Intel Core 5 320 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 155HL Comparison

The Verdict

The Intel Core 5 320 and Intel Core Ultra 7 155HL occupy different positions in the desktop and mobile landscape. The Core 5 320 is a mobile-focused, efficiency-oriented processor with a 15 W TDP, while the Core Ultra 7 155HL is a desktop part with a 45 W TDP. Benchmark data for the Core 5 320 places it at the 72nd percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 18023. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 5 1600, which scores 17994 (0.2% behind), the Intel Core 5 120U at 17898 (0.7% behind), the Intel Core i5-1334U at 18154 (0.7% ahead), and the AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT at 17891 (0.7% behind). This positions the Core 5 320 as a mid-pack performer, competitive with older desktop six-core parts despite its low power envelope.

The Core Ultra 7 155HL has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, meaning its performance cannot be quantified here. However, its specifications indicate a much larger core count (16 cores, 22 threads versus 6 cores, 6 threads), a higher boost clock (4.80 GHz versus 4.60 GHz), and significantly more cache (24 MB shared L3 versus 6 MB shared L3). The Core Ultra 7 155HL also supports dual-channel memory with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth, compared to single-channel 59.7 GB/s for the Core 5 320. For workloads that scale with core count and memory bandwidth, the Core Ultra 7 155HL should be the stronger choice. For tasks that favor single-thread efficiency and low power draw, the Core 5 320 has the advantage of a newer 3 nm process node and a lower TDP.

The data suggests the Core 5 320 is best suited for thin-and-light mobile systems where battery life and thermal limits are primary concerns. The Core Ultra 7 155HL is aimed at desktop builds that require substantial multi-threaded throughput, though its exact performance remains unmeasured in the database.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural lineages. The Core 5 320 is based on the Wildcat Lake codename, built on a 3 nm process node. The Core Ultra 7 155HL uses the Meteor Lake architecture, specifically the Meteor Lake-PS variant, on a 7 nm process node. This process difference is substantial: the 3 nm node allows the Core 5 320 to operate at a 15 W TDP while still reaching a 4.60 GHz boost clock, whereas the Core Ultra 7 155HL requires 45 W to achieve its 4.80 GHz boost.

Core count differs dramatically. The Core 5 320 has 6 cores and 6 threads, meaning no hyper-threading. The Core Ultra 7 155HL has 16 cores and 22 threads, indicating a hybrid arrangement that likely includes performance and efficiency cores, though the database does not specify the exact core mix. Cache hierarchies are also different: the Core 5 320 has 192 KB L1, 2.5 MB L2, and 6 MB shared L3. The Core Ultra 7 155HL has 112 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 24 MB shared L3. The per-core L2 design of the Core Ultra 7 155HL suggests a larger total L2 footprint given its 16 cores.

Integrated graphics differ. The Core 5 320 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The Core Ultra 7 155HL uses Arc Xe-LPG with 128 EU. The latter is clearly a more capable iGPU based on execution unit count alone, though no graphics benchmarks are present in the database. Memory support also diverges: the Core 5 320 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X in a single-channel configuration, while the Core Ultra 7 155HL supports DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration. The memory bandwidth figures reflect this: 59.7 GB/s for the Core 5 320 versus 89.6 GB/s for the Core Ultra 7 155HL.

PCIe connectivity is another difference. The Core 5 320 provides Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only), while the Core Ultra 7 155HL provides Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only). Both are locked multipliers, and neither supports ECC memory. Sockets differ as well: the Core 5 320 uses Intel BGA 1516, indicating a soldered mobile package, while the Core Ultra 7 155HL uses Intel Socket 1851, a desktop socket.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark results between the Core 5 320 and the Core Ultra 7 155HL. The Core Ultra 7 155HL has an empty benchmark array and no average score. This makes direct numerical comparison impossible. The Core 5 320, however, has a full suite of recorded measurements. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score is 6197, and its single-core score is 1926. Cinebench R20 scores are 5462 multi-core and 771 single-core. Cinebench R15 scores are 1054 multi-core and 276 single-core.

PassMark results for the Core 5 320 include a multi-thread score of 15450 and a single-thread score of 4045. Data compression scores 148779, data encryption scores 10984, extended instructions score 13262, and prime number finding scores 110. Floating point math scores 42440, integer math scores 32323, physics scores 1221, and random string sorting scores 18038. These numbers provide a baseline for the Core 5 320's capability. Its nearest rival comparison shows it is essentially on par with the AMD Ryzen 5 1600 (0.2% higher average score) and the Intel Core 5 120U (0.7% higher). It trails the Intel Core i5-1334U by 0.7% and leads the AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT by 0.7%.

Because the Core Ultra 7 155HL lacks recorded scores, no win/loss tally can be established. The winsA and winsB fields are both zero. The analysis must rely on architectural specifications to project relative performance. The Core Ultra 7 155HL's 16 cores and 22 threads should provide a multi-threaded advantage over the 6-core, 6-thread Core 5 320, but the absence of measured data prevents quantifying that advantage. Similarly, the Core 5 320's 3 nm process and lower TDP suggest better efficiency, but no efficiency benchmarks exist in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 155HL reaches 4.80 GHz, while the Intel Core 5 320 reaches 4.60 GHz.

