Intel Core 5 320 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 225H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the Intel Core Ultra 5 225H wins every single head-to-head test against the Intel Core 5 320. Across all 17 recorded comparisons, the Core Ultra 5 225H delivers higher scores, with the Core 5 320 earning zero wins. The largest margins appear in multi-threaded workloads, where the Core Ultra 5 225H's additional cores produce substantial advantages.

The most dramatic gap is in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the Core Ultra 5 225H scores 14629.5 against the Core 5 320's 6197, a 57.6% deficit for the latter. Cinebench R15 multi-core shows a similar pattern: 2397.5 versus 1054, a 56% difference. Cinebench R20 multi-core delivers 10041 versus 5462, a 45.6% gap. These results confirm that the Core Ultra 5 225H is in a different performance class when all cores are active.

Single-core results are much closer, but the Core Ultra 5 225H still leads. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 1969 versus 1926, only a 2.2% difference. Cinebench R15 single-core is nearly identical in percentage terms, with 288.5 versus 276, a 4.3% gap. PassMark single-thread scores are 4258 versus 4045, a 5% difference. The Core 5 320's single-core performance is competitive, but not enough to claim any victory.

The passmark suite reinforces the multi-core story. Data compression scores 283451 versus 148779, a 47.5% deficit. Data encryption shows 21428 versus 10984, a 48.7% gap. Integer math delivers 68520 versus 32323, a 52.8% deficit. Floating point math comes in at 86540 versus 42440, a 51% gap. Find prime numbers scores 220 versus 110, an exact 50% difference. Random string sorting shows 33654 versus 18038, a 46.4% deficit. Extended instructions measure 21915 versus 13262, a 39.5% gap. PassMark multithread scores 28119 versus 15450, a 45.1% difference. Physics results are 1877 versus 1221, a 34.9% deficit.

The Core Ultra 5 225H's average benchmark score is 31508, placing it in the 82nd percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i5-13500 with an average score of 31510 and a 0% delta, the AMD Ryzen 9 5980HX at 31495 with a 0% delta, the Intel Core 7 240H at 31483 with a 0.1% delta, and the Intel Core Ultra 3 205 at 31473 with a 0.1% delta. The Core 5 320, by contrast, has an average score of 18023, placing it in the 72nd percentile. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen 5 1600 at 17994 with a 0.2% delta, the Intel Core 5 120U at 17898 with a 0.7% delta, the Intel Core i5-1334U at 18154 with a -0.7% delta, and the AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT at 17891 with a 0.7% delta. The average score difference between the two processors is roughly 75% in favor of the Core Ultra 5 225H.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225H wins decisively with a score of 14629.5, while the Intel Core 5 320 scores 6197, a 57.6% deficit.

Q: How close are the single-core scores?

A: The Core Ultra 5 225H leads in every single-core test, but the margins are small. Cinebench R23 single-core is 1969 versus 1926 (2.2% gap), Cinebench R15 single-core is 288.5 versus 276 (4.3% gap), and PassMark single-thread is 4258 versus 4045 (5% gap).

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

A: The largest gap appears in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the Core Ultra 5 225H scores 57.6% higher than the Core 5 320.

Q: Does the Core 5 320 win any benchmark?

A: No. The recorded data shows zero wins for the Core 5 320 across all 17 head-to-head tests.

Q: How do the two processors compare in overall percentile ranking?

A: The Core Ultra 5 225H sits in the 82nd percentile of all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 31508. The Core 5 320 sits in the 72nd percentile with an average score of 18023.

Q: What are the closest rivals for each processor?

A: The Core Ultra 5 225H's nearest rival is the Intel Core i5-13500 with a 0% delta. The Core 5 320's nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen 5 1600 with a 0.2% delta.

The Verdict

The data indicates a clear choice for anyone prioritizing multi-threaded performance: the Intel Core Ultra 5 225H. It wins every benchmark in the recorded set, with multi-core advantages ranging from 34.9% to 57.6%. The Core Ultra 5 225H also delivers a higher single-core score, although the margin is modest, between 2.2% and 5%. The Core 5 320 offers competitive single-core performance but falls far behind in any workload that uses multiple threads.

