Intel Core 5 315 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 255H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark comparison between the Intel Core 5 315 and the Intel Core Ultra 7 255H is defined by a notable split in workload performance. The Core Ultra 7 255H wins 16 of the 17 recorded head-to-head tests, with the Core 5 315 securing only a single victory. That one win, however, is substantial.

The Core 5 315 takes the Cinebench R23 multi-core test with a score of 12981 against the Core Ultra 7 255H's 9240, a 40.5% advantage. This is the largest single delta in either direction across the entire benchmark set and indicates that the 6-core, 6-thread Wildcat Lake part can outperform the 16-core, 16-thread Arrow Lake-H chip in this specific rendering workload. The result is surprising given the Core Ultra 7 255H's higher core count and higher boost clock, but the data is unambiguous.

Outside of that Cinebench R23 multi-core result, the Core Ultra 7 255H dominates across the remaining tests, often by wide margins. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Core Ultra 7 255H scores 1515 against 1308, a 13.7% lead. The single-core gap is larger in Cinebench R15, where the Core Ultra 7 255H scores 251 versus 184, a 26.7% advantage. Cinebench R20 shows a 14.6% lead for the Core Ultra 7 255H in both multi-core (6381 to 5452) and single-core (900 to 769). Cinebench R23 single-core is nearly a tie, with the Core Ultra 7 255H ahead by just 0.6% (1843 to 1832).

The Passmark suite reveals the Core Ultra 7 255H's broad strength in compute-heavy tasks. Data compression shows a 51.1% lead (298850 to 146143), data encryption shows a 52.5% lead (23395 to 11119), and extended instructions show a 44.7% lead (23755 to 13143). The largest Passmark deltas come in the math workloads: floating point math is 57% higher (98796 to 42441), integer math is 59.4% higher (77975 to 31690), and prime number finding is 63% higher (303 to 112). Multithread performance is 50.3% higher (30703 to 15272), physics is 48.4% higher (2254 to 1163), and random string sorting is 51.3% higher (36058 to 17551). Single-thread Passmark scores are closer, with the Core Ultra 7 255H ahead by 6.9% (4317 to 4021).

The average benchmark score tells a similar story. The Core Ultra 7 255H records an average of 33537, placing it at the 83rd percentile of all CPUs. The Core 5 315 averages 18188, placing it at the 72nd percentile. The Core Ultra 7 255H's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 5 240 (33542, 0% delta) and the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS (33667, -0.4% delta). The Core 5 315's nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 9274F (18189, 0% delta) and the Intel Core i7-9700 (18180, 0% delta). These comparison points confirm that the Core 5 315's average performance sits in a lower tier despite its single standout Cinebench R23 multi-core result.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel design lineages. The Core 5 315 uses the Wildcat Lake codename and belongs to the Core 5 (Wildcat Lake) generation. The Core Ultra 7 255H uses the Arrow Lake-H codename, belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2 and the Ultra 7 (Arrow Lake-H) generation, and implements the Arrow Lake architecture.

The core configurations differ sharply. The Core 5 315 has 6 cores and 6 threads, meaning no simultaneous multithreading. The Core Ultra 7 255H has 16 cores and 16 threads, also without multithreading but with a far higher physical core count. Base clocks are 1.50 GHz for the Core 5 315 and 2.00 GHz for the Core Ultra 7 255H. Boost clocks are 4.40 GHz and 5.10 GHz respectively.

Both processors are built on a 3 nm process node, but the foundries differ. The Core 5 315 is fabricated by Intel, while the Core Ultra 7 255H is fabricated by TSMC. The Core 5 315 uses the Intel BGA 1516 socket, and the Core Ultra 7 255H uses the Intel BGA 2049 socket.

Cache hierarchies are not directly comparable. 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 7 255H has 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. The per-core L2 sizing on the Core Ultra 7 255H, combined with the larger shared L3, gives it a substantial cache capacity advantage that shows up in the Passmark workloads.

Memory support is similar in type, as both accept DDR5 and LPDDR5X, but the memory bus differs. The Core 5 315 uses a single-channel memory bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Core Ultra 7 255H uses a dual-channel memory bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. That bandwidth difference likely contributes to the Core Ultra 7 255H's large leads in data compression, encryption, and random string sorting.

PCIe support also differs. The Core 5 315 offers Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only), while the Core Ultra 7 255H offers Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only). The integrated graphics are different as well: the Core 5 315 has Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores, while the Core Ultra 7 255H has Arc Graphics 140T. ECC memory support is present on the Core Ultra 7 255H but not on the Core 5 315. The power envelope differs, with the Core 5 315 rated at 15 W TDP and the Core Ultra 7 255H rated at 28 W TDP.

