Intel Core 5 315 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data delivers an unambiguous verdict: the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus wins all 17 recorded head-to-head comparisons against the Intel Core 5 315. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus sits in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 5 315 ranks in the 72nd percentile. Their average benchmark scores, 66855 versus 18188, place them in completely different performance classes.

The Core 5 315 is a 6-core, 6-thread mobile processor built for efficiency, with a 15 TDP and single-channel memory support. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is an 18-core, 18-thread desktop processor with a 125 TDP, dual-channel memory, and PCIe Gen 5 connectivity. These are not competing products for the same buyer; they serve different market segments entirely.

Buyers needing desktop-class multi-threaded throughput, high core counts, and maximum memory bandwidth should select the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus. Buyers constrained by power envelopes and needing a mobile socket should select the Core 5 315, accepting its substantial performance disadvantage for the sake of portability and low power draw.

Architecture Differences

Both processors use a 3 nm process node, but the foundry differs. The Core 5 315 is fabricated by Intel, while the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is fabricated by TSMC. The Core 5 315 uses the Wildcat Lake codename with a Core 5 (Wildcat Lake) generation designation, while the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus uses Arrow Lake Refresh with an Ultra 5 (Arrow Lake) generation designation.

The core configurations diverge sharply. The Core 5 315 provides 6 cores and 6 threads with no hyperthreading, while the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus provides 18 cores and 18 threads. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has a base clock of 4.20 GHz and boost clock of 5.30 GHz, compared to the Core 5 315's 1.50 GHz base and 4.40 GHz boost.

Cache hierarchies 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 250K Plus carries 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 30 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus also lists 17,800 million transistors and a 243 mm² die size, while the Core 5 315 has no recorded transistor or die size data.

Memory support separates the two. The Core 5 315 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory over a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus supports DDR5 over a dual-channel bus with 115.2 GB/s bandwidth. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus also supports ECC memory, which the Core 5 315 does not.

PCIe capabilities differ as well. The Core 5 315 provides Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes, while the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus provides Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes. Integrated graphics also differ: the Core 5 315 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores, while the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 EU. The multiplier is unlocked on the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus, while the Core 5 315 is locked.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus dominates every recorded benchmark. The largest single-core gap appears in Cinebench R20 single-core, where the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus scores 2603 versus the Core 5 315's 769, a 70.5% advantage. Cinebench R15 single-core shows the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus at 328 versus 184, a 43.9% lead. Cinebench R23 single-core records 2261 versus 1832, a 19% lead. PassMark single-thread shows 4757 versus 4021, a 15.5% lead.

Multi-core results amplify the gap dramatically. Cinebench R23 multi-core gives the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus 30867 versus 12981, a 57.9% advantage. Cinebench R20 multi-core records 18442 versus 5452, a 70.4% lead. Cinebench R15 multi-core shows 4640 versus 1308, a 71.8% lead.

PassMark multi-thread results follow the same pattern. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus scores 51596 versus 15272, a 70.4% advantage. PassMark integer math gives 125091 versus 31690, a 74.7% lead. PassMark floating-point math records 162692 versus 42441, a 73.9% advantage. PassMark data compression shows 568721 versus 146143, a 74.3% lead. PassMark data encryption delivers 42144 versus 11119, a 73.6% advantage. PassMark extended instructions records 44565 versus 13143, a 70.5% lead. PassMark find prime numbers shows 486 versus 112, a 77% advantage. PassMark physics gives 3494 versus 1163, a 66.7% lead. PassMark random string sorting records 69090 versus 17551, a 74.6% advantage.

The Core 5 315 does not win a single recorded comparison. The smallest margin is in PassMark single-thread, where the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus leads by only 15.5%, indicating the Core 5 315's single-core performance is its most competitive area relative to the desktop part.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has 18 cores and 18 threads. The Intel Core 5 315 has 6 cores and 6 threads. Neither processor supports additional threads beyond its core count.

Q: What is the performance percentile difference between the two?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus ranks in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel Core 5 315 ranks in the 72nd percentile. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has an average benchmark score of 66855, compared to 18188 for the Core 5 315.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus supports ECC memory. The Intel Core 5 315 does not support ECC memory.

Q: What memory bandwidth does each processor support?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus supports dual-channel memory with 115.2 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core 5 315 supports single-channel memory with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What are the TDP ratings for each processor?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has a TDP of 125. The Intel Core 5 315 has a TDP of 15.

Q: Which processor has an unlocked multiplier?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has an unlocked multiplier. The Intel Core 5 315 does not have an unlocked multiplier.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus wins in every recorded benchmark category. Its advantages are most pronounced in multi-threaded workloads, where its 18 cores and dual-channel memory bandwidth deliver leads of 57.9% to 77% across Cinebench and PassMark tests. The largest single benchmark advantage is 77% in PassMark find prime numbers, followed by 74.7% in PassMark integer math and 74.6% in PassMark random string sorting.

The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus also leads in single-threaded performance, though by smaller margins. PassMark single-thread shows a 15.5% advantage, while Cinebench R23 single-core shows a 19% advantage. These results indicate the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus offers both higher peak frequency and better per-core efficiency in the recorded tests.

The Intel Core 5 315 has no benchmark wins in the database. Its strengths lie outside raw performance: a 15 TDP versus 125 TDP, mobile socket compatibility, LPDDR5X memory support, and a smaller footprint. The 3 nm process node from Intel and the Wildcat Lake architecture target low-power mobile devices where the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus cannot operate due to its desktop socket and higher power requirements.

For workloads such as Cinebench rendering, PassMark integer and floating-point math, data compression, encryption, extended instruction sets, prime number finding, physics calculations, and random string sorting, the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is the clear choice. The Core 5 315 suits scenarios where power efficiency and mobile form factor matter more than benchmark scores.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 5 315 | Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus |

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

| Cores | 6 | 18 |

| Threads | 6 | 18 |

| Base Clock | 1.50 GHz | 4.20 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.40 GHz | 5.30 GHz |

| TDP | 15 | 125 |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1516 | Intel Socket 1851 |

| Codename | Wildcat Lake | Arrow Lake Refresh |

| Process Node | 3 nm (Intel) | 3 nm (TSMC) |

| Transistors | Not recorded | 17,800 million |

| Die Size | Not recorded | 243 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 192 KB | 192 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 2.5 MB | 3 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 6 MB (shared) | 30 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR5, LPDDR5X | DDR5 |

| Memory Bus | Single-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 59.7 GB/s | 115.2 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 6 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 20 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Production Status | Active | Active |

| Release Date | 2026-04-15 | 2026-03-10 |

| Launch MSRP | $340 | $199 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | Yes |

| Part Number | SAEFC | SA4UZ |