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

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive overall victory for the Intel Core Ultra 5 225T, which wins all 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons against the Intel Core 5 320. The largest margin appears in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the Ultra 5 225T scores 21,971 versus 6,197, a delta of 71.8%. This is the single biggest performance gap between the two processors in any workload.

Single-thread performance tells a similar story, though with smaller margins. The Ultra 5 225T leads by 37.9% in Cinebench R23 single-core (3,101 versus 1,926) and by 40.8% in Cinebench R20 single-core (1,302 versus 771). The narrowest win for the Ultra 5 225T comes in PassMark single-thread tests, where it scores 4,348 versus 4,045, a 7% advantage. That 7% margin is the only head-to-head result below double digits.

Multi-threaded workloads show consistent dominance. Cinebench R15 multi-core favors the Ultra 5 225T by 52.4% (2,214 versus 1,054), while Cinebench R20 multi-core shows a 40.8% edge (9,227 versus 5,462). PassMark multithread delivers a 39.1% lead (25,358 versus 15,450), and PassMark physics shows a 40.5% gap (2,053 versus 1,221).

Math-oriented tasks follow the same pattern. PassMark floating point math records 82,751 for the Ultra 5 225T against 42,440 for the Core 5 320, a 48.7% difference. Integer math shows 59,543 versus 32,323, a 45.7% lead. Prime number finding is particularly lopsided: 284 versus 110, a 61.3% delta. Data compression favors the Ultra 5 225T by 36.4% (233,998 versus 148,779), and data encryption by 39.9% (18,289 versus 10,984). Extended instruction throughput lands at 20,083 versus 13,262, a 34% edge. Random string sorting completes at 28,774 versus 18,038, a 37.3% advantage.

The average benchmark score reflects this overall split: the Ultra 5 225T averages 30,468 against 18,023 for the Core 5 320. In percentile ranking against all CPUs in the database, the Ultra 5 225T sits at the 82nd percentile, while the Core 5 320 sits at the 72nd. The closest rival to the Core 5 320 is the AMD Ryzen 5 1600, with an average score of 17,994 and a delta of 0.2%. For the Ultra 5 225T, the nearest rival is the Intel Core i9-11980HK at 30,422, a 0.2% difference.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T wins every benchmark category recorded, so there is no workload in this dataset where the Core 5 320 takes the lead. That said, the magnitude of the Ultra 5 225T's advantage varies meaningfully by workload type.

The smallest gap, 7% in PassMark single-thread, indicates that lightly threaded tasks narrow the performance difference considerably. For single-core responsiveness, the Core 5 320 is less disadvantaged than in heavily parallel workloads. The Cinebench R23 multi-core result, with its 71.8% delta, shows the opposite extreme: the Ultra 5 225T pulls far ahead when all cores are engaged.

Intermediate gaps appear across most real-world content creation and data processing tasks. Floating point math, integer math, physics, and encryption all fall in the 39% to 49% range. Compression and sorting tasks sit near 36% to 37%. These results suggest that the Ultra 5 225T provides roughly a third to a half more throughput in typical productivity workloads, while the single-thread advantage is more modest at under 10%.

The Core 5 320 does have the advantage in power envelope, a factor not captured by benchmark scores. Its TDP is 15 watts versus 65 watts for the Ultra 5 225T, a four-fold difference. That makes the Core 5 320 the more suitable option for thermally constrained systems, even though it loses every performance comparison in the database.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel design families. The Core 5 320 uses the Wildcat Lake codename and belongs to the Core 5 generation, while the Ultra 5 225T uses the Arrow Lake-S codename and belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2 generation, with the Ultra 5 (Arrow Lake) generation label. Both are built on a 3 nm process node, but the foundry differs: Intel fabricates the Core 5 320, while TSMC fabricates the Ultra 5 225T.

Core counts diverge substantially. The Core 5 320 has 6 cores and 6 threads, meaning no hyper-threading. The Ultra 5 225T has 10 cores and 10 threads, also without hyper-threading. The extra 4 physical cores are the primary driver behind the multi-core benchmark gaps.

Cache hierarchy also differs. The Core 5 320 has 192 KB of L1 cache, 2.5 MB of L2 cache, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ultra 5 225T lists L1 as 192 KB per core, L2 as 3 MB per core, and shared L3 at 20 MB. The L2 specification is listed per core for the Ultra 5 225T, while the Core 5 320 lists a total L2 figure. The Ultra 5 225T also reports a transistor count of 17,800 million and a die size of 243 mm²; the Core 5 320 has no recorded transistor count or die size in the database.

