Intel Core 5 330 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus Comparison

The Intel Core 5 330 and Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus occupy distinct positions in the Intel lineup, with the benchmark data showing a decisive performance gap between the two. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus wins every single head-to-head comparison recorded in the database, with an average benchmark score of 66855 compared to 18345 for the Core 5 330. This places the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus at the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 5 330 sits at the 72nd percentile. The magnitude of the difference varies by workload, ranging from a modest 14.1% lead in single-threaded tests to a 76.5% advantage in prime number calculations, making the performance relationship between these two processors a study in scaling rather than a competitive matchup.

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data shows no benchmark wins for the Intel Core 5 330. Across all 17 head-to-head comparisons, the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus takes every victory, which makes a use-case split based on wins a one-sided affair. The Core 5 330 is a mobile processor with a 15 watt TDP, while the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is a desktop part with a 125 watt TDP, so the practical distinction lies in platform and power envelope rather than raw performance dominance.

For single-threaded responsiveness, the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus leads by 14.1% in the PassMark single-thread test, scoring 4757 against 4088, and by 17.9% in Cinebench R23 single-core, scoring 2261 against 1856. These are the narrowest gaps in the dataset, indicating that the Core 5 330 is relatively competitive when the workload uses a single core. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus still wins, but the margin is smaller than in heavily parallel workloads, suggesting the Core 5 330 has reasonable single-core efficiency for its power class.

Multi-threaded and throughput-heavy tasks show the largest separation. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus delivers 30867 in Cinebench R23 multi-core against 13150 for the Core 5 330, a 57.4% advantage. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the gap widens to 70.1%, with scores of 18442 and 5523 respectively. PassMark multi-thread results follow the same pattern, with the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus scoring 51596 versus 15471, a 70% lead. Data compression and encryption workloads amplify the difference further, with the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus leading by 74.5% and 73.7% respectively. The Core 5 330 remains a functional mobile processor, but the data indicates it is not designed to compete with the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus in sustained compute-heavy scenarios.

Architecture Differences

The two processors share the same 3 nm process node but are built by different foundries. The Core 5 330 uses Intel as the foundry and is based on the Wildcat Lake codename with a Core 5 generation label. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is fabricated by TSMC, uses the Arrow Lake Refresh codename, and belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2 with an Ultra 5 generation label. Both are active production parts, but they target different sockets and market segments.

The Core 5 330 has 6 cores and 6 threads, while the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has 18 cores and 18 threads. Neither processor supports simultaneous multithreading, so thread counts equal core counts in both cases. The Core 5 330 has a base clock of 1.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz, whereas the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus runs at 4.20 GHz base and 5.30 GHz boost. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus also has an unlocked multiplier, allowing manual overclocking, while the Core 5 330 is locked.

Cache configurations differ substantially. 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 250K Plus lists 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 30 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus also reports 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die, while the Core 5 330 does not report transistor count or die size in the database.

Memory support separates the two as well. The Core 5 330 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a single-channel memory bus and 59.7 GB/s of bandwidth. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus supports DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and 115.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus supports ECC memory, while the Core 5 330 does not. PCIe connectivity also differs, with the Core 5 330 providing Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes and the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus providing Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes. Integrated graphics are Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores on the Core 5 330, while the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench suite shows the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus leading in every test. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus scores 4640 against 1325, a 71.4% lead. The single-core R15 result is 328 versus 186, a 43.3% gap. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows 18442 for the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus against 5523 for the Core 5 330, a 70.1% difference, and R20 single-core repeats the same 70.1% delta with scores of 2603 and 779. Cinebench R23 multi-core narrows the relative gap to 57.4%, with 30867 versus 13150, while R23 single-core shows a 17.9% lead at 2261 versus 1856.

PassMark results reinforce the pattern across a broader set of workloads. The largest single gap in the entire dataset is in the find prime numbers test, where the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus scores 486 against 114, a 76.5% lead. Data compression shows 568721 against 145287, a 74.5% gap, and random string sorting shows 69090 against 17771, a 74.3% lead. Data encryption follows at 73.7% with scores of 42144 and 11076. Floating point math shows a 73% gap, with 162692 versus 43885, and integer math shows a 73.4% gap, with 125091 versus 33258. Extended instructions score 44565 against 12808, a 71.3% lead. The physics test shows 3494 against 1201, a 65.6% gap, and the multi-thread test shows 51596 against 15471, a 70% lead. The PassMark single-thread test, listed twice in the database with identical values, shows the smallest gap at 14.1%, with 4757 versus 4088.

The nearest rivals in the database provide context for each processor. The Core 5 330 has an average score of 18345, sitting within 0.2% of the Intel Core 7 360 and Intel Core i3-13100, and within 0.1% of the Intel Core i3-14100. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has an average score of 66855, sitting within 0.1% of the AMD EPYC 4465P and within 0.2% of the Intel Xeon 6515P. Its own sibling, the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus, trails by 1.1%. This indicates the Core 5 330 competes with low-end desktop and mobile parts, while the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus competes with server-class silicon.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has 18 cores and 18 threads, while the Intel Core 5 330 has 6 cores and 6 threads. Neither processor supports multithreading, so thread counts match core counts.

Q: What is the performance difference in multi-core workloads?

A: The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus leads by 57.4% in Cinebench R23 multi-core with 30867 against 13150, and by 70% in PassMark multi-thread with 51596 against 15471. The Cinebench R20 multi-core gap is 70.1%, with scores of 18442 and 5523.

Q: How do the single-core scores compare?

A: The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus leads by 17.9% in Cinebench R23 single-core with 2261 against 1856, and by 14.1% in PassMark single-thread with 4757 against 4088. The Cinebench R15 single-core gap is 43.3%, with scores of 328 and 186.

Q: Do both processors use the same manufacturing process?

A: Both use a 3 nm process node, but the Core 5 330 is fabricated by Intel, while the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is fabricated by TSMC. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus reports 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die.

Q: What memory configurations do the two processors support?

A: The Core 5 330 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a single-channel bus and 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus supports DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and 115.2 GB/s bandwidth, and it also supports ECC memory.

Q: Are both processors unlocked for overclocking?

A: No. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has an unlocked multiplier, while the Core 5 330 does not. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus also uses a different socket, Intel Socket 1851, compared to Intel BGA 1516 on the Core 5 330.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 5 330 | Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus |

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

| Cores | 6 | 18 |

| Threads | 6 | 18 |

| Base Clock | 1.50 GHz | 4.20 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.60 GHz | 5.30 GHz |

| TDP | 15 W | 125 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1516 | Intel Socket 1851 |

| Codename | Wildcat Lake | Arrow Lake Refresh |

| Generation | Core 5 (Wildcat Lake) | Ultra 5 (Arrow Lake) |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Transistors | Not reported | 17,800 million |

| Die Size | Not reported | 243 mm² |

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

| L2 Cache | 2.5 MB | 3 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 6 MB (shared) | 30 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR5, LPDDR5X | DDR5 |

| Memory Bus | Single-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 59.7 GB/s | 115.2 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 6 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 20 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Launch MSRP | $309 | $199 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | Yes |

| Percentile vs All CPUs | 72 | 93 |

| Average Benchmark Score | 18345 | 66855 |