Intel Core 5 315 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 125UL Comparison
Intel Core 5 315
Core Ultra 5 125UL
PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS
Analysis: Intel Core 5 315 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 125UL
Where Each One Wins
The Intel Core 5 315 and the Intel Core Ultra 5 125UL occupy different positions in the database, and the benchmark data reflects a clear split between them. The Core 5 315 has a full set of recorded benchmark scores across Cinebench and Passmark tests, while the Core Ultra 5 125UL has no recorded benchmark scores in the database. This makes the comparison one-sided in terms of measured performance data, but the architectural specifications still allow for a meaningful analysis of where each processor would excel.
The Core 5 315 delivers strong single-threaded performance, as shown by its Passmark single-thread score of 4021 and its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1832. These results place it well ahead of typical mobile processors in the database, and its boost clock of 4.40 GHz is the highest among the two chips. The Core Ultra 5 125UL, with a boost clock of 4.30 GHz, is slightly behind in this regard, though its 12 cores and 14 threads give it a structural advantage in heavily threaded workloads.
The Core Ultra 5 125UL wins on core count and thread count. It offers 12 cores and 14 threads, double the core count of the Core 5 315, which has 6 cores and 6 threads. The Core Ultra 5 125UL also has a larger shared L3 cache at 12 MB, compared to 6 MB on the Core 5 315. For workloads that scale with core count, such as rendering, compilation, or data processing, the Core Ultra 5 125UL has the theoretical edge. However, without recorded benchmark scores for the Core Ultra 5 125UL, the database cannot confirm how that core advantage translates into actual performance.
The Core 5 315 also wins on memory bandwidth efficiency in terms of its specifications. It supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory with a single-channel bus and a memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. The Core Ultra 5 125UL supports DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, which is significantly higher. In memory-heavy tasks, the Core Ultra 5 125UL should benefit from this wider memory path.
The production status of both chips is listed as Active, and both have the same TDP of 15 watts. The Core 5 315 is a mobile segment part, while the Core Ultra 5 125UL is a desktop segment part. The Core 5 315 uses the Intel BGA 1516 socket, while the Core Ultra 5 125UL uses Intel Socket 1851, which means they are not interchangeable in a system.
Architecture Differences
The two processors come from different architectural lineages. The Core 5 315 is built on the Wildcat Lake architecture and is part of the Core 5 (Wildcat Lake) generation. It uses a 3 nm process node, fabricated by Intel. The Core Ultra 5 125UL is based on the Meteor Lake architecture, specifically the Meteor Lake-PS codename, and belongs to the Core Ultra Series 1 generation. It uses a 7 nm process node, also fabricated by Intel.
The process node difference is significant. The 3 nm node on the Core 5 315 is more advanced than the 7 nm node on the Core Ultra 5 125UL. This likely contributes to the Core 5 315's higher boost clock of 4.40 GHz and its better single-thread benchmark results. The Core Ultra 5 125UL, despite its older node, compensates with a higher core count and a larger cache hierarchy.
The cache configurations differ substantially. The Core 5 315 has a 192 KB L1 cache, a 2.5 MB L2 cache, and a 6 MB shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 5 125UL has a 112 KB per-core L1 cache, a 2 MB per-core L2 cache, and a 12 MB shared L3 cache. The per-core L2 cache on the Core Ultra 5 125UL is larger on a per-core basis, which can help with workloads that require frequent access to moderate-sized datasets. The shared L3 cache on the Core Ultra 5 125UL is double that of the Core 5 315, which may improve performance in multi-threaded scenarios where data sharing between cores is common.
Memory support also differs. The Core 5 315 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory with a single-channel memory bus and a memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. The Core Ultra 5 125UL supports DDR5, with the exact type depending on the motherboard, and has a dual-channel memory bus with a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The dual-channel configuration on the Core Ultra 5 125UL gives it a 50% higher theoretical memory bandwidth, which can matter for applications that are sensitive to memory throughput.
The integrated graphics differ as well. The Core 5 315 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The Core Ultra 5 125UL uses Arc Xe-LPG with 64 execution units. The Arc Xe-LPG GPU is likely the more capable graphics solution, though the database does not include graphics benchmark scores for either chip.
PCIe support is similar but not identical. The Core 5 315 has PCIe Gen 4 with 6 CPU-only lanes. The Core Ultra 5 125UL has PCIe Gen 4 with 8 CPU-only lanes. Both support the same PCIe generation, but the Core Ultra 5 125UL provides two additional lanes for expansion or device connectivity.
Neither chip supports ECC memory, and both have locked multipliers. The Core 5 315 was released more recently, with a release date in 2026, while the Core Ultra 5 125UL was released in 2024. The Core 5 315 has a launch MSRP of $340, and the Core Ultra 5 125UL has a launch MSRP of $309.
