Intel Core 5 320 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 226V Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 226V records an average benchmark score of 19368, while the Intel Core 5 320 records 18023. The Ultra 5 226V also sits at the 73rd percentile of all CPUs, one point above the Core 5 320 at the 72nd percentile.

Q: How do the two compare in Cinebench R23 multi-core performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 226V scores 9848 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, which is 37.1% ahead of the Core 5 320's 6197. This is the largest single benchmark gap between the two processors in the recorded data.

Q: Is there any benchmark where the Core 5 320 wins?

A: Yes. The Core 5 320 leads in Cinebench R15 single-core (276 vs 267, a 3.4% lead), Cinebench R23 single-core (1926 vs 1744, a 10.4% lead), and PassMark single-thread (4045 vs 3754, a 7.8% lead). It wins 4 of the 17 recorded head-to-head benchmarks.

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

A: The Intel Core 5 320 has 6 cores and 6 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 5 226V has 8 cores and 8 threads. Neither processor uses simultaneous multithreading.

Q: What are the base and boost clocks?

A: The Core 5 320 runs at a 1.50 GHz base clock and 4.60 GHz boost clock. The Core Ultra 5 226V runs at a 2.10 GHz base clock and 4.50 GHz boost clock.

Q: What is the thermal design power of each?

A: The Core 5 320 has a TDP of 15 watts. The Core Ultra 5 226V has a TDP of 17 watts.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel design lineages. The Intel Core 5 320 uses the Wildcat Lake codename and is manufactured on a 3 nm process at Intel's own foundry. The Intel Core Ultra 5 226V uses the Lunar Lake architecture, is manufactured on a 3 nm process, and is fabricated by TSMC. Both are mobile-market parts with active production status.

Core configuration differs significantly. The Core 5 320 provides 6 cores and 6 threads, while the Core Ultra 5 226V provides 8 cores and 8 threads. Neither chip enables multi-threading per core, so thread counts equal core counts in both cases. The Ultra 5 226V also belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2 family, a designation the Core 5 320 does not carry.

Cache hierarchies are structured differently. 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 5 226V lists L1 cache as 192 KB per core and L2 cache as 2.5 MB per core, with 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The per-core framing of the Ultra 5 226V cache data indicates a different allocation strategy across its larger core count.

Memory support also differs. The Core 5 320 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory through a single-channel bus, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. The Core Ultra 5 226V uses a dual-channel memory bus, and its memory support is described as dependent on the motherboard. PCIe connectivity differs as well: the Core 5 320 provides Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes, while the Core Ultra 5 226V provides Gen 5 with 4 CPU lanes.

Integrated graphics differ by generation and naming. The Core 5 320 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The Core Ultra 5 226V uses Arc 130V graphics. Both are integrated solutions for mobile platforms, but they represent different graphics architectures within Intel's lineup.

The sockets are not interchangeable. The Core 5 320 uses Intel BGA 1516, while the Core Ultra 5 226V uses Intel BGA 2833. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The release dates are far apart: the Core 5 320 launched on 2026-04-15, while the Core Ultra 5 226V launched on 2024-09-23.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear overall winner for multi-threaded workloads. The Intel Core Ultra 5 226V wins 13 of the 17 recorded head-to-head benchmarks, including every Cinebench multi-core test and every PassMark compute test. Its advantage ranges from 9.9% in PassMark extended instructions to 37.1% in Cinebench R23 multi-core. The average benchmark score confirms this: 19368 for the Ultra 5 226V versus 18023 for the Core 5 320, a margin that also shows in its nearest rival comparison, where the Ultra 5 226V matches the AMD Ryzen 5 7533HS at a 0% delta.

The Intel Core 5 320 is not without merit. It wins the single-core tests that matter most in the Cinebench suite: R15 single-core by 3.4% and R23 single-core by 10.4%. It also leads PassMark single-thread by 7.8%. Those wins indicate that for lightly threaded tasks, the Core 5 320 can deliver higher peak performance per thread despite its lower base clock and smaller core count.

