Intel Core 5 330 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 135HL Comparison
Intel Core 5 330
Core Ultra 5 135HL
PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS
Analysis: Intel Core 5 330 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 135HL
FAQ
Q: How do the core counts differ between the Intel Core 5 330 and the Intel Core Ultra 5 135HL?
A: The Core 5 330 has 6 cores and 6 threads, while the Core Ultra 5 135HL has 14 cores and 18 threads. The Ultra 5 135HL also runs a higher base clock at 1.70 GHz compared to 1.50 GHz, though both share the same 4.60 GHz boost clock.
Q: Which processor has the larger shared cache?
A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 135HL has a shared L3 cache of 18 MB, while the Intel Core 5 330 has a shared L3 cache of 6 MB. The Ultra 5 135HL also provides 2 MB of L2 cache per core, versus 2.5 MB total L2 for the Core 5 330.
Q: What are the process nodes for these two chips?
A: The Intel Core 5 330 uses a 3 nm process node, whereas the Intel Core Ultra 5 135HL uses a 7 nm node. Both are manufactured by Intel.
Q: How does memory bandwidth compare?
A: The Core Ultra 5 135HL delivers 89.6 GB/s over a dual-channel memory bus, while the Core 5 330 offers 59.7 GB/s over a single-channel bus. Both support DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory types.
Q: What is the market segment for each processor?
A: The Core 5 330 is classified as a Mobile processor with a 15 W TDP and uses Intel BGA 1516 socket. The Core Ultra 5 135HL is a Desktop processor with a 45 W TDP and uses Intel Socket 1851.
Q: Do the benchmark databases show any head-to-head tests between these two?
A: The recorded head-to-head benchmark array is empty, and both win counters stand at zero. The Core 5 330 has individual benchmark scores, while the Ultra 5 135HL has no recorded benchmark scores in the database.
Architecture Differences
The two processors come from different architectural families. The Intel Core 5 330 is built on the Wildcat Lake codename, part of the Core 5 generation, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 135HL uses the Meteor Lake architecture and belongs to the Core Ultra Series 1 family with the Meteor Lake-PS codename. This places them in separate design lineages with distinct implementation strategies.
The process node separates them further: the Core 5 330 uses a 3 nm node, while the Ultra 5 135HL uses a 7 nm node. Both are fabricated by Intel, but the smaller node gives the Core 5 330 a manufacturing advantage in density and power characteristics.
Core and thread counts differ substantially. The Core 5 330 provides 6 cores and 6 threads, indicating no hyperthreading. The Ultra 5 135HL provides 14 cores and 18 threads, meaning it has more physical cores plus additional threads. This structural difference explains much of the expected multi-threaded performance gap.
Cache hierarchies are organized differently. The Core 5 330 has 192 KB of L1 cache, 2.5 MB of total L2 cache, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ultra 5 135HL has 112 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The larger L3 on the Ultra 5 135HL gives it a significant advantage for workloads that reuse data across cores.
Memory support also differs. The Core 5 330 uses a single-channel memory bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Ultra 5 135HL uses a dual-channel bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth, a 50% higher theoretical ceiling. Both support DDR5 and LPDDR5X, but the Ultra 5 135HL memory support depends on the motherboard.
Integrated graphics differ: the Core 5 330 carries Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores, while the Ultra 5 135HL carries Arc Xe-LPG with 128 execution units. PCIe support shows the Ultra 5 135HL with 8 CPU lanes at Gen 4, versus 6 CPU lanes at Gen 4 for the Core 5 330.
The socket types are incompatible: Intel BGA 1516 for the Core 5 330 versus Intel Socket 1851 for the Ultra 5 135HL. The production status for both is Active. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.
Where Each One Wins
The Core 5 330 wins in portability-oriented scenarios. Its 15 W TDP and mobile market segment target thin-and-light systems. The 3 nm node supports lower power operation, and the single-channel memory bus with 59.7 GB/s suits lighter workloads that do not need high memory throughput. The Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores provides integrated display output for mobile form factors.
The Core 5 330 also wins in benchmark presence. The database records 17 individual benchmark scores for it, covering Cinebench R15, R20, R23, and multiple PassMark tests. Its average benchmark score is 18345, and it ranks in the 72nd percentile of all CPUs. The nearest rivals show it sits within 0.2% of the Intel Core i3-14100, Core 7 360, Core i3-13100, and Core 3 305 by average score.
The Ultra 5 135HL wins in raw compute capacity. Its 14 cores and 18 threads, combined with 18 MB of shared L3 cache, position it for heavily threaded workloads such as content creation, compilation, and rendering. The dual-channel memory bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth supports data-intensive applications. The larger Arc Xe-LPG 128EU integrated GPU provides more graphics execution resources than the Core 5 330's Xe3 implementation.