The release dates are not identical. The Core Ultra 7 255H was released on 2025-01-12, while the Core 5 315 was released on 2026-04-15. Both parts are currently listed as Active in production status, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 5 315's single benchmark victory in Cinebench R23 multi-core is the defining data point for that processor. A 40.5% advantage over the Core Ultra 7 255H in that specific rendering workload suggests that the Wildcat Lake design, despite its 6-core configuration and lower TDP, can deliver competitive multi-threaded rendering performance under certain conditions. Users running Cinebench R23 multi-core as a primary workload would see the Core 5 315 ahead by a wide margin.

Every other measured workload favors the Core Ultra 7 255H. The Passmark suite covers a range of compute patterns, and the Core Ultra 7 255H leads in all of them. Integer math, floating point math, and prime number finding are all roughly 57% to 63% higher, indicating a strong ALU and FPU throughput advantage. Data compression and encryption are approximately 51% to 52% higher, reflecting the dual-channel memory bandwidth and larger cache. Multithread and physics scores are about 48% to 50% higher, consistent with the 16-core physical configuration.

Single-thread performance also favors the Core Ultra 7 255H, though the margins are smaller. Passmark single-thread is 6.9% higher, Cinebench R23 single-core is 0.6% higher, Cinebench R20 single-core is 14.6% higher, and Cinebench R15 single-core is 26.7% higher. The Core Ultra 7 255H's higher boost clock of 5.10 GHz versus 4.40 GHz explains part of this advantage.

The Core Ultra 7 255H also sits in a higher overall performance percentile at 83 compared to the Core 5 315's 72. Its average benchmark score of 33537 is roughly 84% higher than the Core 5 315's 18188. The Core 5 315's nearest rivals, including the AMD EPYC 9274F and Intel Core i7-9700, all cluster near the 18188 average, confirming that the Core 5 315 performs in line with those parts on average. The Core Ultra 7 255H, by contrast, clusters with the AMD Ryzen 5 240 and AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS, both of which average near 33537.

The use-case split is therefore straightforward: the Core 5 315 wins in Cinebench R23 multi-core rendering, while the Core Ultra 7 255H wins in virtually all other measured categories, including single-threaded tasks, math workloads, data processing, and overall average performance.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 255H has an average benchmark score of 33537, while the Intel Core 5 315 has an average benchmark score of 18188.

Q: How many head-to-head benchmark tests does each processor win?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 255H wins 16 of the 17 head-to-head tests. The Intel Core 5 315 wins 1 test, which is Cinebench R23 multi-core.

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

A: The largest gap is in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the Intel Core 5 315 leads by 40.5% with a score of 12981 versus 9240 for the Intel Core Ultra 7 255H.

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

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 255H wins in all single-thread tests. Passmark single-thread is 4317 versus 4021 (6.9% higher), Cinebench R23 single-core is 1843 versus 1832 (0.6% higher), Cinebench R20 single-core is 900 versus 769 (14.6% higher), and Cinebench R15 single-core is 251 versus 184 (26.7% higher).

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 7 255H has 16 cores and 16 threads.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 255H supports ECC memory. The Intel Core 5 315 does not.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification category recorded in the database.

The Intel Core 5 315 uses the Wildcat Lake codename and belongs to the Core 5 (Wildcat Lake) generation. The Intel Core Ultra 7 255H uses the Arrow Lake-H codename, belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2 and the Ultra 7 (Arrow Lake-H) generation, and implements the Arrow Lake architecture.

Core counts differ: 6 cores and 6 threads for the Core 5 315, 16 cores and 16 threads for the Core Ultra 7 255H. Base clock is 1.50 GHz for the Core 5 315 and 2.00 GHz for the Core Ultra 7 255H. Boost clock is 4.40 GHz for the Core 5 315 and 5.10 GHz for the Core Ultra 7 255H. TDP is 15 W for the Core 5 315 and 28 W for the Core Ultra 7 255H.

Sockets differ: Intel BGA 1516 for the Core 5 315, Intel BGA 2049 for the Core Ultra 7 255H. Both use a 3 nm process node, but the foundry is Intel for the Core 5 315 and TSMC for the Core Ultra 7 255H.

Cache configurations differ. 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 7 255H has 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache.

Memory support is the same in type (DDR5, LPDDR5X), but the memory bus and bandwidth differ. The Core 5 315 has a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Core Ultra 7 255H has a dual-channel bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. ECC memory is supported only on the Core Ultra 7 255H.

PCIe support differs: Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only) for the Core 5 315, Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only) for the Core Ultra 7 255H. Integrated graphics differ: Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores for the Core 5 315, Arc Graphics 140T for the Core Ultra 7 255H.

Release dates differ: 2026-04-15 for the Core 5 315, 2025-01-12 for the Core Ultra 7 255H. The launch MSRP for the Core 5 315 is $340. The Core Ultra 7 255H has no recorded launch MSRP. Part numbers are SAEFC for the Core 5 315 and SRQAN for the Core Ultra 7 255H. Both are Active in production status, both target the Mobile market segment, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.