Intel Core 5 315 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 366H Comparison

The Intel Core 5 315 and Intel Core Ultra 7 366H are both active mobile processors from Intel, built on the same 3 nm process node and using the same foundry. Despite sharing a manufacturing process, the benchmark results show a clear performance hierarchy, with the Core Ultra 7 366H dominating the Core 5 315 in every recorded test. The database records 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, and the Core Ultra 7 366H wins all 17 of them, leaving the Core 5 315 without a single victory.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest performance gaps appear in multi-threaded and compute-intensive workloads. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core Ultra 7 366H scores 28,477 points against the Core 5 315's 12,981 points, a difference of 54.4 percent. The same 54.4 percent delta appears in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the Core Ultra 7 366H reaches 11,960 points and the Core 5 315 reaches 5,452 points. Cinebench R15 multi-core follows the pattern, with the Core Ultra 7 366H scoring 2,870 points versus 1,308 points for the Core 5 315.

The Core Ultra 7 366H also wins decisively in single-core rendering tests. Cinebench R23 single-core gives the Core Ultra 7 366H a score of 4,020 points, roughly 119 percent higher than the Core 5 315's 1,832 points, a delta of 54.4 percent. Cinebench R20 single-core shows the same relative margin, with the Core Ultra 7 366H at 1,688 points and the Core 5 315 at 769 points. Cinebench R15 single-core is the closest of the rendering tests in absolute terms, yet the Core Ultra 7 366H still leads by 54.6 percent, scoring 405 points against 184 points.

PassMark tests reveal where the Core Ultra 7 366H stretches its advantage furthest. The prime number search workload shows the biggest gap: the Core Ultra 7 366H scores 326 points, which is 65.6 percent ahead of the Core 5 315's 112 points. Integer math also favors the Core Ultra 7 366H substantially, with a score of 83,695 points versus 31,690 points, a 62.1 percent delta. Floating point math puts the Core Ultra 7 366H at 103,615 points, 59 percent ahead of the Core 5 315's 42,441 points. Physics testing gives the Core Ultra 7 366H a 59.6 percent edge, scoring 2,880 points against 1,163 points.

Data encryption and compression workloads show similar margins. The Core Ultra 7 366H scores 25,845 points in data encryption, which is 57 percent higher than the Core 5 315's 11,119 points. In data compression, the Core Ultra 7 366H reaches 327,455 points, a 55.4 percent lead over the Core 5 315's 146,143 points. Random string sorting gives the Core Ultra 7 366H a 55.9 percent advantage, with scores of 39,814 and 17,551 respectively. Extended instructions testing shows a 51.1 percent gap, with the Core Ultra 7 366H at 26,901 points and the Core 5 315 at 13,143 points.

The only nearly even contest is PassMark single-thread performance. The Core Ultra 7 366H scores 4,043 points, barely ahead of the Core 5 315's 4,021 points, a delta of just 0.5 percent. The same result appears in the redundant single-thread test. This narrow margin indicates that the two processors are much closer in lightly threaded scenarios, while the Core Ultra 7 366H pulls away sharply whenever more cores or higher sustained throughput come into play. PassMark multithread confirms the overall trend, with the Core Ultra 7 366H at 33,429 points versus 15,272 points for the Core 5 315, a 54.3 percent gap.

Architecture Differences

The two processors share a 3 nm process node and Intel as the foundry, but their internal designs differ considerably. The Core 5 315 is built on the Wildcat Lake codename and belongs to the Core 5 generation. The Core Ultra 7 366H uses the Panther Lake architecture, specifically the Panther Lake-H generation, and is part of the Core Ultra Series 3. These are distinct silicon designs with different target roles within Intel's mobile lineup.

Core counts present the most obvious architectural split. The Core 5 315 has 6 cores and 6 threads, meaning it does not use simultaneous multithreading. The Core Ultra 7 366H has 16 cores and 16 threads, also without multithreading, but with more than double the physical core count. The clock speeds reflect the different positioning. The Core 5 315 has a base clock of 1.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. The Core Ultra 7 366H runs at a 2.00 GHz base clock and boosts to 4.80 GHz. The Core Ultra 7 366H also carries a higher thermal design power at 25 watts compared to the Core 5 315's 15 watts.

Cache hierarchies differ in structure. The Core 5 315 lists an L1 cache of 192 KB, an L2 cache of 2.5 MB, and an L3 cache of 6 MB shared. The Core Ultra 7 366H lists L1 and L2 caches on a per-core basis, with 192 KB per core for L1 and 2.5 MB per core for L2, plus a larger 18 MB shared L3 cache. The total cache available to the Core Ultra 7 366H dwarfs that of the Core 5 315, which helps explain the multi-core benchmark dominance.

Memory support also diverges. Both processors support DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory, but the Core 5 315 uses a single-channel memory bus with 59.7 GB/s of bandwidth. The Core Ultra 7 366H uses a dual-channel memory bus and reaches 115.2 GB/s of bandwidth. That memory bandwidth difference is substantial and contributes to the performance gap in memory-sensitive workloads. Neither processor supports ECC memory.

