Intel Core 5 320 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 258V Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a clear overall winner in the Intel Core Ultra 7 258V, which takes 14 of the 17 head-to-head comparisons. The Core 5 320 manages only 3 wins, but those wins are concentrated in single-threaded workloads where the margin is real if narrow.

The largest gap appears in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the Ultra 7 258V scores 10301 against 6197 for the Core 5 320, a 39.8% advantage. That is the single biggest delta in the entire comparison. A similar pattern shows in Cinebench R15 multi-core, with the Ultra 7 at 1596.5 versus 1054, a 34% lead. Cinebench R20 multi-core is closer at 18.9% (6739 vs 5462), but still firmly in the Ultra 7's favor.

The Ultra 7 also dominates in math-heavy PassMark tests. Find prime numbers shows a 40.5% lead (185 vs 110), floating point math is 26% higher (57372 vs 42440), and integer math is 24.6% ahead (42889 vs 32323). Data compression results give the Ultra 7 a 15.8% edge (176686 vs 148779), and data encryption is 18.8% higher (13534 vs 10984). Extended instructions land at 9.9% (14717 vs 13262), random string sorting at 16.4% (21580 vs 18038), and the PassMark multithread score shows an 18.2% gap (18887 vs 15450). Physics performance is 22% higher on the Ultra 7 (1565 vs 1221).

Single-core results tell a different story. The Core 5 320 wins Cinebench R23 single-core by 2.9% (1926 vs 1872) and both PassMark single-thread listings by 0.7% (4045 vs 4018). Cinebench R15 single-core goes to the Ultra 7 by 3.2% (285 vs 276), and Cinebench R20 single-core shows an 18.9% gap in its favor (951 vs 771). The R20 single-core result is an outlier compared to the other single-thread tests, where the two chips are much closer.

Overall average benchmark scores reflect the multi-core dominance: the Ultra 7 258V averages 20454 against 18023 for the Core 5 320. Percentile placement versus all CPUs is close, with the Ultra 7 at the 74th percentile and the Core 5 at the 72nd. The nearest rivals in the database also bracket these chips tightly: the Core 5 320 sits within 0.7% of the AMD Ryzen 5 1600, Intel Core 5 120U, and AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT, while the Ultra 7 trades within 0.4% of the AMD Ryzen 5 5600, AMD Ryzen 5 8500G, and two AMD EPYC server parts.

The Verdict

From the recorded data, the Intel Core Ultra 7 258V is the stronger processor for any workload that scales across cores or stresses math throughput. Its 8 cores and 8 threads outmatch the Core 5 320's 6 cores and 6 threads, and the benchmark results confirm that structural advantage in nearly every multi-threaded test. The 39.8% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core and the 40.5% lead in prime number finding are decisive margins, not noise.

The Core 5 320 wins only in Cinebench R23 single-core and the two PassMark single-thread entries. Those wins are small, at 2.9% and 0.7% respectively, and they do not compensate for the multi-core losses. The data shows the Core 5 320 as the pick only for scenarios where a slight single-thread edge matters more than everything else, which is a narrow slice of mobile workloads.

The Ultra 7 also carries a higher percentile rank (74 vs 72) and a higher average benchmark score (20454 vs 18023). It is the more capable part across the board. The Core 5 320 remains a functional mobile processor, but the database positions it clearly below the Ultra 7 in overall performance.

Architecture Differences

The two chips come from different Intel product lines built on the same 3 nm process node, but with different foundries. The Core 5 320 uses Intel's own foundry, while the Ultra 7 258V is built by TSMC. The Core 5 320 belongs to the Wildcat Lake codename family, and the Ultra 7 258V is a Lunar Lake part from the Core Ultra Series 2.

Core counts differ: the Core 5 320 has 6 cores and 6 threads, while the Ultra 7 258V has 8 cores and 8 threads. Neither chip uses simultaneous multithreading. Clock speeds favor the Ultra 7, with a 2.20 GHz base and 4.80 GHz boost against the Core 5 320's 1.50 GHz base and 4.60 GHz boost. Thermal design power is close, at 15 W for the Core 5 and 17 W for the Ultra 7.

