Intel Core 5 315 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 225T Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher multi-core benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T dominates multi-core workloads. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 21971 versus 12981 for the Intel Core 5 315, a 40.9% advantage. The Core Ultra 5 225T also wins every other multi-core test in the database, including PassMark multi-thread (25358 vs 15272).

Q: How large is the gap in single-core performance?

A: The Core Ultra 5 225T leads by 7.5% in PassMark single-thread (4348 vs 4021). The gap widens substantially in Cinebench R23 single-core, where the Core Ultra 5 225T scores 3101 against 1832, a 40.9% difference.

Q: Which processor has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T uses a dual-channel memory bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core 5 315 uses a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Core Ultra 5 225T also supports DDR5 only, while the Core 5 315 supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T has 10 cores and 10 threads. The Intel Core 5 315 has 6 cores and 6 threads. Neither processor supports Hyper-Threading, so thread counts equal core counts.

Q: How do the processors compare in data compression and encryption workloads?

A: The Core Ultra 5 225T scores 233998 in PassMark data compression versus 146143, a 37.5% lead. In data encryption, it scores 18289 versus 11119, a 39.2% advantage.

Q: What is the production status of both processors?

A: Both the Intel Core 5 315 and the Intel Core Ultra 5 225T are listed as Active in production status. The Core Ultra 5 225T has a recorded release date before the Core 5 315.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel lineups and design intents. The Intel Core 5 315 uses the Wildcat Lake codename and belongs to the Core 5 generation. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T uses the Arrow Lake-S codename with the Arrow Lake architecture, part of the Core Ultra Series 2. Both chips are built on a 3 nm process node, but the foundry differs: the Core 5 315 is fabricated by Intel, while the Core Ultra 5 225T is fabricated by TSMC.

The Core Ultra 5 225T carries a transistor count of 17,800 million and a die size of 243 mm². The Core 5 315 has no recorded transistor or die size data in the database.

Cache organization differs sharply. The Core 5 315 has an L1 cache of 192 KB, an L2 of 2.5 MB, and a shared L3 of 6 MB. The Core Ultra 5 225T lists L1 cache as 192 KB per core and L2 as 3 MB per core, with a shared L3 of 20 MB. The larger L3 cache on the Core Ultra 5 225T provides a clear capacity advantage for workloads that reuse data sets.

Memory support also diverges. The Core 5 315 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Core Ultra 5 225T supports DDR5 over a dual-channel bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. The Core Ultra 5 225T delivers roughly 71% more memory bandwidth based on the recorded figures.

PCIe capabilities differ by generation and lane count. The Core 5 315 provides Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes. The Core Ultra 5 225T provides Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes. The integrated graphics also differ: the Core 5 315 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores, while the Core Ultra 5 225T uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 16 EU.

The Core Ultra 5 225T targets the desktop segment with a 65 TDP and an Intel Socket 1851. The Core 5 315 targets the mobile segment with a 15 TDP and an Intel BGA 1516 socket. The Core 5 315 has a recorded launch MSRP of $340; the Core Ultra 5 225T has no launch MSRP in the database.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T wins every head-to-head comparison in the recorded data. The database lists 17 benchmark comparisons, and the Core Ultra 5 225T takes all of them.

Cinebench results show a consistent pattern. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Core Ultra 5 225T scores 2214 versus 1308, a 40.9% lead. The single-core R15 result is nearly identical in percentage: 312 versus 184, a 41% lead. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows 9227 against 5452, again a 40.9% gap. The R20 single-core test shows 1302 versus 769, also 40.9%. Cinebench R23 multi-core repeats the same margin: 21971 versus 12981, a 40.9% difference. The R23 single-core test shows 3101 versus 1832, also 40.9%.

The consistency of the 40.9% delta across all six Cinebench runs indicates a fixed performance scaling factor between the two chips in that workload family, likely tied to core count and clock behavior rather than workload-specific effects.

PassMark results reveal a wider spread of margins. The smallest gap appears in PassMark single-thread and single-thread (both recorded separately with identical scores): 4348 versus 4021, a 7.5% lead for the Core Ultra 5 225T. This is the closest contest in the entire comparison.

The largest margin appears in PassMark find prime numbers, where the Core Ultra 5 225T scores 284 versus 112, a 60.6% advantage. Integer math also shows a big gap: 59543 versus 31690, a 46.8% lead. Floating point math shows 82751 versus 42441, a 48.7% lead.