The Core Ultra 5 225H is the appropriate pick for compute-heavy tasks such as rendering, encoding, compilation, or any workload that scales with core count. The Core 5 320 can handle lighter tasks and offers respectable single-core speed, but the recorded benchmarks show it trailing by roughly 40% to 50% in most multi-threaded tests. The 82nd percentile ranking for the Core Ultra 5 225H versus the 72nd percentile for the Core 5 320 reinforces the performance separation. For users who value throughput, the Core Ultra 5 225H is the only reasonable selection based on the data.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ substantially in core and thread counts. The Core Ultra 5 225H uses 14 cores and 14 threads, while the Core 5 320 uses 6 cores and 6 threads. Base clocks are 1.70 GHz for the Core Ultra 5 225H and 1.50 GHz for the Core 5 320. Boost clocks are 4.90 GHz versus 4.60 GHz. Thermal design power is 28 watts for the Core Ultra 5 225H and 15 watts for the Core 5 320.

Socket types differ: the Core Ultra 5 225H uses Intel BGA 2049, while the Core 5 320 uses Intel BGA 1516. Cache configurations are different as well. The Core Ultra 5 225H has 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. The Core 5 320 has 192 KB of L1, 2.5 MB of L2, and 6 MB of shared L3.

Memory channels differ: the Core Ultra 5 225H supports dual-channel memory with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth, while the Core 5 320 supports single-channel memory with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. Both support DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory. PCIe configurations differ: the Core Ultra 5 225H supports Gen 5 with 8 lanes (CPU only), while the Core 5 320 supports Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only). Neither processor supports ECC memory.

The integrated graphics differ. The Core Ultra 5 225H uses Arc Graphics 130T, while the Core 5 320 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. Both are mobile segment processors with active production status. The Core 5 320 has a launch MSRP of $340; no launch MSRP is recorded for the Core Ultra 5 225H. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural families. The Core Ultra 5 225H is based on Arrow Lake architecture, specifically the Arrow Lake-H codename, and belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2 generation. The Core 5 320 is based on Wildcat Lake codename and belongs to the Core 5 (Wildcat Lake) generation.

Both are built on a 3 nm process node, but the foundries differ. The Core Ultra 5 225H is manufactured by TSMC, while the Core 5 320 is manufactured by Intel. The Core Ultra 5 225H has 14 cores and 14 threads, indicating no hyper-threading, while the Core 5 320 also has equal core and thread counts at 6 and 6.

Cache architecture shows significant differences. The Core Ultra 5 225H's L2 cache is 3 MB per core, compared to 2.5 MB total for the Core 5 320. The L3 cache is 18 MB shared versus 6 MB shared. The L1 cache is 192 KB per core for the Core Ultra 5 225H, while the Core 5 320 lists 192 KB without specifying per-core or total.

The integrated graphics differ in architecture as well. The Core Ultra 5 225H uses Arc Graphics 130T, while the Core 5 320 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe execution units. The memory bus differs, with dual-channel support on the Core Ultra 5 225H and single-channel support on the Core 5 320. PCIe generation differs, with Gen 5 on the Core Ultra 5 225H and Gen 4 on the Core 5 320.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225H wins in every recorded benchmark category. Its advantages are largest in multi-threaded workloads, where the 14-core configuration provides a substantial throughput advantage over the 6-core Core 5 320. Cinebench R23 multi-core, Cinebench R15 multi-core, and PassMark multithread all show deficits of 45% to 58% for the Core 5 320. The Core Ultra 5 225H also wins in data compression, data encryption, integer math, floating point math, physics, and random string sorting, with margins between 34.9% and 52.8%.

The Core 5 320 does not win any benchmark, but its closest results are in single-core tests. The 2.2% gap in Cinebench R23 single-core and the 5% gap in PassMark single-thread indicate that the Core 5 320's single-core performance is within striking distance of the Core Ultra 5 225H. The 15-watt TDP of the Core 5 320 versus the 28-watt TDP of the Core Ultra 5 225H suggests that the Core 5 320 may draw less power, although no efficiency metrics are recorded in the database.

For workloads that depend on single-thread responsiveness, the Core 5 320 is nearly competitive, but it still trails in every recorded test. For any workload that utilizes multiple cores, the Core Ultra 5 225H is the clear choice. The data shows no scenario where the Core 5 320 outperforms the Core Ultra 5 225H, making the performance hierarchy straightforward.