Integrated graphics differ as well. The Core 5 320 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe units. The Ultra 5 225T uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 16 execution units. The database does not provide graphics benchmark scores, so direct comparison is not possible from the recorded data.

Memory architecture reveals another split. The Core 5 320 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory over a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Ultra 5 225T supports only DDR5, but over a dual-channel bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. Neither processor supports ECC memory.

PCIe connectivity is also different. The Core 5 320 provides PCIe Gen 4 with 6 lanes from the CPU. The Ultra 5 225T provides PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU. This gives the Ultra 5 225T both a newer PCIe generation and more available lanes.

The socket and market segment separate the two clearly. The Core 5 320 uses Intel BGA 1516, a soldered mobile socket, and targets the mobile market. The Ultra 5 225T uses Intel Socket 1851 and targets the desktop market. The production status for both is listed as active.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ on every major specification field in the database except process node (both 3 nm), ECC support (both false), unlocked multiplier (both false), and production status (both active).

| Specification | Intel Core 5 320 | Intel Core Ultra 5 225T |

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

| Cores | 6 | 10 |

| Threads | 6 | 10 |

| Base clock | 1.50 GHz | 2.50 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.60 GHz | 4.90 GHz |

| TDP | 15 W | 65 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1516 | Intel Socket 1851 |

| Codename | Wildcat Lake | Arrow Lake-S |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Transistors | not recorded | 17,800 million |

| Die size | not recorded | 243 mm² |

| L1 cache | 192 KB | 192 KB per core |

| L2 cache | 2.5 MB | 3 MB per core |

| L3 cache | 6 MB shared | 20 MB shared |

| Memory support | DDR5, LPDDR5X | DDR5 |

| Memory bus | Single-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory bandwidth | 59.7 GB/s | 102.4 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 6 lanes | Gen 5, 20 lanes |

| Integrated graphics | Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 16EU |

| Market segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Release date | 2026-04-15 | 2024-12-31 |

The Core 5 320 has a launch MSRP of $340. The Ultra 5 225T has no recorded launch MSRP in the database. The Core 5 320 has a part number of SAE3H, while the Ultra 5 225T has an unknown part number.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T has 10 cores and 10 threads. The Intel Core 5 320 has 6 cores and 6 threads.

Q: How much faster is the Ultra 5 225T in multi-core Cinebench R23?

A: The Ultra 5 225T scores 21,971 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, while the Core 5 320 scores 6,197. This is a 71.8% advantage for the Ultra 5 225T.

Q: What is the single-thread performance difference?

A: In PassMark single-thread tests, the Ultra 5 225T scores 4,348 versus 4,045 for the Core 5 320, a 7% lead. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Ultra 5 225T leads by 37.9% with 3,101 versus 1,926.

Q: What memory bandwidth does each processor support?

A: The Core 5 320 supports 59.7 GB/s over a single-channel bus. The Ultra 5 225T supports 102.4 GB/s over a dual-channel bus. The Core 5 320 accepts both DDR5 and LPDDR5X, while the Ultra 5 225T supports DDR5 only.

Q: Which processor uses more power?

A: The Ultra 5 225T has a TDP of 65 watts. The Core 5 320 has a TDP of 15 watts.

Q: Are both processors on the same manufacturing process?

A: Both use a 3 nm process node, but the Core 5 320 is fabricated by Intel, while the Ultra 5 225T is fabricated by TSMC.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the Intel Core Ultra 5 225T wins every single recorded performance test, with an average benchmark score of 30,468 compared to 18,023 for the Intel Core 5 320. The 82nd percentile ranking for the Ultra 5 225T versus the 72nd percentile for the Core 5 320 confirms that the performance gap extends beyond just these two parts when compared against the broader CPU database.

The Core 5 320 is a mobile processor with a 15 watt TDP, a single-channel memory bus, and 6 PCIe Gen 4 lanes. It targets thermally constrained laptops and compact mobile systems. The Ultra 5 225T is a desktop part with a 65 watt TDP, dual-channel memory, 20 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, and 4 additional cores. It delivers between 34% and 71.8% more performance depending on the workload, with the largest gains in heavily threaded rendering tasks.

Users who need maximum compute throughput, especially for multi-core rendering, physics simulation, data compression, or encryption, should select the Ultra 5 225T. The data shows no workload where the Core 5 320 outperforms it. Users who require a low-power mobile processor with a soldered BGA socket and the ability to use LPDDR5X memory should consider the Core 5 320, but they must accept a substantial performance penalty in every benchmark category recorded. The single-thread gap is the smallest at 7%, so lightly threaded tasks make the Core 5 320 less disadvantageous, but still slower.