Intel Core 5 320 vs Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL Comparison
Intel Core 5 320
Core Ultra 3 105UL
PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS
Analysis: Intel Core 5 320 vs Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL
The Intel Core 5 320 and the Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL are two very different approaches to a 15-watt processor. The data shows a clear split in their performance profiles, with the Core 5 320 dominating most single-threaded and latency-sensitive tasks, while the Core Ultra 3 105UL shows strength in a specific multi-threaded workload. The following analysis breaks down the recorded benchmark data to show where each processor delivers its results.
Head-to-Head Benchmarks
The Intel Core 5 320 wins 15 of the 17 recorded head-to-head comparisons. The margin of victory is not uniform, ranging from a modest 19.6% lead to a massive 150% advantage in one specific test. The largest win for the Core 5 320 comes in the PassMark find prime numbers test, where it scores 110 against 44 for the Core Ultra 3 105UL, a delta of 150%. This is a task that rewards raw single-core speed, and the Core 5 320 delivers it in abundance.
Single-core performance is a consistent strength for the Core 5 320. In Cinebench R15 single-core, it scores 276 versus 124, a 122.6% advantage. The Cinebench R20 single-core test shows a 48.8% lead with scores of 771 to 518. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Core 5 320 scores 1926 against 1234, a 56.1% delta. The PassMark single-thread score confirms the trend: 4045 for the Core 5 320 against 3382 for the Core Ultra 3 105UL, a 19.6% lead. The data indicates the Core 5 320 has a significantly stronger single-threaded design.
The Core 5 320 also wins the multi-threaded tests in Cinebench R15 and R20. In R15 multi-core, it scores 1054 versus 881, a 19.6% win. In R20 multi-core, the delta grows to 48.8% with scores of 5462 and 3671. The PassMark multithread test shows a 50.2% win for the Core 5 320, scoring 15450 against 10285. The PassMark physics test also favors the Core 5 320, with a 70.1% lead (1221 to 718).
Data-heavy workloads heavily favor the Core 5 320. PassMark data compression shows a 58.3% win (148779 to 93961). Data encryption shows a 72.9% win (10984 to 6354). Extended instructions show a 135.4% win (13262 to 5634). Floating point math goes to the Core 5 320 with a 38% lead (42440 to 30750). Random string sorting also goes to the Core 5 320, with a 61.4% win (18038 to 11179).
The Core Ultra 3 105UL wins only two head-to-head tests. The most significant is Cinebench R23 multi-core, where it scores 8742 against 6197 for the Core 5 320, a 29.1% advantage. This is a substantial win in a modern, popular rendering benchmark. The second win is in PassMark integer math, where the Core Ultra 3 105UL scores 41171 against 32323, a 21.5% lead. These two wins show that the Core Ultra 3 105UL has a specific advantage in workloads that can use its higher core and thread count effectively.
Architecture Differences
The two processors are built on fundamentally different designs. The Intel Core 5 320 uses the Wildcat Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process node. The Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL uses the Meteor Lake architecture, built on a 7 nm process node. This process difference is likely a major factor in the Core 5 320's strong single-core performance and efficiency in many tests.
The core configurations differ significantly. The Core 5 320 has 6 cores and 6 threads, meaning it lacks Hyper-Threading. The Core Ultra 3 105UL has 8 cores and 10 threads, offering more parallel execution resources. This explains the Core Ultra 3 105UL's wins in Cinebench R23 multi-core and PassMark integer math, which scale with core count.
Cache layouts are also distinct. The Core 5 320 has 192 KB of L1 cache, 2.5 MB of L2 cache, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 3 105UL has 112 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 10 MB of shared L3 cache. The larger L3 cache on the Core Ultra 3 105UL (10 MB versus 6 MB) may contribute to its performance in certain multi-threaded workloads.
Memory support differs. The Core 5 320 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory over a single-channel bus, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. The Core Ultra 3 105UL supports DDR5 (depending on motherboard) over a dual-channel bus, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The dual-channel memory bus of the Core Ultra 3 105UL provides a higher theoretical bandwidth, which can benefit memory-intensive applications.
The integrated graphics are different. The Core 5 320 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The Core Ultra 3 105UL uses Arc Xe-LPG with 48 EU. The platform and socket also differ: the Core 5 320 uses Intel BGA 1516, while the Core Ultra 3 105UL uses Intel Socket 1851. The Core 5 320 is classified as a mobile processor, while the Core Ultra 3 105UL is classified as a desktop processor. The Core 5 320 offers Gen 4 PCIe with 6 lanes (CPU only), while the Core Ultra 3 105UL offers Gen 4 PCIe with 8 lanes (CPU only).
The Verdict
The benchmark data shows two distinct performance profiles. The Intel Core 5 320 is the faster processor in the majority of recorded tests, including all Cinebench R15 and R20 tests, all single-core tests, and most PassMark workloads. Its wins are often large, particularly in single-core and latency-sensitive tasks. The Core 5 320 also has a higher average benchmark score (18023) and a higher percentile ranking (72nd percentile) compared to the Core Ultra 3 105UL (13061 average score, 68th percentile).