Cache hierarchies are structured differently. The Core 5 320 lists 192 KB L1, 2.5 MB L2, and 6 MB shared L3. The Ultra 7 258V lists 192 KB L1 per core, 2.5 MB L2 per core, and 12 MB shared L3. The Ultra 7's larger shared L3 and per-core L2 allocation are consistent with its higher multi-core scores.

Memory support diverges. The Core 5 320 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Ultra 7 258V supports only LPDDR5X over a dual-channel bus with 136.5 GB/s bandwidth, more than double the Core 5's figure. PCIe also differs: the Core 5 uses Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes, while the Ultra 7 uses Gen 5 with 4 CPU lanes.

Integrated graphics are another split. The Core 5 320 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores, while the Ultra 7 258V uses Arc 140V. The sockets are incompatible: the Core 5 mounts on Intel BGA 1516, and the Ultra 7 on Intel BGA 2833.

The release dates are far apart. The Core 5 320 launched with a release date of 2026-04-15 and a launch MSRP of $340. The Ultra 7 258V released on 2024-09-23. Both are marked as Active production and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core workloads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 258V wins every multi-core benchmark in the comparison. Its lead ranges from 15.8% in data compression to 39.8% in Cinebench R23 multi-core, with the PassMark multithread score 18.2% higher.

Q: Does the Intel Core 5 320 win any benchmarks?

A: Yes, it wins 3 of the 17 head-to-head tests: Cinebench R23 single-core by 2.9% (1926 vs 1872) and both PassMark single-thread listings by 0.7% (4045 vs 4018).

Q: How do the memory systems compare?

A: The Core 5 320 uses a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth and supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. The Ultra 7 258V uses a dual-channel bus with 136.5 GB/s bandwidth and supports only LPDDR5X.

Q: What are the core and thread counts?

A: The Core 5 320 has 6 cores and 6 threads. The Ultra 7 258V has 8 cores and 8 threads. Neither supports simultaneous multithreading.

Q: Are these processors on the same manufacturing node?

A: Both use a 3 nm process node, but the Core 5 320 is fabricated at Intel's foundry and the Ultra 7 258V is fabricated at TSMC.

Q: What are the boost clocks?

A: The Core 5 320 boosts to 4.60 GHz from a 1.50 GHz base. The Ultra 7 258V boosts to 4.80 GHz from a 2.20 GHz base.

Where Each One Wins

The Ultra 7 258V wins in every multi-threaded and math-intensive category. Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core all favor it, with margins from 18.9% to 39.8%. PassMark tests for data compression, data encryption, extended instructions, prime number finding, floating point math, integer math, multithread, physics, and random string sorting all go to the Ultra 7, with leads from 9.9% to 40.5%. Its dual-channel memory at 136.5 GB/s and 12 MB shared L3 support these results.

The Core 5 320 wins in Cinebench R23 single-core and both PassMark single-thread tests. These are the only areas where the database shows it ahead, and the margins are small at 2.9% and 0.7%. Its lower base clock and smaller cache do not prevent it from edging out the Ultra 7 in these specific tests, but the advantage is marginal.

For workloads that scale across cores, such as rendering, compilation, or data processing, the Ultra 7 is the clear choice from the data. For lightly threaded tasks where every point of single-core score matters, the Core 5 320 has a slight edge in some tests, but the Ultra 7 counters that by winning Cinebench R15 and R20 single-core. The overall pattern favors the Ultra 7 for virtually all practical use.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 5 320 | Intel Core Ultra 7 258V |

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

| Cores | 6 | 8 |

| Threads | 6 | 8 |

| Base clock | 1.50 GHz | 2.20 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.60 GHz | 4.80 GHz |

| TDP | 15 W | 17 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1516 | Intel BGA 2833 |

| Codename | Wildcat Lake | Lunar Lake |

| Process node | 3 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| L1 cache | 192 KB | 192 KB (per core) |

| L2 cache | 2.5 MB | 2.5 MB (per core) |

| L3 cache | 6 MB (shared) | 12 MB (shared) |

| Memory support | DDR5, LPDDR5X | LPDDR5X |

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

| Memory bandwidth | 59.7 GB/s | 136.5 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 6 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 4 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated graphics | Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) | Arc 140V |

| Release date | 2026-04-15 | 2024-09-23 |

| Launch MSRP | $340 | null |

| Part number | SAE3H | SRPMNSRPMT |