Intel Core 5 315 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 226V Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The head-to-head benchmark data splits clearly between two different performance profiles. The Intel Core Ultra 5 226V takes 13 of the 17 recorded comparisons, while the Intel Core 5 315 wins 4. These wins are not distributed randomly; they cluster around specific workload types.

The Core Ultra 5 226V dominates in the Cinebench R15 and R20 suites. In Cinebench R15 multicore, it scores 1501 against 1308, a 12.9% advantage. The single-core gap in R15 is even larger at 31.1%, with scores of 267 versus 184. Cinebench R20 shows a 14.6% lead in both multicore (6381 versus 5452) and single-core (900 versus 769) tests. This pattern suggests the Ultra 5 226V has a consistent throughput advantage in these older Cinebench versions.

The PassMark suite also favors the Ultra 5 226V in most categories. Data compression shows 170687 against 146143, a 14.4% edge. Encryption delivers 12710 versus 11119, a 12.5% gain. Extended instructions score 14724 compared to 13143, a 10.7% margin. Prime number finding jumps 32.5% from 112 to 166. Floating point math improves 18.8% (52270 versus 42441), integer math 18% (38647 versus 31690), multithread 14.4% (17850 versus 15272), physics 19.7% (1449 versus 1163), and random string sorting 15.7% (20813 versus 17551).

The Core 5 315 wins in different territory. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 12981 towers over the Ultra 5 226V's 9848, a 31.8% lead. The R23 single-core result also goes to the Core 5 315, though by a slim 5% margin (1832 versus 1744). PassMark single-thread testing shows the Core 5 315 ahead by 7.1%, scoring 4021 against 3754.

This split indicates the Core 5 315 performs better in the newer Cinebench R23 workload and in PassMark's single-threaded test, while the Ultra 5 226V holds advantages in nearly every other measured category. The average benchmark score reflects this overall balance: the Core 5 315 averages 18188, while the Ultra 5 226V averages 19368, placing the latter 6.5% higher on aggregate. The Core 5 315 sits at the 72nd percentile of all CPUs, and the Ultra 5 226V at the 73rd, indicating both are near the same performance tier despite their different workload strengths.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel design families. The Core 5 315 uses the Wildcat Lake codename, while the Core Ultra 5 226V belongs to the Lunar Lake architecture and the Core Ultra Series 2 family. Both are fabricated on a 3 nm process, but the foundries differ. The Core 5 315 is built by Intel, while the Core Ultra 5 226V comes from TSMC.

Core counts differ significantly. The Core 5 315 has 6 cores and 6 threads, with no hyperthreading. The Core Ultra 5 226V offers 8 cores and 8 threads. This 33% core count advantage for the Ultra 5 226V likely explains much of its multicore lead in older Cinebench versions and PassMark multithread tests.

Clock speeds show a mixed picture. The Core 5 315 has a base clock of 1.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. The Core Ultra 5 226V runs a higher base clock of 2.10 GHz but only reaches 4.50 GHz boost. The higher base clock on the Ultra 5 226V may contribute to its lead in sustained workloads, while the Core 5 315's boost advantage appears limited to specific tests.

Cache configurations differ substantially. The Core 5 315 has 192 KB of L1 cache, 2.5 MB of L2 cache, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 5 226V lists 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The per-core L2 allocation on the Ultra 5 226V with 8 cores suggests a much larger total L2 footprint, though the database records it per core rather than as a total.

Memory support diverges as well. The Core 5 315 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory over a single-channel bus, delivering 59.7 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The Core Ultra 5 226V uses a dual-channel memory bus, though its supported memory types are listed as unknown and dependent on the motherboard. The dual-channel configuration likely provides higher memory throughput, which could influence bandwidth-sensitive workloads.

PCI Express generations differ. The Core 5 315 provides Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes. The Core Ultra 5 226V provides Gen 5 with 4 CPU lanes. The newer Gen 5 standard offers higher per-lane bandwidth, but the Core 5 315 has more lanes available.

Integrated graphics differ by name and configuration. The Core 5 315 includes Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The Core Ultra 5 226V features Arc 130V graphics. Socket types also differ, with the Core 5 315 using Intel BGA 1516 and the Core Ultra 5 226V using Intel BGA 2833. Neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Release timing places these chips in different periods. The Core Ultra 5 226V launched on 2024-09-23, while the Core 5 315 arrived later on 2026-04-15. The Core 5 315 has a recorded launch MSRP of $340, while no launch price exists for the Ultra 5 226V in the database. The Core 5 315 carries part number SAEFC, and the Ultra 5 226V uses SRPMQSRPMR.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to the Intel Core Ultra 5 226V as the stronger all-around mobile processor. It wins 13 of 17 head-to-head comparisons and posts a higher average benchmark score of 19368 versus 18188. The 8-core, 8-thread configuration with a 2.10 GHz base clock and dual-channel memory gives it a broad advantage in most measured workloads.

The Intel Core 5 315 is not without its strengths. Its Cinebench R23 multicore result of 12981 exceeds the Ultra 5 226V by 31.8%, which is the largest single margin in either direction across the entire benchmark set. The R23 single-core score also favors the Core 5 315 by 5%, and PassMark single-thread testing shows a 7.1% lead. These wins suggest the Core 5 315 has a more efficient implementation for certain modern rendering workloads and single-threaded tasks, despite having fewer cores and a lower base clock.

The process node is identical at 3 nm, but the foundry difference matters. Intel fabricates the Core 5 315, while TSMC produces the Ultra 5 226V. The Core Ultra 5 226V's earlier release date and higher aggregate performance indicate Intel's Lunar Lake design has matured well, while Wildcat Lake appears tuned for specific efficiency-oriented scenarios.

