Intel Core 5 320 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 268V Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark comparison between the Intel Core 5 320 and the Intel Core Ultra 7 268V shows a clear pattern of dominance by the Ultra 7 268V across nearly every recorded test. Out of 17 head-to-head benchmarks, the Core Ultra 7 268V wins 16, while the Core 5 320 manages a single narrow victory. The average benchmark score for the Core 5 320 sits at 18023, while the Core Ultra 7 268V reaches 20897, placing the Ultra part roughly 15.9% higher overall.

The largest gap appears in the Cinebench R23 multicore test, where the Core Ultra 7 268V scores 10653 against the Core 5 320's 6197, a difference of 41.8%. This is a substantial margin and indicates that heavily threaded workloads, such as 3D rendering or video encoding, will favor the Ultra 7 268V by a wide margin. The Cinebench R15 multicore test shows a similar story, with the Ultra 7 268V scoring 1616 versus 1054 for the Core 5 320, a 34.8% deficit for the latter. The PassMark find prime numbers test also shows a large gap, with the Ultra 7 268V scoring 192 against 110 for the Core 5 320, translating to a 42.7% difference.

Several other multicore and throughput-oriented tests show consistent double-digit advantages for the Core Ultra 7 268V. In PassMark floating point math, the Ultra part scores 57628 versus 42440 for the Core 5 320, a 26.4% lead. Integer math shows a 24.2% advantage, with scores of 42669 and 32323 respectively. The PassMark multithread test shows a 19.9% lead for the Ultra 7 268V, scoring 19297 against 15450. Data compression also favors the Ultra part, with a score of 181443 versus 148779, an 18% difference. Data encryption shows a 20.3% gap, with scores of 13779 and 10984. The extended instructions test shows a 13.5% lead for the Ultra 7 268V, scoring 15323 against 13262. Random string sorting shows a 19.5% difference, with the Ultra part scoring 22416 versus 18038. The physics test shows a 24.5% lead, with scores of 1617 and 1221.

In Cinebench R20, the multicore test shows a 20.7% advantage for the Ultra 7 268V, with scores of 6887 and 5462. The single-core variant of R20 shows the same 20.7% delta, with the Ultra part scoring 972 against 771. Cinebench R15 single-core shows a much smaller gap, with the Ultra 7 268V scoring 293 against 276, a 5.8% lead. The PassMark single-thread tests show the closest margins, with the Ultra 7 268V scoring 4051 against 4045 for the Core 5 320, a mere 0.1% difference. The only benchmark where the Core 5 320 wins is Cinebench R23 single-core, where it scores 1926 against 1921 for the Ultra 7 268V, a 0.3% edge. This is essentially a tie, but it does indicate that the Core 5 320's single-core performance is competitive with the Ultra part in at least one test.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on a 3 nm process node, but they come from different foundries. The Intel Core 5 320 is fabricated by Intel itself, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 268V is fabricated by TSMC. This difference in manufacturing partner is notable, though the recorded data does not include transistor counts or die sizes for either part.

The core configurations differ significantly. The Core 5 320 has 6 cores and 6 threads, meaning it does not support simultaneous multithreading. The Core Ultra 7 268V has 8 cores and 8 threads, also without multithreading. The Ultra part therefore offers two additional physical cores for parallel workloads. The Core 5 320 uses the Wildcat Lake codename, while the Core Ultra 7 268V uses the Lunar Lake codename and belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2. The Core Ultra 7 268V has a stated architecture of Lunar Lake, while the Core 5 320's architecture field is not specified in the recorded data.

Clock speeds show clear differences. The Core 5 320 has a base clock of 1.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. The Core Ultra 7 268V has a base clock of 2.20 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. Both the base and boost clocks are higher on the Ultra part, contributing to its performance advantage in most tests. The thermal design power (TDP) is 15 watts for the Core 5 320 and 17 watts for the Core Ultra 7 268V, a modest increase for the higher-performing part.

Cache hierarchies differ substantially. 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 7 268V has 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 2.5 MB of L2 cache per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The per-core cache allocation on the Ultra part is notable, and the total L3 cache is double that of the Core 5 320. This larger cache pool likely helps with data-heavy workloads.