Head-to-Head Benchmarks
The database contains no head-to-head benchmark entries for these two processors, and the Core Ultra 5 125UL has no recorded benchmark scores at all. As a result, the comparison must rely on the benchmark data available for the Core 5 315 and the architectural specifications of the Core Ultra 5 125UL.
The Core 5 315 has an average benchmark score of 18188, placing it at the 72nd percentile among all CPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 9274F with an average score of 18189 and a delta of 0%, the Intel Core i7-9700 with an average score of 18180 and a delta of 0%, the Intel Core i7-1365U with an average score of 18177 and a delta of 0.1%, and the AMD Ryzen 7 5700U with an average score of 18176 and a delta of 0.1%. These results show that the Core 5 315 sits in a competitive performance band, essentially tied with a server-class EPYC processor and a desktop Core i7 from an older generation.
In Cinebench R23, the Core 5 315 scores 12981 in multi-core and 1832 in single-core. The single-core score of 1832 is strong for a 15-watt mobile processor and reflects the benefit of the 3 nm process node and the 4.40 GHz boost clock. In Cinebench R20, the scores are 5452 multi-core and 769 single-core. In Cinebench R15, the scores are 1308 multi-core and 184 single-core.
Passmark results for the Core 5 315 show a single-thread score of 4021, a multithread score of 15272, and an average benchmark score of 18188. The integer math score is 31690, and the floating point math score is 42441. The data compression score is 146143, data encryption scores 11119, and extended instructions score 13143. The find prime numbers test scores 112, physics scores 1163, and random string sorting scores 17551.
The Core Ultra 5 125UL, by contrast, has an average benchmark score of 0 and a percentile rank of 50 among all CPUs. This percentile of 50 is notably lower than the 72nd percentile of the Core 5 315, but it is based on no recorded benchmark data, so it should not be interpreted as a direct performance comparison. The Core Ultra 5 125UL has no nearest rivals listed in the database.
The biggest performance win for the Core 5 315 is in single-threaded workloads. Its Passmark single-thread score of 4021 and Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1832 are the only directly measured performance metrics in this comparison. The Core Ultra 5 125UL has no such scores, so the data cannot show a win in either direction for any specific benchmark.
FAQ
Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?
A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 125UL has 12 cores and 14 threads, while the Intel Core 5 315 has 6 cores and 6 threads.
Q: What is the process node difference between the two processors?
A: The Intel Core 5 315 uses a 3 nm process node, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 125UL uses a 7 nm process node. Both are fabricated by Intel.
Q: How does the memory bandwidth compare?
A: The Intel Core 5 315 has a single-channel memory bus with a bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. The Intel Core Ultra 5 125UL has a dual-channel memory bus with a bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s.
Q: What are the integrated graphics solutions?
A: The Intel Core 5 315 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The Intel Core Ultra 5 125UL uses Arc Xe-LPG with 64 execution units.
Q: Which chip has a larger L3 cache?
A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 125UL has a 12 MB shared L3 cache, which is double the 6 MB shared L3 cache on the Intel Core 5 315.
Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?
A: No, neither processor supports ECC memory.
Q: What sockets do these processors use?
A: The Intel Core 5 315 uses the Intel BGA 1516 socket, and the Intel Core Ultra 5 125UL uses the Intel Socket 1851.
The Verdict
The data shows two processors designed for different roles. The Intel Core 5 315 is a mobile processor with a 15-watt TDP, a 3 nm process node, and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. Its benchmark scores are strong, with an average score of 18188, a 72nd percentile rank, and a Passmark single-thread score of 4021. It is well suited for workloads that depend on single-threaded performance, such as interactive applications, lightweight productivity tasks, and responsive system behavior.
The Intel Core Ultra 5 125UL is a desktop processor with a 15-watt TDP, a 7 nm process node, 12 cores, 14 threads, and a 12 MB L3 cache. It offers a dual-channel memory bus with 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth, which is higher than the Core 5 315. Its architecture is designed for multi-threaded scaling, and its larger cache and higher core count should help in parallel workloads such as rendering, compilation, or data analysis. However, the database contains no recorded benchmark scores for this chip, so its actual performance cannot be verified from the measured data.
The Core 5 315 is the only one of the two with verified benchmark results, and it sits at the 72nd percentile among all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 9274F, the Intel Core i7-9700, the Intel Core i7-1365U, and the AMD Ryzen 7 5700U, all within 0.1% of its average score. The Core Ultra 5 125UL, with no benchmark data and a 50th percentile rank, cannot be placed on the same performance scale.
For a mobile system where single-threaded responsiveness and a proven benchmark record matter, the Core 5 315 is the clear choice based on the data. For a desktop system where core count, cache capacity, and memory bandwidth are the priorities, the Core Ultra 5 125UL offers the stronger specification sheet, though its performance remains unverified in the database. The decision between the two should rest on whether the workload favors the measured single-thread strength of the Core 5 315 or the multi-core potential of the Core Ultra 5 125UL.