Q: What is the core count difference between the two?

A: The Core 5 320 has 6 cores and 6 threads. The Core Ultra 7 155HL has 16 cores and 22 threads.

Q: How does memory bandwidth compare?

A: The Core Ultra 7 155HL supports dual-channel memory with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Core 5 320 supports single-channel memory with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which processor is built on a smaller process node?

A: The Core 5 320 uses a 3 nm process node, while the Core Ultra 7 155HL uses a 7 nm process node.

Q: Are there recorded benchmark scores for the Core Ultra 7 155HL?

A: No, the database contains no benchmark entries for the Core Ultra 7 155HL. Its average benchmark score is recorded as zero.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No, both the Core 5 320 and the Core Ultra 7 155HL have ECC memory support listed as false.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 5 320 wins in scenarios where power efficiency and compact packaging matter. Its 15 W TDP, 3 nm process node, and BGA 1516 socket indicate a mobile-first design. The single-channel memory configuration and 6 PCIe Gen 4 lanes are sufficient for thin laptops where space and thermal constraints limit expansion. Its measured performance, sitting at the 72nd percentile of all CPUs, shows it can handle everyday productivity and moderate content creation without issue. The benchmark scores, such as a Cinebench R23 multi-core of 6197 and a PassMark single-thread of 4045, are respectable for a low-power part. The Core 5 320 also does not require a large cooler; the 15 W TDP allows for passive or low-profile cooling solutions.

The Core Ultra 7 155HL wins on raw specification headroom. Its 16 cores and 22 threads, 24 MB shared L3 cache, dual-channel memory, and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth make it a candidate for multi-threaded desktop workloads such as video encoding, 3D rendering, and software compilation. The Arc Xe-LPG graphics with 128 EU outclasses the Core 5 320's Xe3 with 2 Xe cores, providing better integrated graphics performance for GPU-accelerated tasks without a discrete card. The 45 W TDP and Socket 1851 confirm a desktop-oriented design that can sustain higher power draw and use larger coolers. The 8 PCIe Gen 4 lanes offer more connectivity headroom for expansion cards.

The Core 5 320 wins on the basis of process technology and power draw. The 3 nm node gives it a manufacturing advantage that the 7 nm Core Ultra 7 155HL does not have. For mobile users who prioritize battery life and low heat output, the Core 5 320 is the clear choice. For desktop users who need multi-core throughput and memory bandwidth, the Core Ultra 7 155HL has the architectural advantage, though its performance remains unverified in the database. The absence of benchmark data for the Core Ultra 7 155HL means its actual wins cannot be confirmed numerically, but its specifications point to superiority in heavily threaded and memory-intensive tasks.

Specification Differences

Clock speeds differ slightly. The Core 5 320 has a base clock of 1.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. The Core Ultra 7 155HL has a base clock of 1.40 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The Core Ultra 7 155HL boosts higher but starts from a lower base clock.

Core and thread counts differ by 10 cores and 16 threads. The Core 5 320 has 6 cores and 6 threads. The Core Ultra 7 155HL has 16 cores and 22 threads.

TDP differs by 30 watts. The Core 5 320 is rated at 15 W. The Core Ultra 7 155HL is rated at 45 W.

Socket types differ. The Core 5 320 uses Intel BGA 1516. The Core Ultra 7 155HL uses Intel Socket 1851.

Process node differs. The Core 5 320 uses 3 nm. The Core Ultra 7 155HL uses 7 nm. Both are manufactured by Intel.

Cache configurations differ. The Core 5 320 has 192 KB L1, 2.5 MB L2, and 6 MB shared L3. The Core Ultra 7 155HL has 112 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 24 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 7 155HL supports DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. Memory support for the Core Ultra 7 155HL depends on the motherboard.

PCIe lanes differ. The Core 5 320 provides Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only). The Core Ultra 7 155HL provides Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only).

Integrated graphics differ. The Core 5 320 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The Core Ultra 7 155HL uses Arc Xe-LPG with 128 EU.

Market segments differ. The Core 5 320 is listed as Mobile. The Core Ultra 7 155HL is listed as Desktop.

Release dates differ. The Core 5 320 was released on 2026-04-15. The Core Ultra 7 155HL was released on 2024-04-07. The Core 5 320 has a launch MSRP of $340. The Core Ultra 7 155HL has a launch MSRP of $438.

Both processors have a locked multiplier, no ECC support, and are marked as Active in production status. The Core Ultra 7 155HL has a recorded series name, Core Ultra Series 1, and an architecture name, Meteor Lake, while the Core 5 320 lists neither a series nor an architecture field. Both have part numbers: SAE3H for the Core 5 320 and SRN2Z for the Core Ultra 7 155HL.