Intel Core 5 315 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 266V Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a clear overall picture, but the details reveal a fascinating split. The Intel Core Ultra 7 266V wins 15 of the 17 recorded head-to-head comparisons, while the Intel Core 5 315 takes only 2. The margin of victory for the Core Ultra 7 is consistently substantial across most workloads, yet the Core 5 315's single win is notable for its direction.

In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core Ultra 7 266V scores 16544 against the Core 5 315's 12981, a difference of 21.5%. The single-core R23 result follows the same pattern: 2335 versus 1832, again a 21.5% gap. These consistent deltas across the Cinebench suite suggest a fundamental performance advantage rather than workload-specific behavior. The R15 multi-core test shows 1667 against 1308, and R20 multi-core shows 6948 against 5452. Every Cinebench iteration, whether single or multi-threaded, lands at nearly the same 21.5% deficit for the Core 5 315.

The Passmark suite reinforces this trend with even larger margins in some areas. The integer math test shows 41558 versus 31690, a 23.7% advantage for the Core Ultra 7. Floating point math widens to 25.4% with 56923 versus 42441. The physics test shows 1608 versus 1163, a 27.7% gap. Most striking is the find prime numbers test, where the Core Ultra 7 scores 191 against the Core 5 315's 112, a dramatic 41.4% difference. This suggests the Core Ultra 7's architecture handles certain integer-heavy, branch-dense workloads with far greater efficiency.

Data compression and encryption also favor the Core Ultra 7, with deltas of 21.9% and 19.6% respectively. Random string sorting shows a 23.4% advantage, and the multithread Passmark score is 19461 versus 15272, a 21.5% gap. Extended instructions show a relatively smaller 17.5% delta, still favoring the Core Ultra 7.

The single exception to this pattern is the Passmark single-thread test. Here, the Core 5 315 scores 4021 against the Core Ultra 7's 3943, a 2% advantage. This is the only benchmark where the Core 5 315 leads, and the margin is modest. The same result appears twice in the data under slightly different test names (passmark_single_thread and passmark_singlethread), confirming the finding. This inversion is curious: in Cinebench R23 single-core, the Core Ultra 7 leads by 21.5%, yet in Passmark's single-thread test, the Core 5 315 edges ahead. The two tests likely measure different aspects of single-thread performance, with Passmark's workload favoring the Core 5 315's specific execution characteristics.

The average benchmark score tells the broader story: the Core Ultra 7 266V averages 23297, placing it in the 76th percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 5 315 averages 18188, in the 72nd percentile. The Core Ultra 7's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 5800H at 23277 (0.1% behind) and the Intel Core i9-11900F at 23254 (0.2% behind). The Core 5 315 sits near the AMD EPYC 9274F at 18189 and the Intel Core i7-9700 at 18180. These rival placements indicate that the Core Ultra 7 competes with higher-tier desktop and mobile processors, while the Core 5 315 aligns with older mainstream parts.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design lineages. The Core 5 315 uses the Wildcat Lake codename and belongs to the Core 5 generation, while the Core Ultra 7 266V uses the Lunar Lake architecture and is part of the Core Ultra Series 2. Both are manufactured on a 3 nm process, but the foundries differ: the Core 5 315 is produced by Intel, while the Core Ultra 7 266V is produced by TSMC. This foundry split is significant, as it implies different process optimizations and manufacturing maturity.

Core counts differ meaningfully. The Core 5 315 has 6 cores and 6 threads, while the Core Ultra 7 266V has 8 cores and 8 threads. Neither processor uses simultaneous multithreading, so thread counts equal core counts. The Core Ultra 7's additional 2 cores contribute directly to its multi-core benchmark advantage.

Cache organization is another differentiator. The Core 5 315 lists 192 KB of L1 cache, 2.5 MB of L2 cache, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 7 266V lists 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 2.5 MB of L2 cache per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The per-core notation implies that the Core Ultra 7's total L2 cache scales with its 8 cores, giving it substantially more L2 capacity than the Core 5 315's fixed 2.5 MB. The Core Ultra 7 also doubles the shared L3 cache to 12 MB. This additional cache hierarchy likely explains some of the Core Ultra 7's advantage in cache-sensitive workloads like data compression and random string sorting.

Memory architecture differs as well. The Core 5 315 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a single-channel memory bus and 59.7 GB/s of bandwidth. The Core Ultra 7 266V supports LPDDR5X (dependent on motherboard) with a dual-channel bus and 136.5 GB/s of bandwidth. The dual-channel configuration more than doubles the memory bandwidth, which can heavily influence integrated graphics performance and memory-bound compute tasks.

PCIe connectivity also diverges. The Core 5 315 provides Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes, while the Core Ultra 7 266V provides Gen 5 with 4 CPU lanes. The newer PCIe generation on the Core Ultra 7 offers higher per-lane bandwidth, though fewer lanes.

Clock speeds favor the Core Ultra 7. Its base clock is 2.20 GHz with a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, compared to the Core 5 315's 1.50 GHz base and 4.40 GHz boost. The higher boost clock of 600 MHz gives the Core Ultra 7 a single-thread speed advantage in most tests, though the Passmark single-thread result contradicts this expectation. Thermal design power is 17 W for the Core Ultra 7 and 15 W for the Core 5 315, a modest difference.

