Intel Core 5 315 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 228V Comparison

Intel Core 5 315 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 228V

The Intel Core 5 315 and the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V are two mobile processors that occupy different positions in Intel’s lineup, and the recorded benchmark data shows a clear split in their strengths. The Core Ultra 5 228V wins 13 of the 17 head-to-head tests, while the Core 5 315 takes 4 wins, including the most significant multi-core Cinebench result. The overall average benchmark score for the Core Ultra 5 228V is 21440, placing it in the 75th percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 5 315 averages 18188, sitting in the 72nd percentile. These figures indicate that the Core Ultra 5 228V is the stronger all-around performer in the database, but the Core 5 315 has specific advantages that matter for certain workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result in the head-to-head comparison is the Cinebench R23 multi-core test. The Core 5 315 scores 12981, while the Core Ultra 5 228V scores 9932, giving the Core 5 315 a 30.7% advantage. This is the largest delta in either direction across all recorded benchmarks. The result is unexpected given the Core Ultra 5 228V has 8 cores and 8 threads compared to 6 cores and 6 threads on the Core 5 315, but the data is clear: in this specific rendering workload, the Core 5 315 delivers substantially higher multi-threaded performance.

The Core 5 315 also wins the Cinebench R23 single-core test, scoring 1832 against 1758 for the Core Ultra 5 228V, a 4.2% lead. In the Passmark single-thread tests, the same pattern repeats: the Core 5 315 scores 4021 in both Passmark single-thread and Passmark singlethread tests, while the Core Ultra 5 228V scores 3836 in both, giving the Core 5 315 a 4.8% advantage. These single-thread wins suggest the Core 5 315 has a higher per-core efficiency in certain workloads, despite the Core Ultra 5 228V having a higher boost clock of 4.50 GHz compared to 4.40 GHz.

The Core Ultra 5 228V dominates the older Cinebench versions. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it scores 1502.5 against 1308, a 12.9% lead. In Cinebench R15 single-core, it scores 267 against 184, a 31.1% lead, which is the second-largest margin in the entire comparison. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the Core Ultra 5 228V scores 6491 against 5452, a 16% lead, and in Cinebench R20 single-core, it scores 916 against 769, also a 16% lead. The R15 single-core gap is particularly notable, as it shows a much larger performance difference than the newer R23 single-core test, which the Core 5 315 actually wins.

In the Passmark suite, the Core Ultra 5 228V wins every test except the two single-thread variants. The largest Passmark margin is in find prime numbers, where the Core Ultra 5 228V scores 168 against 112, a 33.3% lead. Physics shows a 24.4% lead (1538 vs 1163), floating point math shows a 20.4% lead (53310 vs 42441), and integer math shows a 20.1% lead (39679 vs 31690). The Core Ultra 5 228V also leads in multithread (18227 vs 15272, a 16.2% margin), random string sorting (21254 vs 17551, a 17.4% margin), data compression (173924 vs 146143, a 16% margin), data encryption (13032 vs 11119, a 14.7% margin), and extended instructions (14801 vs 13143, a 11.2% margin). These results show that the Core Ultra 5 228V is consistently faster in most compute-intensive and data-processing tasks.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 5 315 wins in the Cinebench R23 multi-core test, Cinebench R23 single-core, and both Passmark single-thread tests. The R23 multi-core result is the standout, as it shows a 30.7% advantage over the Core Ultra 5 228V, which is the largest margin in the entire dataset. This suggests the Core 5 315 is well-suited for workloads that rely on the most recent Cinebench rendering engine, where its architecture appears to scale better despite having fewer cores. The single-thread wins in R23 and Passmark indicate that the Core 5 315 has a slight edge in lightly threaded applications, at least in these specific tests.

The Core Ultra 5 228V wins the remaining 13 tests, covering all other Cinebench versions and the majority of Passmark tests. Its advantages range from 4.8% in the single-thread Passmark tests (which it actually loses) to 33.3% in find prime numbers. The Core Ultra 5 228V is particularly strong in physics (24.4% lead), floating point math (20.4% lead), and integer math (20.1% lead), which are common in scientific and engineering workloads. It also leads in data compression and encryption by roughly 15-16%, making it a better choice for file handling and security-related tasks. The Cinebench R15 single-core result, a 31.1% lead, is the second-largest margin, showing that the Core Ultra 5 228V has a significant advantage in that older benchmark version.

The split is clear: the Core 5 315 wins in the newest Cinebench tests and single-thread Passmark tests, while the Core Ultra 5 228V wins in all other measured areas, including older Cinebench versions and most Passmark workloads. The Core Ultra 5 228V also has a higher overall average benchmark score (21440 vs 18188), a higher percentile ranking (75th vs 72nd), and more total wins (13 vs 4).

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher overall average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V has an average benchmark score of 21440, while the Intel Core 5 315 has an average score of 18188. The Core Ultra 5 228V also ranks in the 75th percentile of all CPUs, compared to the 72nd percentile for the Core 5 315.

Q: What is the largest performance gap in the head-to-head comparison?