Data-oriented workloads favor the Core Ultra 5 225T by slightly smaller margins. Data compression shows 233998 versus 146143, a 37.5% lead. Data encryption shows 18289 versus 11119, a 39.2% lead. Extended instructions show 20083 versus 13143, a 34.6% lead. Random string sorting shows 28774 versus 17551, a 39% lead. Physics shows 2053 versus 1163, a 43.4% lead. The multi-thread test shows 25358 versus 15272, a 39.8% lead.

The average benchmark score for the Core Ultra 5 225T is 30468, placing it at the 82nd percentile of all CPUs. The Core 5 315 has an average score of 18188, placing it at the 72nd percentile. The Core Ultra 5 225T sits near rivals like the Intel Core i9-11980HK (30422, 0.2% higher) and the AMD Ryzen 5 7640HS (30390, 0.3% higher). The Core 5 315 sits near the AMD EPYC 9274F (18189, 0% difference) and the Intel Core i7-9700 (18180, 0% difference).

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every recorded specification field.

Core and thread counts: the Core 5 315 has 6 cores and 6 threads. The Core Ultra 5 225T has 10 cores and 10 threads.

Clocks: the Core 5 315 has a base clock of 1.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. The Core Ultra 5 225T has a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz.

TDP: the Core 5 315 is rated at 15 W. The Core Ultra 5 225T is rated at 65 W.

Socket: the Core 5 315 uses Intel BGA 1516. The Core Ultra 5 225T uses Intel Socket 1851.

Process node and foundry: both are 3 nm, but the Core 5 315 comes from Intel's foundry while the Core Ultra 5 225T comes from TSMC.

Transistors and die size: the Core Ultra 5 225T has 17,800 million transistors and a 243 mm² die. The Core 5 315 has no recorded values.

Cache: the Core 5 315 has 192 KB L1, 2.5 MB L2, and 6 MB shared L3. The Core Ultra 5 225T has 192 KB L1 per core, 3 MB L2 per core, and 20 MB shared L3.

Memory: the Core 5 315 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a single-channel bus and 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Core Ultra 5 225T supports DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and 102.4 GB/s bandwidth.

PCIe: the Core 5 315 has Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes. The Core Ultra 5 225T has Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes.

Integrated graphics: the Core 5 315 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The Core Ultra 5 225T uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 16 EU.

Market segment: the Core 5 315 is mobile. The Core Ultra 5 225T is desktop.

Release date: the Core Ultra 5 225T has an earlier recorded release date than the Core 5 315.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T wins every benchmark in the recorded head-to-head set, so its advantages define nearly the entire comparison. The 10-core configuration with a 4.90 GHz boost clock and 20 MB of shared L3 gives it decisive leads in heavily threaded workloads. Cinebench R23 multi-core shows a 40.9% margin, and PassMark integer math shows a 46.8% margin. The dual-channel memory bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth supports data-heavy tasks, reflected in the 37.5% compression lead and 39.2% encryption lead. The desktop socket and 65 W TDP allow sustained operation at higher clocks, which explains the consistent multi-workload dominance.

The single-thread results are the closest area of comparison. PassMark single-thread shows the Core Ultra 5 225T ahead by only 7.5%, and Cinebench R23 single-core shows a 40.9% lead. The small PassMark margin suggests that in lightly threaded, short-duration tasks, the Core 5 315 can approach the Core Ultra 5 225T more closely than in sustained multi-core loads. The higher boost clock of the Core Ultra 5 225T still keeps it ahead.

The Intel Core 5 315 does not win any recorded benchmark. Its advantages are structural rather than performance-based. The mobile BGA 1516 socket and 15 W TDP make it suitable for low-power, compact systems. The support for LPDDR5X memory gives it flexibility for mobile memory configurations. The Wildcat Lake codename and Intel foundry production represent a different manufacturing approach. The 6-core, 6-thread configuration with a 4.40 GHz boost clock and 6 MB L3 is sufficient for lighter workloads, but the data shows it trails the Core Ultra 5 225T by 34.6% to 60.6% depending on the test.

For users prioritizing multi-core rendering, math-heavy computation, or data processing, the Core Ultra 5 225T is the clear choice based on every recorded metric. For users prioritizing power efficiency and mobile integration, the Core 5 315 offers a lower TDP and mobile socket, but the benchmark data indicates a substantial performance sacrifice. The Core 5 315 sits at the 72nd percentile of all CPUs, while the Core Ultra 5 225T sits at the 82nd percentile, a ten-point gap in overall standing.