate choice for any workload that benefits from multi-core scaling. Its 24 cores and 32 threads, combined with a 5.80 GHz boost clock, produce results that are consistently 56 to 80 percent ahead of the Core 5 315 in render, compression, encryption, and math-heavy tasks. For video editing, 3D rendering, scientific computation, or server-style workloads, the i9-14900HX is the clear data-backed selection.

The Intel Core 5 315, with 6 cores and 6 threads, does not win any benchmark, but its relative strength appears in the single-thread Passmark result where the gap shrinks to 3.7 percent. That means for basic office tasks, web browsing, or legacy single-threaded applications, the Core 5 315 is not far behind. Its low power envelope, 15 watt TDP versus the i9’s 55 watt TDP, suggests it fits into thinner, lighter mobile devices where sustained multi-core performance is not the priority. The data records no benchmark where the Core 5 315 outperforms, so any advantage would come from system-level factors such as cooling capacity or battery life, which are not captured in these scores.

The percentile rankings reinforce this split. The i9-14900HX sits at the 91st percentile among all CPUs in the database, while the Core 5 315 sits at the 72nd percentile. The average benchmark score for the i9 is 56004, compared to 18188 for the Core 5 315. That is roughly a threefold difference in aggregate performance, which aligns with the multi-core deltas observed across the individual tests.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel design families. The Intel Core 5 315 uses the Wildcat Lake codename and belongs to the Core 5 generation. It is built on a 3 nm process node, also from Intel’s foundry. The Intel Core i9-14900HX uses the Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-HX codename, part of the Core 14th Gen series. Its process node is 10 nm, and the die size is 257 mm². The Core 5 315 has no recorded die size in the database.

Core and thread counts differ dramatically. The Core 5 315 provides 6 cores and 6 threads, meaning no hyperthreading. The i9-14900HX provides 24 cores and 32 threads, indicating a hybrid arrangement with performance and efficiency cores. The base clock of the i9 is 2.20 GHz versus 1.50 GHz for the Core 5 315. Boost clocks are 5.80 GHz and 4.40 GHz respectively.

Cache hierarchies also diverge. The Core 5 315 has 192 KB of L1 cache, 2.5 MB of L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. The i9-14900HX specifies L1 as 80 KB per core, L2 as 2 MB per core, and L3 as 36 MB shared. The total L2 for the i9, when multiplied across its cores, is substantially larger, and the L3 is six times the size of the Core 5 315’s cache. That larger cache likely contributes to the i9’s superior performance in data-heavy benchmarks like compression and integer math.

Integrated graphics differ as well. The Core 5 315 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores, while the i9-14900HX uses UHD Graphics 770. Neither benchmark set in the data includes graphics tests, so the recorded scores do not reflect GPU performance.

The memory controllers are not identical. The Core 5 315 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory through a single-channel bus with a measured bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. The i9-14900HX supports DDR4 and DDR5 through a dual-channel bus, though no bandwidth figure is recorded. The i9 also supports ECC memory, while the Core 5 315 does not.

PCIe capabilities differ. The Core 5 315 uses Gen 4 with 6 lanes from the CPU. The i9-14900HX uses Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU. That gives the i9 significantly more headroom for discrete GPUs and high-speed storage.

The i9-14900HX has an unlocked multiplier, meaning overclocking is possible. The Core 5 315 does not have an unlocked multiplier. The i9’s socket is Intel BGA 1964, while the Core 5 315 uses Intel BGA 1516. The production status for both is listed as Active.

Specification Differences

The specifications that differ between the two parts are numerous. Core count: 6 versus 24. Thread count: 6 versus 32. Base clock: 1.50 GHz versus 2.20 GHz. Boost clock: 4.40 GHz versus 5.80 GHz. TDP: 15 watts versus 55 watts. Socket: Intel BGA 1516 versus Intel BGA 1964. Architecture: Wildcat Lake versus Raptor Lake. Process node: 3 nm versus 10 nm. Die size: not recorded versus 257 mm².