The Core Ultra 3 105UL is not without merit. Its win in Cinebench R23 multi-core is significant, showing a 29.1% advantage over the Core 5 320. Its win in PassMark integer math also shows a 21.5% lead. These results indicate that the Core Ultra 3 105UL can outperform the Core 5 320 in specific multi-threaded workloads that scale well with its 8 cores and 10 threads.
For users focused on general responsiveness, single-threaded applications, and the majority of the recorded benchmark suite, the Core 5 320 is the stronger choice. For users running workloads similar to Cinebench R23 multi-core or integer math, the Core Ultra 3 105UL has a clear edge. The Core 5 320 has a launch MSRP of $340, while the Core Ultra 3 105UL has a launch MSRP of $295. The data does not suggest either processor is a universal winner; it indicates a workload-dependent decision.
The Core 5 320 sits near the AMD Ryzen 5 1600 in the database (0.2% delta) and the Intel Core 5 120U (0.7% delta), while the Core Ultra 3 105UL sits near the Intel Core i5-9400F (0.2% delta) and the Intel Core i7-10750H (0.3% delta). These rival comparisons show that the Core 5 320 competes with a higher tier of processors in average benchmark score.
FAQ
Q: Which processor has a higher single-core score in Cinebench R23?
A: The Intel Core 5 320 scores 1926 in Cinebench R23 single-core, while the Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL scores 1234. This gives the Core 5 320 a 56.1% lead.
Q: What is the biggest performance difference between the two processors?
A: The largest delta is in the PassMark find prime numbers test, where the Intel Core 5 320 scores 110 versus 44 for the Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL, a 150% advantage.
Q: Does the Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL win any benchmarks?
A: Yes. The Core Ultra 3 105UL wins Cinebench R23 multi-core (8742 versus 6197, a 29.1% lead) and PassMark integer math (41171 versus 32323, a 21.5% lead).
Q: How do the core and thread counts compare?
A: The Intel Core 5 320 has 6 cores and 6 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL has 8 cores and 10 threads.
Q: Which processor has a higher memory bandwidth?
A: The Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL has a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, while the Intel Core 5 320 has a memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s.
Q: What are the average benchmark scores for each processor?
A: The Intel Core 5 320 has an average benchmark score of 18023. The Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL has an average benchmark score of 13061.
Where Each One Wins
The Intel Core 5 320 wins in scenarios that require fast single-core execution. This includes Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 single-core tests, PassMark single-thread, and the PassMark find prime numbers test. It also wins in data compression, data encryption, extended instructions, floating point math, physics, random string sorting, and the PassMark multithread test. Its wins in Cinebench R15 and R20 multi-core tests show it can handle moderately parallel workloads effectively.
The Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL wins in scenarios that use its higher core and thread count. Its victory in Cinebench R23 multi-core is the standout result, indicating strong scaling in a modern rendering workload. Its win in PassMark integer math shows an advantage in integer-heavy computation. These wins suggest the Core Ultra 3 105UL is the better choice for tasks that can fully utilize 8 cores and 10 threads, such as content rendering or specific computational workloads.
The overall data shows the Core 5 320 as the more versatile processor, winning 15 of 17 head-to-head tests. The Core Ultra 3 105UL has a narrower but real advantage in its two winning tests. The choice between them depends on whether the workload resembles Cinebench R23 multi-core or the broader set of tests that the Core 5 320 wins.
Specification Differences
The two processors differ in several key specifications. The Intel Core 5 320 uses the Wildcat Lake codename and is part of the Core 5 generation. The Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL uses the Meteor Lake-PS codename and is part of the Core Ultra Series 1 generation. The process nodes differ: 3 nm for the Core 5 320 and 7 nm for the Core Ultra 3 105UL.
Core and thread counts differ: 6 cores and 6 threads for the Core 5 320, versus 8 cores and 10 threads for the Core Ultra 3 105UL. Boost clocks differ: 4.60 GHz for the Core 5 320 and 4.20 GHz for the Core Ultra 3 105UL. Base clocks are the same at 1.50 GHz.
Cache configurations differ. The Core 5 320 has 192 KB L1, 2.5 MB L2, and 6 MB shared L3. The Core Ultra 3 105UL has 112 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 10 MB shared L3.
Memory support differs. The Core 5 320 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a single-channel bus and 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Core Ultra 3 105UL supports DDR5 (depending on motherboard) with a dual-channel bus and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth.
Platform and socket differ. The Core 5 320 uses Intel BGA 1516 and is a mobile processor. The Core Ultra 3 105UL uses Intel Socket 1851 and is a desktop processor. PCIe lanes differ: 6 lanes for the Core 5 320 and 8 lanes for the Core Ultra 3 105UL, both Gen 4 (CPU only). Integrated graphics differ: Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) for the Core 5 320, and Arc Xe-LPG 48EU for the Core Ultra 3 105UL.
Release dates differ: 2026-04-15 for the Core 5 320 and 2024-04-07 for the Core Ultra 3 105UL. The launch MSRP is $340 for the Core 5 320 and $295 for the Core Ultra 3 105UL. Both processors have an active production status and neither has an unlocked multiplier.