A: The largest gap is in the Cinebench R23 multi-core test, where the Intel Core 5 315 scores 12981 against 9932 for the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V, a 30.7% advantage. The second-largest gap is in Cinebench R15 single-core, where the Core Ultra 5 228V leads by 31.1% (267 vs 184).

Q: How do the two processors compare in single-threaded performance?

A: The Intel Core 5 315 wins the Cinebench R23 single-core test (1832 vs 1758, a 4.2% lead) and both Passmark single-thread tests (4021 vs 3836, a 4.8% lead). The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V wins the Cinebench R15 single-core test (267 vs 184, a 31.1% lead) and the Cinebench R20 single-core test (916 vs 769, a 16% lead).

Q: Which processor performs better in Passmark tests?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V wins 6 of the 8 Passmark tests, including data compression (173924 vs 146143), data encryption (13032 vs 11119), extended instructions (14801 vs 13143), find prime numbers (168 vs 112), floating point math (53310 vs 42441), integer math (39679 vs 31690), multithread (18227 vs 15272), physics (1538 vs 1163), and random string sorting (21254 vs 17551). The Intel Core 5 315 wins only the two single-thread Passmark tests.

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

A: The Intel Core 5 315 has 6 cores and 6 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V has 8 cores and 8 threads. Despite having more cores and threads, the Core Ultra 5 228V loses the Cinebench R23 multi-core test to the Core 5 315.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V has a boost clock of 4.50 GHz, while the Intel Core 5 315 has a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. The base clock is also higher on the Core Ultra 5 228V at 2.10 GHz, compared to 1.50 GHz for the Core 5 315.

Specification Differences

The Intel Core 5 315 uses the Intel BGA 1516 socket, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V uses the Intel BGA 2833 socket. The Core 5 315 has a TDP of 15, and the Core Ultra 5 228V has a TDP of 17. 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 228V has a dual-channel memory bus, and its memory support is listed as unknown and dependent on the motherboard, with no memory bandwidth figure recorded. The Core 5 315 uses PCIe Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only), while the Core Ultra 5 228V uses PCIe Gen 5 with 4 lanes (CPU only). The integrated graphics differ: the Core 5 315 has Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores, while the Core Ultra 5 228V has Arc 130V. The Core 5 315 has a launch MSRP of $340, while no launch MSRP is recorded for the Core Ultra 5 228V. The release dates are also different, with the Core 5 315 released later than the Core Ultra 5 228V. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier, and both are listed as active in production.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core 5 315 is based on the Wildcat Lake architecture, with no specific series designation. It uses a 3 nm process node manufactured by Intel. Its cache configuration includes 192 KB of L1 cache, 2.5 MB of L2 cache, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V is based on the Lunar Lake architecture and belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2. It also uses a 3 nm process node, but it is manufactured by TSMC. Its cache configuration includes 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 2.5 MB of L2 cache per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 5 228V has 8 cores and 8 threads, while the Core 5 315 has 6 cores and 6 threads. Both processors are mobile segments, both lack ECC memory support, and both are not multiplier unlocked. The foundry difference is notable: Intel fabricates the Core 5 315, while TSMC fabricates the Core Ultra 5 228V, despite both using the same 3 nm process node. The cache structure also differs, with the Core Ultra 5 228V having per-core L1 and L2 caches, while the Core 5 315 lists its L1 and L2 as aggregate amounts. The L3 cache is larger on the Core Ultra 5 228V at 8 MB shared, compared to 6 MB shared on the Core 5 315.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V is the stronger performer in the majority of recorded benchmarks, winning 13 of 17 head-to-head tests and posting a higher average benchmark score (21440 vs 18188) and a higher percentile ranking (75th vs 72nd). It shows particular strength in Passmark workloads, with double-digit leads in most tests, and it also leads in the older Cinebench R15 and R20 versions. The Core Ultra 5 228V achieves these results with 8 cores and 8 threads, a 4.50 GHz boost clock, and a dual-channel memory bus, which likely contribute to its broad performance advantage.

The Intel Core 5 315 is the better choice for Cinebench R23 workloads, where it leads by 30.7% in multi-core and 4.2% in single-core. It also wins both Passmark single-thread tests by 4.8%. These wins suggest that the Core 5 315 has a specific architectural advantage in the newest Cinebench rendering engine and in certain lightly threaded tasks. Its lower TDP of 15, compared to 17 for the Core Ultra 5 228V, may also be relevant for systems where power draw is a consideration, though the database does not record power consumption measurements.

For users running the most recent Cinebench R23 benchmarks or single-threaded Passmark tests, the Core 5 315 delivers the higher scores. For all other recorded workloads, including data compression, encryption, physics, floating point math, integer math, and the older Cinebench versions, the Core Ultra 5 228V is consistently faster. The overall average score and percentile ranking further support the Core Ultra 5 228V as the more capable processor in the database. The choice between the two depends on which specific workloads matter most, but the recorded data favors the Core Ultra 5 228V across the broader set of tests.