The Ultra 5 135HL also wins in desktop integration. Its 45 W TDP and Desktop market segment suit standard desktop builds with adequate cooling. The Intel Socket 1851 platform offers 8 PCIe Gen 4 lanes from the CPU, giving more direct device connectivity. Its earlier release date, 2024-04-07, indicates it has been in the market longer than the Core 5 330, which released on 2026-04-15.
Specification Differences
The core and thread counts differ: 6 cores and 6 threads for the Core 5 330, versus 14 cores and 18 threads for the Ultra 5 135HL. Base clocks are 1.50 GHz versus 1.70 GHz, with identical boost clocks at 4.60 GHz.
TDP differs by a factor of three: 15 W versus 45 W. The socket types are Intel BGA 1516 versus Intel Socket 1851. The process nodes are 3 nm versus 7 nm.
Cache configurations differ: L1 is 192 KB total for the Core 5 330 versus 112 KB per core for the Ultra 5 135HL. L2 is 2.5 MB total versus 2 MB per core. L3 is 6 MB shared versus 18 MB shared.
Memory bandwidth is 59.7 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s. The memory bus is single-channel versus dual-channel. PCIe lanes are 6 versus 8, both Gen 4.
Integrated graphics differ: Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) versus Arc Xe-LPG 128EU. Market segments are Mobile versus Desktop. Release dates are 2026-04-15 versus 2024-04-07.
The Core 5 330 has a launch MSRP of $309. The Ultra 5 135HL has no launch MSRP recorded. Part numbers are SAE3G for the Core 5 330 and SRN33 for the Ultra 5 135HL. Neither supports ECC memory, and both have locked multipliers.
Head-to-Head Benchmarks
The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between these two processors. The head-to-head array is empty, and the win counters are both zero. This means a direct comparison must rely on the individual benchmark scores recorded for the Core 5 330 and the architectural characteristics of the Ultra 5 135HL.
The Core 5 330's recorded scores provide a baseline. In Cinebench R15, it scores 1325 multicore and 186 singlecore. In Cinebench R20, it scores 5523 multicore and 779 singlecore. In Cinebench R23, it scores 13150 multicore and 1856 singlecore. PassMark results include 145287 in data compression, 11076 in data encryption, 12808 in extended instructions, 114 in find prime numbers, 43885 in floating point math, 33258 in integer math, 15471 in multithread, 1201 in physics, 17771 in random string sorting, and 4088 in single thread.
The Core 5 330's average benchmark score is 18345, placing it in the 72nd percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals by average score are the Intel Core i3-14100 at 18318 (0.1% delta), Intel Core 7 360 at 18374 (-0.2% delta), Intel Core i3-13100 at 18380 (-0.2% delta), and Intel Core 3 305 at 18302 (0.2% delta). This places the Core 5 330 in a tight cluster with those four processors, all within a 0.4% spread.
The Ultra 5 135HL has no recorded benchmark scores and an average benchmark score of zero. Its percentile rank is 50th among all CPUs, which is lower than the Core 5 330's 72nd percentile. However, the absence of benchmark data means this percentile does not reflect measured performance from the database.
The structural advantages of the Ultra 5 135HL are clear from specifications: more than double the cores, triple the L3 cache, and 50% higher memory bandwidth. These factors should translate to higher multi-threaded scores, but no quantitative confirmation exists in the recorded data. The Core 5 330's 6-core, 6-thread configuration with a 4.60 GHz boost clock will deliver strong single-threaded performance, as indicated by its Cinebench R23 singlecore score of 1856.
The Verdict
The data supports different selections depending on the use case. For mobile systems where power efficiency matters, the Core 5 330 is the clear choice. Its 15 W TDP, 3 nm process node, and Mobile market segment align with thin-and-light laptops. It also has the advantage of a complete benchmark profile, showing competitive performance against the Intel Core i3-14100, Core 7 360, Core i3-13100, and Core 3 305 within a 0.2% margin.
For desktop workloads that demand high multi-threaded throughput, the Ultra 5 135HL has the architectural edge. Its 14 cores, 18 threads, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache provide a substantially larger compute resource than the Core 5 330. The dual-channel memory bus at 89.6 GB/s and 8 PCIe Gen 4 lanes support more demanding memory and I/O scenarios. The 45 W TDP and Desktop market segment confirm its intended use in desktop builds.
The Core 5 330 has a launch MSRP of $309. The Ultra 5 135HL has no launch MSRP recorded in the database. Neither processor supports ECC memory or unlocked multipliers.
The lack of head-to-head benchmark data means the performance advantage of the Ultra 5 135HL is inferred from specifications rather than measured. The Core 5 330's measured scores place it near several existing Intel processors, all within 0.2% of each other by average score. The Ultra 5 135HL's 50th percentile rank is recorded, but without benchmark scores, it does not provide a performance comparison.
Buyers seeking a mobile processor with verified benchmark results should select the Core 5 330. Buyers building a desktop system and prioritizing core count, cache size, and memory bandwidth should select the Ultra 5 135HL, understanding that its performance is not yet quantified in the database. The two processors target different market segments and are not direct substitutes for the same system type.