PCIe connectivity marks another generational difference. The Core 5 315 uses PCIe Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes, while the Core Ultra 7 366H uses PCIe Gen 5 with 12 CPU lanes. The Core Ultra 7 366H therefore offers both a newer PCIe standard and double the lane count. Integrated graphics also differ. The Core 5 315 includes Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores, while the Core Ultra 7 366H includes Intel Xe3 Graphics without a specified core count in the recorded data. The two processors use different sockets, with the Core 5 315 on Intel BGA 1516 and the Core Ultra 7 366H on Intel BGA 2540. The Core Ultra 7 366H also has the higher average benchmark score of 41,263 points compared to the Core 5 315's 18,188 points, placing it in the 87th percentile of all CPUs versus the 72nd percentile for the Core 5 315.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous. The Core Ultra 7 366H outperforms the Core 5 315 across every recorded workload, with most deltas falling between 51 percent and 66 percent. The Core 5 315 comes within striking distance only in PassMark single-thread testing, where the Core Ultra 7 366H leads by 0.5 percent. Every other test shows a commanding lead for the Core Ultra 7 366H.

The Core 5 315's nearest rivals in the database include the AMD EPYC 9274F, the Intel Core i7-9700, the Intel Core i7-1365U, and the AMD Ryzen 7 5700U, all with average scores within 0.1 percent of its own 18,188 points. The Core Ultra 7 366H sits in a different class, with nearest rivals such as the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H, the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440, the AMD Ryzen 9 5900X, and the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H. The smallest delta among those rivals is 0.1 percent, and the largest is 0.7 percent, confirming that the Core Ultra 7 366H competes far above the Core 5 315's bracket.

Users needing sustained multi-core throughput, heavy compute, or faster memory bandwidth should select the Core Ultra 7 366H. The dual-channel memory bus, 16 cores, higher clocks, and larger L3 cache all contribute to its decisive lead. The Core 5 315 may suit lighter workloads where its 15-watt TDP and lower core count are acceptable, but the recorded data shows no workload category where it beats the Core Ultra 7 366H. The verdict from the database is straightforward: the Core Ultra 7 366H is the stronger processor by a wide margin.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every specification field. The Core 5 315 has 6 cores and 6 threads, while the Core Ultra 7 366H has 16 cores and 16 threads. Base clocks are 1.50 GHz for the Core 5 315 and 2.00 GHz for the Core Ultra 7 366H. Boost clocks are 4.40 GHz and 4.80 GHz respectively. Thermal design power is 15 watts for the Core 5 315 and 25 watts for the Core Ultra 7 366H. The Core 5 315 uses Intel BGA 1516, while the Core Ultra 7 366H uses Intel BGA 2540.

The codenames and generations differ as well. The Core 5 315 is Wildcat Lake in the Core 5 generation, while the Core Ultra 7 366H is Panther Lake in the Ultra 7 Panther Lake-H generation. The Core Ultra 7 366H also carries the Core Ultra Series 3 label. The Core 5 315 lists an L1 cache of 192 KB, an L2 cache of 2.5 MB, and a shared L3 cache of 6 MB. The Core Ultra 7 366H lists L1 and L2 caches per core, 192 KB and 2.5 MB respectively, with a shared L3 cache of 18 MB.

Memory bus width differs, with the Core 5 315 using single-channel memory and the Core Ultra 7 366H using dual-channel. Memory bandwidth is 59.7 GB/s for the Core 5 315 and 115.2 GB/s for the Core Ultra 7 366H. PCIe support differs, with Gen 4 and 6 lanes for the Core 5 315 versus Gen 5 and 12 lanes for the Core Ultra 7 366H. Integrated graphics are listed as Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores for the Core 5 315, while the Core Ultra 7 366H lists Intel Xe3 Graphics without a core count. The Core 5 315 has a launch MSRP of $340, while the Core Ultra 7 366H has no recorded launch MSRP. Both processors are locked, meaning the multiplier is not unlocked on either. The Core 5 315 has a part number of SAEFC, and the Core Ultra 7 366H has a part number of SA4R9Q9EL.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more benchmarks in the database?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H wins all 17 recorded head-to-head benchmark comparisons against the Intel Core 5 315. The Core 5 315 does not win a single test.

Q: How close are the two processors in single-thread performance?

A: In PassMark single-thread testing, the Core Ultra 7 366H scores 4,043 points and the Core 5 315 scores 4,021 points, a delta of 0.5 percent. This is the narrowest gap in the entire benchmark set.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two CPUs?

A: The largest delta is in PassMark find prime numbers, where the Core Ultra 7 366H scores 326 points and the Core 5 315 scores 112 points, a 65.6 percent difference.

Q: Do the two processors use the same memory configuration?

A: No. The Core 5 315 uses a single-channel memory bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth, while the Core Ultra 7 366H uses a dual-channel memory bus with 115.2 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: How much more L3 cache does the Core Ultra 7 366H have?

A: The Core Ultra 7 366H has 18 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Core 5 315 has 6 MB of shared L3 cache.

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

A: The Core 5 315 has 6 cores and 6 threads. The Core Ultra 7 366H has 16 cores and 16 threads.