Intel Core 5 315 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 265T Comparison

Intel
INTEL

Intel Core 5 315

CORE STATE Wildcat Lake
CORE SPECS 6 Cores / 6 Threads
CLOCK SPEED 1.5 Base / 4.4 GHz Turbo
CACHE 6 MB (shared)
MAX TDP 15W
ARCHITECTURE Wildcat Lake
nm
PROCESS 3 nm
LAUNCH DATE 2026
VS
Intel
INTEL

Core Ultra 7 265T

CORE STATE Arrow Lake-S
CORE SPECS 20 Cores / 20 Threads
CLOCK SPEED 1.5 Base / 5.3 GHz Turbo
CACHE 30 MB (shared)
MAX TDP 35W
ARCHITECTURE Arrow Lake
nm
PROCESS 3 nm
LAUNCH DATE 2025

PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS

cinebench_cinebench_r15_multicore
1,308
3,180
cinebench_cinebench_r15_singlecore
184
449
cinebench_cinebench_r20_multicore
5,452
13,254
cinebench_cinebench_r20_singlecore
769
1,871
cinebench_cinebench_r23_multicore
12,981
31,558
cinebench_cinebench_r23_singlecore
1,832
4,455
passmark_data_compression
146,143
370,158
passmark_data_encryption
11,119
29,687
passmark_extended_instructions
13,143
28,609
passmark_find_prime_numbers
112
322
passmark_floating_point_math
42,441
129,817
passmark_integer_math
31,690
104,943
passmark_multithread
15,272
37,084
passmark_physics
1,163
2,391
passmark_random_string_sorting
17,551
44,400
passmark_single_thread
4,021
4,338
passmark_singlethread
4,021
4,338

Analysis: Intel Core 5 315 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 265T

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark comparison between the Intel Core 5 315 and the Intel Core Ultra 7 265T is decisive. The recorded data shows the Core Ultra 7 265T winning all 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons. The Core 5 315 does not register a single victory across any of the Cinebench or PassMark tests. This is not a close contest with trade-offs; the Core Ultra 7 265T delivers superior results in every measured workload category.

The use-case split is therefore straightforward. The Core Ultra 7 265T is the stronger option for single-threaded tasks, multi-threaded rendering, physics calculations, encryption, compression, and math workloads. The Core 5 315, while competitive in single-thread performance relative to its own multi-core output, consistently trails by substantial margins. The data indicates the Core Ultra 7 265T targets desktop workloads where sustained throughput matters, while the Core 5 315 is a mobile-oriented part with a 15 W TDP, designed for efficiency rather than top-tier performance.

The closest margin appears in single-thread tests. The Core Ultra 7 265T scores 4338 in PassMark single-thread, only 7.3% ahead of the Core 5 315's 4021. This is the narrowest gap in the entire dataset. For applications that rely heavily on single-core responsiveness, the difference is modest. However, once workloads scale across cores, the gap becomes enormous, with the Core Ultra 7 265T leading by 58.8% to 69.8% depending on the test.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265T boosts to 5.30 GHz, while the Intel Core 5 315 boosts to 4.40 GHz.

Q: How many cores does each processor have?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265T has 20 cores and 20 threads. The Intel Core 5 315 has 6 cores and 6 threads.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265T supports dual-channel DDR5 with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core 5 315 supports single-channel DDR5 and LPDDR5X with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265T has 30 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Core 5 315 has 6 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: What is the production status of both processors?

A: Both the Intel Core 5 315 and the Intel Core Ultra 7 265T are listed as Active in production.

Q: Are both processors on the same process node?

A: Yes, both use a 3 nm process node, though the Core 5 315 is fabricated by Intel while the Core Ultra 7 265T is fabricated by TSMC.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench suite shows consistent dominance for the Intel Core Ultra 7 265T. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core Ultra 7 265T scores 31558 against the Core 5 315's 12981, a 58.9% advantage. The single-core R23 result follows the same pattern: 4455 versus 1832, again a 58.9% delta. The identical percentage across R15, R20, and R23 multi-core tests (58.9%) suggests the performance ratio is stable regardless of the rendering workload intensity.

PassMark integer math delivers the largest margin in the entire comparison. The Core Ultra 7 265T scores 104943 while the Core 5 315 manages 31690, a 69.8% difference. Floating-point math also shows a wide gap: 129817 versus 42441, a 67.3% lead. These results indicate the Core Ultra 7 265T has substantially more compute throughput for both integer and floating-point operations.

The smallest gap outside single-thread tests appears in PassMark physics. The Core Ultra 7 265T scores 2391 against 1163 for the Core 5 315, a 51.4% lead. While still a large margin, it is the least severe of the multi-threaded workloads. Data compression and encryption tests show the Core Ultra 7 265T ahead by 60.5% and 62.5% respectively. Random string sorting also results in a 60.5% advantage for the Core Ultra 7 265T.

