Intel Core 5 330 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 225F Comparison
Intel Core 5 330
Core Ultra 5 225F
PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS
Analysis: Intel Core 5 330 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 225F
Where Each One Wins
The benchmark record is one-sided. Across all 17 recorded head-to-head tests, the Intel Core Ultra 5 225F wins every single comparison. The Intel Core 5 330 does not hold a single victory in any workload category, whether single-threaded, multi-threaded, or specialized instruction tests. This is not a close contest with trade-offs; the data shows a complete sweep by the desktop part.
The largest gaps appear in multi-threaded and throughput-oriented workloads. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Core Ultra 5 225F scores 2660 against 1325, a delta of -50.2% from the Core 5 330. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows 11059 versus 5523, a -50.1% difference. PassMark multi-thread delivers 31004 versus 15471, again -50.1%. These results indicate that any workload that scales across cores will favor the Core Ultra 5 225F by roughly a factor of two.
The narrowest margins are in single-threaded tests. Cinebench R23 single-core has the Core Ultra 5 225F at 1893 and the Core 5 330 at 1856, a delta of only -2%. PassMark single-thread shows 4397 versus 4088, a -7% gap. Cinebench R15 single-core shows 287 versus 186, which is -35.2%, but that is an older test where the gap widens. The single-core picture is more nuanced: in the modern Cinebench R23 workload, the two processors are nearly equivalent, with the Core Ultra 5 225F edging ahead by a small margin.
The specialized PassMark tests also favor the Core Ultra 5 225F heavily. Extended instructions show 28027 versus 12808, a -54.3% delta. Prime number finding shows 352 versus 114, a -67.6% delta, the single largest percentage gap in the entire dataset. Floating point math shows 92554 versus 43885, a -52.6% difference. Data compression shows 310843 versus 145287, a -53.3% gap. Integer math shows 66417 versus 33258, a -49.9% gap.
The average benchmark score confirms the hierarchy. The Core Ultra 5 225F averages 37313 and sits at the 85th percentile of all CPUs in the database. The Core 5 330 averages 18345 and sits at the 72nd percentile. The nearest rivals for the Core Ultra 5 225F include the Intel Core i9-13900HK at 37425 (-0.3%), the AMD Ryzen 7 7735H at 37161 (+0.4%), the Intel Core i7-13700 at 37135 (+0.5%), and the AMD Ryzen 7 160 at 37117 (+0.5%). The Core 5 330 sits near the Intel Core i3-14100 at 18318 (+0.1%), the Intel Core 7 360 at 18374 (-0.2%), the Intel Core i3-13100 at 18380 (-0.2%), and the Intel Core 3 305 at 18302 (+0.2%).
Architecture Differences
The two processors come from different design families. The Intel Core 5 330 uses the Wildcat Lake codename and belongs to the Core 5 (Wildcat Lake) generation. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225F uses the Arrow Lake architecture with the Arrow Lake-S codename and belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2 generation.
Both are built on a 3 nm process node, but the foundries differ. The Core 5 330 is manufactured by Intel, while the Core Ultra 5 225F is manufactured by TSMC. The Core Ultra 5 225F has a reported transistor count of 17,800 million and a die size of 243 mm²; the Core 5 330 has no transistor or die size figures recorded.
Core counts differ substantially. The Core 5 330 has 6 cores and 6 threads, with no hyperthreading. The Core Ultra 5 225F has 10 cores and 10 threads. Both lack a multiplier unlock, so neither supports overclocking through the multiplier.
Cache hierarchies are structured differently. The Core 5 330 has 192 KB of L1 cache, 2.5 MB of L2 cache, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 5 225F lists 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 20 MB of shared L3 cache. The L3 advantage for the Core Ultra 5 225F is significant: 20 MB shared versus 6 MB shared.
Memory support also diverges. The Core 5 330 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a single-channel memory bus with a bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. The Core Ultra 5 225F supports DDR5 over a dual-channel bus with a bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. Neither supports ECC memory.
PCIe connectivity differs by generation and lane count. The Core 5 330 uses Gen 4 with 6 CPU-only lanes. The Core Ultra 5 225F uses Gen 5 with 20 CPU-only lanes. The Core Ultra 5 225F has a higher PCIe bandwidth ceiling and more lanes for expansion.
The Core 5 330 includes integrated graphics: Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The Core Ultra 5 225F has no integrated graphics, indicated as N/A. This is a meaningful distinction for systems that rely on the CPU's display output.
Clock speeds also differ. The Core 5 330 has a base clock of 1.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. The Core Ultra 5 225F has a base clock of 3.30 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz. The Core Ultra 5 225F runs at a higher base frequency, which helps sustained workloads.
The power envelope differs considerably. The Core 5 330 has a TDP of 15, while the Core Ultra 5 225F has a TDP of 65. This reflects the mobile versus desktop positioning.
The sockets are incompatible. The Core 5 330 uses Intel BGA 1516, a soldered mobile package. The Core Ultra 5 225F uses Intel Socket 1851, a desktop socket. The market segments confirm this: the Core 5 330 is a mobile part, while the Core Ultra 5 225F is a desktop part.
Release timing is also distinct. The Core Ultra 5 225F was released on 2025-01-06, while the Core 5 330 was released on 2026-04-15. The Core Ultra 5 225F has a launch MSRP of $231, and the Core 5 330 has a launch MSRP of $309.
FAQ
Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?
A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225F has 10 cores and 10 threads. The Intel Core 5 330 has 6 cores and 6 threads.
Q: Do both processors have integrated graphics?
A: No. The Intel Core 5 330 includes Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225F has no integrated graphics, listed as N/A.
Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?