Cache figures differ in every category: L1 is 192 KB total versus 80 KB per core, L2 is 2.5 MB versus 2 MB per core, L3 is 6 MB shared versus 36 MB shared. Memory support: DDR5 and LPDDR5X versus DDR4 and DDR5. Memory bus: single-channel versus dual-channel. Memory bandwidth: 59.7 GB/s recorded for the Core 5 315, not recorded for the i9. ECC: false versus true. PCIe: Gen 4 with 6 lanes versus Gen 5 with 16 lanes. Integrated graphics: Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) versus UHD Graphics 770. Release date: 2026-04-15 versus 2024-01-07. Launch MSRP: $340 for the Core 5 315, none recorded for the i9. Multiplier unlocked: false versus true. Part numbers differ: SAEFC versus SRMXF.

The generation field also differs: Core 5 (Wildcat Lake) versus Core i9 (Raptor Lake-HX Refresh). The series field is null for the Core 5 315 and Core 14th Gen for the i9. Both are Intel parts, both target the mobile market segment, both are listed as Active in production.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core i9-14900HX has 24 cores and 32 threads. The Intel Core 5 315 has 6 cores and 6 threads.

Q: What is the single-thread performance difference?

A: In the Passmark single-thread test, the i9-14900HX scores 4175 and the Core 5 315 scores 4021, a 3.7 percent difference. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the i9 scores 2181.5 against 1832, a 16 percent difference.

Q: Does the Core 5 315 support ECC memory?

A: No. The database lists ECC memory as false for the Intel Core 5 315. The Intel Core i9-14900HX supports ECC memory.

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

A: The largest gap is in Passmark integer math, where the i9-14900HX scores 157375 and the Core 5 315 scores 31690, a 79.9 percent difference.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core i9-14900HX has a boost clock of 5.80 GHz. The Intel Core 5 315 has a boost clock of 4.40 GHz.

Q: What are the average benchmark scores?

A: The i9-14900HX has an average benchmark score of 56004 and sits at the 91st percentile. The Core 5 315 has an average benchmark score of 18188 and sits at the 72nd percentile.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to a single conclusion for raw performance: the Intel Core i9-14900HX is the stronger processor in every measured test. Its 24 cores, 32 threads, 36 MB of L3 cache, and 5.80 GHz boost clock produce results that are routinely 50 to 80 percent ahead of the Core 5 315 across multi-threaded workloads. The i9 also leads in single-threaded tests, though by a smaller margin, with the closest contest in Passmark single-thread at 3.7 percent.

The Intel Core 5 315 is not without merit. Its 3 nm process node and 15 watt TDP position it for a different class of mobile device, one where thermal limits and battery life take priority over peak throughput. The data does not show any performance advantage, but the lower power envelope and newer process node likely translate to efficiency gains that are not visible in these CPU-centric benchmarks.

For any user whose workflow involves rendering, compiling, compression, encryption, or heavy multitasking, the i9-14900HX is the data-backed choice. The 91st percentile ranking and 56004 average score place it well above the Core 5 315’s 72nd percentile and 18188 average. The 17-0 head-to-head record leaves no ambiguity in the benchmark results.

For a user prioritizing portability, longer battery life, or operation in a fanless or low-power chassis, the Core 5 315 may be the appropriate selection despite its lower scores. The data cannot confirm those system-level benefits, but the 15 watt TDP against the i9’s 55 watt TDP indicates a substantially lower thermal footprint. The single-thread Passmark gap of 3.7 percent suggests that everyday responsive tasks would feel similar on both.

The architecture differences reinforce the split. The i9 uses a mature 10 nm Raptor Lake design with a large 257 mm² die and dual-channel memory. The Core 5 315 uses a 3 nm node with single-channel memory and a smaller cache pool. Those differences explain the benchmark outcomes. The i9 is built for maximum throughput, while the Core 5 315 is built for efficiency in a compact package.

The verdict from the data is straightforward. Choose the Intel Core i9-14900HX for performance-critical mobile computing. Choose the Intel Core 5 315 for low-power mobile designs where the benchmark gaps are an acceptable trade-off for a 15 watt envelope. The i9 wins every test, but the Core 5 315 remains a viable option for a different use case.