Extended instructions show a 54.1% lead for the Core Ultra 7 265T, and finding prime numbers results in a 65.2% advantage. The PassMark multi-thread score of 37084 versus 15272 represents a 58.8% lead. Across every benchmark, the Core Ultra 7 265T maintains a minimum lead of 7.3% (single-thread) and a maximum of 69.8% (integer math). The data confirms that the Core Ultra 7 265T is not merely faster in select scenarios but is categorically ahead in all recorded tests.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every major specification category. The Core Ultra 7 265T has 20 cores and 20 threads, while the Core 5 315 has 6 cores and 6 threads. The Core Ultra 7 265T boosts to 5.30 GHz, exceeding the 4.40 GHz boost of the Core 5 315. Both share a 1.50 GHz base clock.

The Core Ultra 7 265T carries a 35 W TDP, more than double the 15 W TDP of the Core 5 315. The socket types differ entirely: the Core Ultra 7 265T uses Intel Socket 1851, while the Core 5 315 uses Intel BGA 1516. The Core Ultra 7 265T is a desktop part, whereas the Core 5 315 is marked as Mobile.

Memory support also diverges. The Core Ultra 7 265T supports DDR5 with a dual-channel bus delivering 102.4 GB/s. The Core 5 315 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X but uses a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. Neither processor supports ECC memory.

PCIe connectivity differs substantially. The Core Ultra 7 265T provides Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes. The Core 5 315 provides Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes. The integrated graphics differ as well: the Core Ultra 7 265T uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units, while the Core 5 315 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores.

Both processors have a launch MSRP recorded. The Core 5 315 has a launch MSRP of $340, and the Core Ultra 7 265T has a launch MSRP of $384. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split is clear from the codenames. The Core 5 315 is based on Wildcat Lake, while the Core Ultra 7 265T uses Arrow Lake-S. The Core Ultra 7 265T belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2 generation, while the Core 5 315 is from the Core 5 (Wildcat Lake) generation.

Both processors use a 3 nm process node, but the foundry differs. The Core 5 315 is fabricated by Intel, while the Core Ultra 7 265T is fabricated by TSMC. The Core Ultra 7 265T has a transistor count of 17,800 million and a die size of 243 mm². The Core 5 315 has no recorded transistor count or die size in the database.

Cache architecture shows major differences. The Core Ultra 7 265T has 192 KB of L1 cache per core and 3 MB of L2 cache per core, plus 30 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core 5 315 has 192 KB of L1 cache, 2.5 MB of L2 cache, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The per-core L2 design of the Core Ultra 7 265T scales with its 20 cores, providing significantly more total cache capacity.

The integrated graphics architectures differ as well. The Core Ultra 7 265T uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units, a more substantial GPU configuration. The Core 5 315 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The Core Ultra 7 265T also offers Gen 5 PCIe connectivity with 20 lanes, while the Core 5 315 is limited to Gen 4 with 6 lanes.

The Core Ultra 7 265T was released earlier, with a release date of 2026-01-06, while the Core 5 315 has a release date of 2026-04-15. The part numbers differ: SRQCS for the Core Ultra 7 265T and SAEFC for the Core 5 315. The Core Ultra 7 265T sits at the 90th percentile among all CPUs in the database, while the Core 5 315 sits at the 72nd percentile. The average benchmark score for the Core Ultra 7 265T is 47697, compared to 18188 for the Core 5 315.

DETAILED SPECIFICATIONS

SPECIFICATION
5 315
Ultra 7 265T
Core Specs
Cores
6
20 +233.3%
Threads
6
20 +233.3%
Base Clock (GHz)
1.5
1.5 0.0%
Boost Clock (GHz)
4.4
5.3 +20.5%
Frequency (GHz)
1.5
1.5 0.0%
Turbo Clock (GHz)
4.4
5.3 +20.5%
Multiplier
15
15 0.0%
SMP CPUs
1
1 0.0%
Cache
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)
Power
TDP (W)
15
35 +133.3%
PL1
35 W
PL2
112 W
Architecture
Architecture
Arrow Lake
Codename
Wildcat Lake
Arrow Lake-S
Generation
Core 5 (Wildcat Lake)
Ultra 7 (Arrow Lake)
Process Size
3 nm
3 nm
Transistors
17,800 million
Die Size
243 mm²
Foundry
Intel
TSMC
Memory
Memory Support
DDR5, LPDDR5X
DDR5
Memory Bus
Single-channel
Dual-channel
Memory Bandwidth
59.7 GB/s
102.4 GB/s
ECC Memory
No
No
DDR5 Speed
6400 MT/s
Platform
Socket
Intel BGA 1516
Intel Socket 1851
Chipsets
Z890, B860, W880, Q870, H810
PCIe
Gen 4, 6 Lanes(CPU only)
Gen 5, 20 Lanes(CPU only)
Intel Hybrid
Hybrid Cores
P-Cores: 2 E-Cores: 4
P-Cores: 8 E-Cores: 12
E-Core Frequency
1400 MHz up to 3.3 GHz
1200 MHz up to 4.6 GHz
P-Core Turbo
5.2 GHz
AI/NPU
NPU
Yes / 15 TOPS
Graphics
Integrated Graphics
Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe)
Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU
Other
Market
Mobile
Desktop
Production Status
Active
Active
Launch Price
$340
$384
Part Number
SAEFC
SRQCS
Package
FC-BGA
FC-LGA18W
Tj Max
100°C
105°C
View Core 5 315 Details View Core Ultra 7 265T Details