Intel Core 5 320 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 336H Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded benchmark data presents an exceptionally one-sided comparison. The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H dominates the Intel Core 5 320 in 15 of the 17 head-to-head tests, with the Core 5 320 securing only 2 wins. The Ultra 5 336H is the clear choice for any workload that scales with core count, multithreading, or sustained compute throughput. Its average benchmark score of 34485 places it at the 84th percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 5 320's average of 18023 sits at the 72nd percentile. The data indicates the Ultra 5 336H performs at nearly double the overall level of the Core 5 320, with a 91.3% higher average score.

The Core 5 320's only victories come in the PassMark single-threaded tests, where it scores 4045 against the Ultra 5 336H's 4013, a margin of 0.8%. This narrow advantage in single-thread performance is insufficient to offset the massive deficits elsewhere. For users whose primary concern is single-thread responsiveness in lightly threaded applications, the Core 5 320 does hold a slight edge, but the difference is marginal. For everything else, the Ultra 5 336H is the statistically superior processor. The launch MSRP of the Core 5 320 is $340; the Ultra 5 336H has no recorded launch MSRP.

Architecture Differences

The two processors share a 3 nm process node and are both produced by Intel, but their underlying architectures diverge significantly. The Core 5 320 is built on the Wildcat Lake architecture, while the Ultra 5 336H uses the Panther Lake architecture. The Ultra 5 336H belongs to the Core Ultra Series 3 and is part of the Panther Lake-H generation, whereas the Core 5 320 is simply listed as Core 5 (Wildcat Lake).

The most striking difference is in core and thread counts. The Core 5 320 offers 6 cores and 6 threads, indicating no hyperthreading support. The Ultra 5 336H provides 16 cores and 16 threads, a substantial increase. Both processors boost to 4.60 GHz, but the base clocks differ: the Core 5 320 runs at 1.50 GHz, while the Ultra 5 336H starts at 1.90 GHz. The thermal design power also differs, with the Core 5 320 rated at 15 W and the Ultra 5 336H at 25 W.

Cache hierarchies reveal further divergence. The Core 5 320 has 192 KB of L1 cache, 2.5 MB of L2, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ultra 5 336H carries 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and a significantly larger 18 MB of shared L3. Memory support is identical in type, both accepting DDR5 and LPDDR5X, but the memory bus differs: the Core 5 320 is single-channel with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth, while the Ultra 5 336H is dual-channel with 115.2 GB/s. PCIe connectivity also differs, with the Core 5 320 offering Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes and the Ultra 5 336H providing Gen 5 with 12 CPU lanes. The integrated graphics differ as well, with the Core 5 320 featuring Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores, while the Ultra 5 336H lists Intel Xe3 Graphics without a specified Xe core count. The sockets are different: Intel BGA 1516 for the Core 5 320 and Intel BGA 2540 for the Ultra 5 336H. Both processors are active in production, neither has an unlocked multiplier, and both report the same manufacturer.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench suite reveals the scale of the performance gap. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the Ultra 5 336H scores 23991 against the Core 5 320's 6197, a delta of -74.2% from the perspective of the Core 5 320. This is the largest relative deficit in any test. The R20 multicore test shows the Ultra 5 336H at 10076 versus 5462, a -45.8% difference. In R15 multicore, the scores are 2418 and 1054, a -56.4% gap. These multicore results clearly reflect the core count advantage of the Ultra 5 336H.

Single-core Cinebench results also favor the Ultra 5 336H, despite the Core 5 320's PassMark single-thread win. In R23 single-core, the Ultra 5 336H scores 3387 against 1926, a -43.1% delta. R20 single-core shows 1422 versus 771, also -45.8%. R15 single-core has the Ultra 5 336H at 341 and the Core 5 320 at 276, a -19.1% gap. These results suggest the Ultra 5 336H has higher per-core performance in the Cinebench workloads, even though the PassMark single-thread test tells a slightly different story.

The PassMark suite mirrors the multicore dominance. Data compression shows the Ultra 5 336H at 280340 versus 148779, a -46.9% delta. Data encryption scores 21291 versus 10984, a -48.4% gap. Extended instructions reach 24542 versus 13262, a -46% difference. Prime number finding, a heavily integer-bound workload, shows a dramatic 299 versus 110, a -63.2% deficit for the Core 5 320. Floating point math scores 82415 versus 42440, a -48.5% gap. Integer math follows at 62070 versus 32323, a -47.9% difference. The multithread score is 28545 versus 15450, a -45.9% delta. Physics simulation shows 2682 versus 1221, a -54.5% gap. Random string sorting completes the picture at 34402 versus 18038, a -47.6% delta.