Integrated graphics differ substantially. The Core 5 315 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores, while the Core Ultra 7 266V uses the Arc 140V. The Arc 140V represents a more capable integrated GPU tier, though the database does not include graphics-specific benchmark scores.

Sockets are incompatible: the Core 5 315 uses Intel BGA 1516, while the Core Ultra 7 266V uses Intel BGA 2833. Release dates also differ, with the Core 5 315 launching on 2026-04-15 and the Core Ultra 7 266V launching on 2024-09-23. The Core Ultra 7 is the older part by roughly a year and a half.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 266V has an average benchmark score of 23297, placing it in the 76th percentile of all CPUs. The Intel Core 5 315 averages 18188, placing it in the 72nd percentile.

Q: Does the Core 5 315 win any benchmarks against the Core Ultra 7 266V?

A: Yes. The Core 5 315 wins the Passmark single-thread test with a score of 4021 against 3943, a 2% advantage. This result appears in both passmark_single_thread and passmark_singlethread entries.

Q: How much faster is the Core Ultra 7 266V in memory bandwidth?

A: The Core Ultra 7 266V has a dual-channel memory bus with 136.5 GB/s of bandwidth. The Core 5 315 has a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s, making the Core Ultra 7's bandwidth more than double.

Q: What is the cache difference between the two processors?

A: The Core 5 315 has 192 KB L1, 2.5 MB L2, and 6 MB shared L3. The Core Ultra 7 266V has 192 KB L1 per core, 2.5 MB L2 per core, and 12 MB shared L3. The per-core L2 on the Core Ultra 7 scales with its 8 cores.

Q: Are the two processors manufactured by the same foundry?

A: No. The Core 5 315 is produced by Intel on a 3 nm process, while the Core Ultra 7 266V is produced by TSMC, also on a 3 nm process.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Core Ultra 7 266V has 8 cores and 8 threads. The Core 5 315 has 6 cores and 6 threads. Neither processor supports simultaneous multithreading.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 5 315 | Intel Core Ultra 7 266V |

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

| Cores | 6 | 8 |

| Threads | 6 | 8 |

| Base Clock | 1.50 GHz | 2.20 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.40 GHz | 5.00 GHz |

| TDP | 15 W | 17 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1516 | Intel BGA 2833 |

| Codename | Wildcat Lake | Lunar Lake |

| Generation | Core 5 (Wildcat Lake) | Ultra 7 (Lunar Lake) |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

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

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

| L3 Cache | 6 MB (shared) | 12 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR5, LPDDR5X | LPDDR5X (depends on motherboard) |

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

| Memory Bandwidth | 59.7 GB/s | 136.5 GB/s |

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

| Integrated Graphics | Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) | Arc 140V |

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

| Launch MSRP | $340 | Not provided |

Both processors have ECC memory disabled, are locked (multiplier unlocked is false), and target the mobile market segment. Both are active in production.

The Verdict

The recorded data shows the Intel Core Ultra 7 266V as the stronger processor in nearly every measured workload. Its multi-core advantage of 21.5% across all Cinebench versions is consistent and substantial. The 41.4% lead in find prime numbers and 27.7% lead in physics indicate architectural strengths in integer and branch-heavy computation. The Core Ultra 7's dual-channel memory at 136.5 GB/s and doubled L3 cache at 12 MB provide a foundation for these wins.

The Core 5 315 is not without merit. Its 2% victory in the Passmark single-thread test shows that its execution core can match or slightly exceed the Core Ultra 7 in certain single-threaded scenarios, despite a lower boost clock of 4.40 GHz versus 5.00 GHz. Its 6 MB L3 cache and 59.7 GB/s bandwidth are more modest, but its 15 W TDP is lower than the Core Ultra 7's 17 W.

The average benchmark score gap is 5119 points, with the Core Ultra 7 at 23297 and the Core 5 315 at 18188. The percentile difference is 4 points, 76th versus 72nd. These numbers place the Core Ultra 7 in a higher performance tier, comparable to desktop processors like the Intel Core i9-11900F and the AMD Ryzen 7 5800H. The Core 5 315 sits alongside the Intel Core i7-9700 and AMD EPYC 9274F.

Where Each One Wins

The Core Ultra 7 266V wins in all multi-threaded and most single-threaded workloads. It is the clear choice for tasks that scale with core count, cache capacity, and memory bandwidth. Data compression at 187050 versus 146143, encryption at 13822 versus 11119, and multithread at 19461 versus 15272 all favor the Core Ultra 7. Its 8 cores, 12 MB L3 cache, and dual-channel memory make it well-suited for content creation, compilation, and data processing workloads.

The Core 5 315 wins exclusively in the Passmark single-thread test, scoring 4021 against 3943. This specific result suggests that for workloads dominated by the particular instruction sequences in that test, the Core 5 315's 6-core design with fewer competing demands on cache and memory can deliver a slight edge. The lower TDP of 15 W also gives it a small efficiency advantage in the thermal envelope, though the database does not include measured power consumption figures.

For users prioritizing raw compute throughput, the Core Ultra 7 266V is the data-backed choice. Its wins span every major benchmark category except one. For users with workloads that mirror the Passmark single-thread pattern, the Core 5 315 offers a 2% advantage, though the broader benchmark suite indicates this is an exception rather than a trend. The Core 5 315's later release date of 2026-04-15 compared to 2024-09-23 does not translate into performance superiority in the recorded tests.