A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225F has a boost clock of 4.90 GHz. The Intel Core 5 330 has a boost clock of 4.60 GHz.
Q: Are these processors compatible with the same motherboard?
A: No. The Intel Core 5 330 uses Intel BGA 1516, a mobile socket. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225F uses Intel Socket 1851, a desktop socket.
Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?
A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225F has 20 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Core 5 330 has 6 MB of shared L3 cache.
Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?
A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225F has an average benchmark score of 37313. The Intel Core 5 330 has an average benchmark score of 18345.
Specification Differences
The two processors differ in nearly every major specification. The Core 5 330 has 6 cores and 6 threads; the Core Ultra 5 225F has 10 cores and 10 threads. Base clocks are 1.50 GHz versus 3.30 GHz. Boost clocks are 4.60 GHz versus 4.90 GHz. TDP is 15 versus 65.
The Core 5 330 uses Intel BGA 1516, while the Core Ultra 5 225F uses Intel Socket 1851. The Core 5 330 is built on the Wildcat Lake codename, while the Core Ultra 5 225F uses Arrow Lake with the Arrow Lake-S codename. Both use a 3 nm process, but the Core 5 330 comes from Intel's foundry and the Core Ultra 5 225F comes from TSMC's foundry. The Core Ultra 5 225F has recorded transistor and die size figures of 17,800 million and 243 mm²; the Core 5 330 has none.
Cache differs in both size and description. The Core 5 330 has 192 KB of L1, 2.5 MB of L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. The Core Ultra 5 225F has 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 20 MB of shared L3.
Memory support differs: the Core 5 330 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a single-channel bus at 59.7 GB/s, while the Core Ultra 5 225F supports DDR5 with a dual-channel bus at 102.4 GB/s. PCIe differs: the Core 5 330 has Gen 4 with 6 CPU-only lanes, while the Core Ultra 5 225F has Gen 5 with 20 CPU-only lanes.
Integrated graphics are present on the Core 5 330 (Intel Xe3 Graphics, 2 Xe) and absent on the Core Ultra 5 225F (N/A). Market segments differ: mobile for the Core 5 330, desktop for the Core Ultra 5 225F. Release dates differ: 2026-04-15 for the Core 5 330, 2025-01-06 for the Core Ultra 5 225F. Both have a launch MSRP recorded: $309 for the Core 5 330 and $231 for the Core Ultra 5 225F. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. Both are currently in active production.
Head-to-Head Benchmarks
The head-to-head table shows a clean sweep. The Core Ultra 5 225F wins all 17 tests. The largest margin is in PassMark find prime numbers, where the Core Ultra 5 225F scores 352 versus 114, a -67.6% delta. This suggests a very large advantage in integer-heavy prime calculation workloads.
The Cinebench multi-core tests all show similar margins. R15 multi-core is 2660 versus 1325, a -50.2% delta. R20 multi-core is 11059 versus 5523, a -50.1% delta. Both tests indicate the Core Ultra 5 225F delivers roughly double the multi-threaded performance of the Core 5 330.
The Cinebench single-core tests are more varied. R15 single-core is 287 versus 186, a -35.2% delta. R20 single-core is 1561 versus 779, a -50.1% delta. R23 single-core is 1893 versus 1856, a -2% delta. The R23 result is notable: it is the closest margin in the entire dataset, meaning the two processors are nearly tied in that particular single-threaded workload.
PassMark multi-thread shows 31004 versus 15471, a -50.1% delta. PassMark single-thread shows 4397 versus 4088, a -7% delta. PassMark physics shows 2430 versus 1201, a -50.6% delta. PassMark integer math shows 66417 versus 33258, a -49.9% delta. PassMark floating point math shows 92554 versus 43885, a -52.6% delta. PassMark data compression shows 310843 versus 145287, a -53.3% delta. PassMark data encryption shows 22648 versus 11076, a -51.1% delta. PassMark extended instructions shows 28027 versus 12808, a -54.3% delta. PassMark random string sorting shows 37325 versus 17771, a -52.4% delta.
The average benchmark score gap is also large: 37313 for the Core Ultra 5 225F versus 18345 for the Core 5 330. The percentile ranking confirms the separation: 85th percentile versus 72nd percentile.
The Verdict
The data points to a clear split by market segment. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225F is the stronger processor in every recorded benchmark. It wins all 17 head-to-head tests, has more cores, more threads, more cache, higher clocks, dual-channel memory, and Gen 5 PCIe. Its average benchmark score of 37313 is roughly double the Core 5 330's 18345. The nearest rivals for the Core Ultra 5 225F include the Intel Core i9-13900HK, AMD Ryzen 7 7735H, Intel Core i7-13700, and AMD Ryzen 7 160, all within a narrow band around 37100 to 37425.
The Intel Core 5 330 is a mobile part with a 15 TDP, integrated graphics, and a soldered BGA package. It has no benchmark wins against the Core Ultra 5 225F. Its nearest rivals are the Intel Core i3-14100, Intel Core 7 360, Intel Core i3-13100, and Intel Core 3 305, all clustered within a small range around 18300 to 18380. The Core 5 330 sits near the 72nd percentile of all CPUs, which is respectable for a low-power mobile chip, but it does not compete with the Core Ultra 5 225F on raw performance.
For desktop workloads that benefit from multi-threading, high memory bandwidth, and PCIe Gen 5 connectivity, the Core Ultra 5 225F is the appropriate choice. For mobile systems that require integrated graphics and a low power envelope, the Core 5 330 has a place. The benchmark record does not support choosing the Core 5 330 for performance reasons; it only offers advantages in form factor, power, and integrated display output. The Core Ultra 5 225F is the faster part across every measured workload.