Memory support also differs. The Core 5 320 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory with a single-channel memory bus and a memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. The Core Ultra 7 268V has a dual-channel memory bus, but its memory bandwidth is not recorded in the database. Its memory support is listed as depending on the motherboard, with the specific memory types not specified in the recorded data. Neither processor supports ECC memory.

PCIe connectivity shows a generation gap. The Core 5 320 uses PCIe Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only). The Core Ultra 7 268V uses PCIe Gen 5 with 4 lanes (CPU only). The newer PCIe generation on the Ultra part offers higher per-lane bandwidth, though it has fewer lanes available from the CPU.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The Core 5 320 features Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The Core Ultra 7 268V features Arc 140V graphics. The recorded data does not include graphics benchmark scores, so a direct comparison of graphics performance cannot be made from the database.

The sockets are incompatible. The Core 5 320 uses Intel BGA 1516, while the Core Ultra 7 268V uses Intel BGA 2833. This means the two processors cannot be used in the same motherboard. The release dates also differ, with the Core Ultra 7 268V released on 2024-09-23 and the Core 5 320 released on 2026-04-15. The Core Ultra 7 268V has a launch MSRP of $340, while the Core 5 320 does not have a recorded launch MSRP.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 268V has an average benchmark score of 20897, while the Intel Core 5 320 has an average benchmark score of 18023. The Ultra 7 268V also has a higher percentile ranking among all CPUs at 74, compared to 72 for the Core 5 320.

Q: How many cores and threads does each processor have?

A: The Intel Core 5 320 has 6 cores and 6 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 7 268V has 8 cores and 8 threads. Neither processor supports simultaneous multithreading, so thread counts equal core counts.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two processors in any benchmark?

A: The largest gap is in the Cinebench R23 multicore test, where the Intel Core Ultra 7 268V scores 10653 against 6197 for the Intel Core 5 320, a difference of 41.8%. The PassMark find prime numbers test shows a similar 42.7% gap.

Q: Does the Intel Core 5 320 win any benchmark against the Intel Core Ultra 7 268V?

A: Yes, the Intel Core 5 320 wins the Cinebench R23 single-core test with a score of 1926 versus 1921 for the Intel Core Ultra 7 268V, a margin of 0.3%. This is the only benchmark win for the Core 5 320 out of 17 recorded head-to-head tests.

Q: What are the thermal design power ratings for these processors?

A: The Intel Core 5 320 has a TDP of 15 watts. The Intel Core Ultra 7 268V has a TDP of 17 watts. The difference is 2 watts, which is relatively small in the context of mobile processors.

Q: Do the two processors use the same socket?

A: No, they use different sockets. The Intel Core 5 320 uses Intel BGA 1516, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 268V uses Intel BGA 2833. This means they are not interchangeable in a motherboard.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the Intel Core 5 320 and the Intel Core Ultra 7 268V:

• Cores: 6 for the Core 5 320, 8 for the Core Ultra 7 268V
• Threads: 6 for the Core 5 320, 8 for the Core Ultra 7 268V
• Base clock: 1.50 GHz for the Core 5 320, 2.20 GHz for the Core Ultra 7 268V
• Boost clock: 4.60 GHz for the Core 5 320, 5.00 GHz for the Core Ultra 7 268V
• TDP: 15 watts for the Core 5 320, 17 watts for the Core Ultra 7 268V
• Socket: Intel BGA 1516 for the Core 5 320, Intel BGA 2833 for the Core Ultra 7 268V
• Codename: Wildcat Lake for the Core 5 320, Lunar Lake for the Core Ultra 7 268V
• Foundry: Intel for the Core 5 320, TSMC for the Core Ultra 7 268V
• L1 cache: 192 KB for the Core 5 320, 192 KB per core for the Core Ultra 7 268V
• L2 cache: 2.5 MB for the Core 5 320, 2.5 MB per core for the Core Ultra 7 268V
• L3 cache: 6 MB shared for the Core 5 320, 12 MB shared for the Core Ultra 7 268V
• Memory support: DDR5, LPDDR5X for the Core 5 320, depends on motherboard for the Core Ultra 7 268V
• Memory bus: Single-channel for the Core 5 320, Dual-channel for the Core Ultra 7 268V
• Memory bandwidth: 59.7 GB/s for the Core 5 320, not recorded for the Core Ultra 7 268V
• PCIe: Gen 4, 6 lanes for the Core 5 320, Gen 5, 4 lanes for the Core Ultra 7 268V
• Integrated graphics: Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) for the Core 5 320, Arc 140V for the Core Ultra 7 268V
• Release date: 2026-04-15 for the Core 5 320, 2024-09-23 for the Core Ultra 7 268V
• Launch MSRP: Not recorded for the Core 5 320, $340 for the Core Ultra 7 268V