For workloads measured by Cinebench R15, R20, and most PassMark categories, the Ultra 5 226V is the clear choice. For Cinebench R23 rendering and PassMark single-thread tests, the Core 5 315 delivers better results. The percentile rankings, 72nd for the Core 5 315 and 73rd for the Ultra 5 226V, confirm these are closely matched processors overall, with the Ultra 5 226V holding a slight edge in the aggregate data.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 226V has 8 cores and 8 threads. The Intel Core 5 315 has 6 cores and 6 threads.

Q: What is the difference in Cinebench R23 multicore performance?

A: The Intel Core 5 315 scores 12981, which is 31.8% higher than the Intel Core Ultra 5 226V's 9848.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 226V has a boost clock of 4.50 GHz, while the Intel Core 5 315 reaches 4.40 GHz.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 226V averages 19368, while the Intel Core 5 315 averages 18188.

Q: What are the memory bus configurations?

A: The Intel Core 5 315 uses a single-channel memory bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core Ultra 5 226V uses a dual-channel memory bus.

Q: Which processor has the larger shared L3 cache?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 226V has 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Core 5 315 has 6 MB of shared L3 cache.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest win for the Intel Core 5 315 comes in Cinebench R23 multicore. Its score of 12981 beats the Ultra 5 226V's 9848 by 31.8%. This is the most decisive result in either direction and indicates the Core 5 315 handles the R23 rendering workload with substantially better efficiency. The R23 single-core test also goes to the Core 5 315, with 1832 versus 1744, a 5% margin.

The Core 5 315 also wins both PassMark single-thread recordings. The database lists both passmark_single_thread and passmark_singlethread with identical scores of 4021 for the Core 5 315 and 3754 for the Ultra 5 226V. The 7.1% delta applies to both entries.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 226V claims the remaining 13 benchmarks. Its most dominant win is Cinebench R15 single-core, where 267 beats 184 by 31.1%. This is the second-largest margin in the entire comparison. PassMark find prime numbers shows a 32.5% lead (166 versus 112), the largest PassMark margin. Cinebench R15 multicore goes to the Ultra 5 226V by 12.9% (1501 versus 1308). Cinebench R20 multicore and single-core both show 14.6% leads, with scores of 6381 versus 5452 and 900 versus 769 respectively.

The PassMark suite favors the Ultra 5 226V across the board. Data compression scores 170687 against 146143, a 14.4% gain. Data encryption delivers 12710 versus 11119, a 12.5% edge. Extended instructions improve 10.7% (14724 versus 13143). Floating point math gains 18.8% (52270 versus 42441). Integer math improves 18% (38647 versus 31690). Multithread shows 17850 versus 15272, a 14.4% difference. Physics scores 1449 against 1163, a 19.7% lead. Random string sorting reaches 20813 versus 17551, a 15.7% advantage.

The win distribution shows the Ultra 5 226V has broad superiority, but the Core 5 315's R23 multicore win stands out as an outlier worth investigating. The R23 test is newer than R15 and R20, and its workload may align better with the Wildcat Lake architecture's design priorities. The single-threaded PassMark wins for the Core 5 315 also suggest its boost behavior under light loads is effective, despite the lower base clock of 1.50 GHz.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 5 315 | Intel Core Ultra 5 226V |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 6 | 8 |

| Threads | 6 | 8 |

| Base clock | 1.50 GHz | 2.10 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.40 GHz | 4.50 GHz |

| TDP | 15 | 17 |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1516 | Intel BGA 2833 |

| Codename | Wildcat Lake | Lunar Lake |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Process node | 3 nm | 3 nm |

| L1 cache | 192 KB | 192 KB per core |

| L2 cache | 2.5 MB | 2.5 MB per core |

| L3 cache | 6 MB shared | 8 MB shared |

| Memory support | DDR5, LPDDR5X | Unknown, depends on motherboard |

| Memory bus | Single-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory bandwidth | 59.7 GB/s | Not recorded |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 6 lanes | Gen 5, 4 lanes |

| Integrated graphics | Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) | Arc 130V |

| Release date | 2026-04-15 | 2024-09-23 |

| Launch MSRP | $340 | Not recorded |

| Part number | SAEFC | SRPMQSRPMR |

The two processors share a 3 nm process node, 192 KB of L1 cache per core, and no ECC memory support. Neither has an unlocked multiplier. Both target the mobile market segment and remain in active production.

The core and thread counts favor the Ultra 5 226V with 8 versus 6. Clock speeds show the Ultra 5 226V ahead on base (2.10 GHz versus 1.50 GHz) and slightly ahead on boost (4.50 GHz versus 4.40 GHz). TDP differs by 2 watts, with the Ultra 5 226V rated at 17 and the Core 5 315 at 15.

Cache configurations differ in both allocation and size. The Core 5 315 lists total L2 of 2.5 MB, while the Ultra 5 226V lists 2.5 MB per core. The L3 cache favors the Ultra 5 226V at 8 MB shared versus 6 MB shared.

Memory and I/O show different design choices. The Core 5 315 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a single-channel bus and recorded bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. The Ultra 5 226V uses dual-channel memory with unspecified types. PCIe generation differs, with the Core 5 315 providing Gen 4 and the Ultra 5 226V providing Gen 5, though the latter has fewer lanes.

The release dates place these chips nearly two years apart. The Core Ultra 5 226V launched on 2024-09-23, while the Core 5 315 arrived on 2026-04-15. The Core 5 315 carries a recorded launch MSRP of $340, and the Ultra 5 226V has no recorded launch price.