The choice depends on workload type. Users who run rendering, compression, encryption, or any workload that scales across cores should select the Core Ultra 5 226V. Users whose primary tasks are single-thread-bound should consider the Core 5 320, which also carries a lower TDP of 15 watts versus 17 watts. The Core 5 320 also has a recorded launch MSRP of $340, while no launch MSRP is recorded for the Ultra 5 226V.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification field. The Core 5 320 has 6 cores and 6 threads; the Core Ultra 5 226V has 8 cores and 8 threads. Base clocks differ at 1.50 GHz versus 2.10 GHz. Boost clocks differ at 4.60 GHz versus 4.50 GHz. TDP differs at 15 watts versus 17 watts.

Sockets differ: Intel BGA 1516 for the Core 5 320, Intel BGA 2833 for the Core Ultra 5 226V. Codename and architecture differ: Wildcat Lake versus Lunar Lake. The foundry differs: Intel for the Core 5 320, TSMC for the Core Ultra 5 226V. Both use a 3 nm process node.

Cache configurations differ. The Core 5 320 has 192 KB L1, 2.5 MB L2, and 6 MB shared L3. The Core Ultra 5 226V has 192 KB L1 per core, 2.5 MB L2 per core, and 8 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 5 226V uses a dual-channel bus with motherboard-dependent support and no bandwidth figure recorded.

PCIe differs: Gen 4 with 6 lanes for the Core 5 320, Gen 5 with 4 lanes for the Core Ultra 5 226V. Integrated graphics differ: Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) versus Arc 130V. Release dates differ: 2026-04-15 versus 2024-09-23. The Core 5 320 has a launch MSRP of $340; the Core Ultra 5 226V has none recorded. Both are mobile parts with active production status, neither has an unlocked multiplier, and neither supports ECC memory.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest single win for the Intel Core Ultra 5 226V comes in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where it scores 9848 against 6197 for the Core 5 320, a 37.1% advantage. This pattern extends across the entire Cinebench multi-core series. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Ultra 5 226V scores 1501 against 1054, a 29.8% lead. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, it scores 6381 against 5462, a 14.4% lead.

The single-core Cinebench results split between the two chips. The Core 5 320 wins Cinebench R15 single-core with 276 versus 267, a 3.4% margin. It wins Cinebench R23 single-core with 1926 versus 1744, a 10.4% margin. The Ultra 5 226V takes Cinebench R20 single-core with 900 versus 771, a 14.3% margin.

PassMark results are uniformly favorable to the Ultra 5 226V. Data compression scores 170687 versus 148779, a 12.8% lead. Data encryption scores 12710 versus 10984, a 13.6% lead. Extended instructions score 14724 versus 13262, a 9.9% lead. Find prime numbers scores 166 versus 110, a 33.7% lead. Floating point math scores 52270 versus 42440, an 18.8% lead. Integer math scores 38647 versus 32323, a 16.4% lead. Multithread scores 17850 versus 15450, a 13.4% lead. Physics scores 1449 versus 1221, a 15.7% lead. Random string sorting scores 20813 versus 18038, a 13.3% lead.

The only PassMark win for the Core 5 320 is in the single-thread test, where it scores 4045 against 3754, a 7.8% lead. This result appears twice in the recorded data under two test names, PassMark single-thread and PassMark singlethread, both with identical scores and deltas.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 5 226V dominates multi-core and throughput-oriented tasks. Every multi-core Cinebench test, every PassMark compute test, and the PassMark multithread test all go to the Ultra 5 226V. Its wins span a wide range of workload types: rendering (Cinebench R23 multi-core), data compression (170687), encryption (12710), prime number finding (166), floating point math (52270), integer math (38647), physics (1449), and random string sorting (20813). The 37.1% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core is the strongest single data point in the comparison.

The Intel Core 5 320 wins in three distinct single-thread categories. It takes Cinebench R15 single-core with a 3.4% margin, Cinebench R23 single-core with a 10.4% margin, and PassMark single-thread with a 7.8% margin. These results suggest that for applications with limited thread parallelism, the Core 5 320 can deliver competitive or superior per-core performance. Its lower TDP of 15 watts also positions it for thermally constrained mobile designs.

The overall win count is decisive: 13 wins for the Ultra 5 226V, 4 for the Core 5 320. The Ultra 5 226V also has the higher average benchmark score (19368 vs 18023) and the higher percentile ranking (73 vs 72). For workloads that can use 8 cores, the Ultra 5 226V is the stronger processor. For workloads that depend on single-thread speed, the Core 5 320 has the edge in the Cinebench and PassMark single-thread measurements.