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 7 268V wins decisively in multicore and throughput-oriented workloads. The Cinebench R23 multicore test shows a 41.8% advantage, the Cinebench R15 multicore test shows a 34.8% advantage, and the Cinebench R20 multicore test shows a 20.7% advantage. PassMark tests for data compression, encryption, extended instructions, find prime numbers, floating point math, integer math, multithread, physics, and random string sorting all favor the Ultra 7 268V, with margins ranging from 13.5% to 42.7%. This makes the Ultra 7 268V the clear choice for tasks like video rendering, scientific computing, software compilation, and other heavily parallel workloads.

The Intel Core 5 320 wins only the Cinebench R23 single-core test, with a 0.3% margin over the Ultra 7 268V. This is a very narrow victory and does not indicate a meaningful single-core performance advantage. In the PassMark single-thread tests, the Ultra 7 268V wins by just 0.1%, scoring 4051 against 4045. The Core 5 320 also trails in Cinebench R15 single-core by 5.8% and in Cinebench R20 single-core by 20.7%. The data therefore shows that the Core 5 320 does not have a significant winning use case in any recorded benchmark category.

For single-core-sensitive applications, the two processors are essentially matched, with the Core 5 320 holding a negligible edge in one test and the Ultra 7 268V holding a negligible edge in another. For any workload that can use more than one core, the Core Ultra 7 268V provides a substantial performance advantage. The additional two cores and larger L3 cache are the likely contributors to this difference, along with the higher boost clock of 5.00 GHz versus 4.60 GHz.

The Verdict

The benchmark data indicates that the Intel Core Ultra 7 268V is the stronger processor in nearly every measurable respect. Out of 17 head-to-head benchmarks, it wins 16, with an average benchmark score of 20897 compared to 18023 for the Intel Core 5 320. The percentile ranking also favors the Ultra 7 268V, sitting at 74 versus 72 for the Core 5 320.

The Core Ultra 7 268V offers 8 cores versus 6, a higher base clock of 2.20 GHz versus 1.50 GHz, a higher boost clock of 5.00 GHz versus 4.60 GHz, and double the L3 cache at 12 MB versus 6 MB. It also uses a dual-channel memory bus compared to the single-channel bus on the Core 5 320, and it supports PCIe Gen 5 rather than Gen 4. These architectural advantages translate directly into the benchmark results, particularly in multicore tests where the margin reaches as high as 41.8%.

The Intel Core 5 320 does have a single benchmark win in Cinebench R23 single-core, but the margin is only 0.3%, which is within the range of normal run-to-run variation. The PassMark single-thread tests show the Ultra 7 268V ahead by 0.1%, confirming that single-core performance is effectively a tie between the two parts.

The Core 5 320 has a lower TDP of 15 watts versus 17 watts for the Ultra 7 268V, which may be relevant for fanless designs or extremely power-constrained devices. However, the recorded data does not include power consumption measurements or battery life tests, so the practical impact of this 2-watt difference cannot be assessed from the database.

The Core 5 320 also has a later release date of 2026-04-15 compared to 2024-09-23 for the Ultra 7 268V. The Core 5 320 is fabricated by Intel, while the Ultra 7 268V is fabricated by TSMC. Both use a 3 nm process node.

In summary, the data shows that the Intel Core Ultra 7 268V is the superior choice for any workload that benefits from multiple cores, which includes most modern applications. The Intel Core 5 320 offers competitive single-core performance but falls behind in all multicore scenarios. The only recorded advantage for the Core 5 320 is its lower TDP, which may be a consideration for specific mobile designs where power draw is the primary constraint. For general-purpose computing, the Core Ultra 7 268V delivers consistently higher performance across the recorded benchmarks.