The only tests where the Core 5 320 wins are the two PassMark single-thread entries, both scoring 4045 against the Ultra 5 336H's 4013. The delta is a mere 0.8% in favor of the Core 5 320. This is a negligible margin, and it does not appear in any Cinebench single-core test, where the Ultra 5 336H leads by substantial margins.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H has 16 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core 5 320 has 6 cores and 6 threads.

Q: What is the difference in L3 cache size?

A: The Core 5 320 has 6 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Ultra 5 336H has 18 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: How do the memory bandwidths compare?

A: The Core 5 320 uses a single-channel memory bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth, while the Ultra 5 336H uses a dual-channel bus with 115.2 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which processor has a higher base clock?

A: The Ultra 5 336H has a base clock of 1.90 GHz, compared to 1.50 GHz for the Core 5 320. Both processors boost to 4.60 GHz.

Q: What are the thermal design power ratings?

A: The Core 5 320 is rated at 15 W, and the Ultra 5 336H is rated at 25 W.

Q: In which benchmark does the Core 5 320 outperform the Ultra 5 336H?

A: The Core 5 320 wins the PassMark single-thread test with a score of 4045 against 4013, a 0.8% advantage. This appears twice in the recorded data as the same test.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference?

A: The Ultra 5 336H has an average benchmark score of 34485, while the Core 5 320 has an average of 18023, a difference of 16462 points.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H wins in every multithreaded and multi-core workload category. The Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multicore tests all show substantial leads, with the R23 multicore advantage being the largest at 74.2% over the Core 5 320. The PassMark multithread test shows a 45.9% lead. This processor is the appropriate choice for rendering, video encoding, scientific computing, and any workload that can utilize 16 threads. The additional 10 cores and 12 MB of L3 cache provide a clear structural advantage.

The Ultra 5 336H also wins in most single-core tests, despite having a lower PassMark single-thread score. Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 single-core all favor the Ultra 5 336H by margins ranging from 19.1% to 45.8%. This suggests that in the Cinebench rendering workloads, the Ultra 5 336H's per-core efficiency is higher.

The Intel Core 5 320 wins only in the PassMark single-thread test, and only by 0.8%. This indicates that for purely single-threaded, short-duration tasks, the Core 5 320 has a very slight advantage. However, this is the only area where it is competitive. The Core 5 320 also has a lower TDP of 15 W versus 25 W, which may be relevant for very power-constrained systems, and it uses a different socket (BGA 1516 versus BGA 2540), which means motherboard compatibility will differ.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification field. The Core 5 320 has 6 cores and 6 threads, while the Ultra 5 336H has 16 cores and 16 threads. Base clocks are 1.50 GHz versus 1.90 GHz, with identical 4.60 GHz boost clocks. TDP is 15 W versus 25 W. The sockets differ: BGA 1516 versus BGA 2540. Architectures are Wildcat Lake versus Panther Lake, with the Ultra 5 336H belonging to the Core Ultra Series 3 and Panther Lake-H generation.

Cache configurations differ substantially. The Core 5 320 has 192 KB L1, 2.5 MB L2, and 6 MB shared L3. The Ultra 5 336H has 192 KB L1 per core, 2.5 MB L2 per core, and 18 MB shared L3. Memory support is the same type (DDR5, LPDDR5X), but the bus is single-channel with 59.7 GB/s for the Core 5 320 versus dual-channel with 115.2 GB/s for the Ultra 5 336H. PCIe generation and lane counts differ: Gen 4 with 6 lanes versus Gen 5 with 12 lanes. Integrated graphics are Xe3 with 2 Xe cores on the Core 5 320, while the Ultra 5 336H lists Xe3 without a specified Xe core count. Neither supports ECC memory, neither has an unlocked multiplier, and both are marked as active in production. The release dates differ, with the Ultra 5 336H released earlier, and the Core 5 320 has a launch MSRP of $340 while the Ultra 5 336H has no recorded launch MSRP.