Intel Core 5 330 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 165UL Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database does not contain direct head-to-head benchmark results between the Intel Core 5 330 and the Intel Core Ultra 7 165UL. The Core 5 330 has a full set of recorded measurements across Cinebench and Passmark workloads, while the Core Ultra 7 165UL has no benchmark entries at all. This absence of comparative data means the only quantitative anchor for the Core 5 330 comes from its own absolute scores and its position relative to other processors in the database.

The Core 5 330 posts a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 13150 and a single-core score of 1856. In Cinebench R20, it records 5523 multi-core and 779 single-core, and in the older R15 test it reaches 1325 multi-core and 186 single-core. Passmark results show 4088 in single-thread testing, 15471 in multithread, 43885 in floating point math, 33258 in integer math, and 145287 in data compression. These numbers place the chip at the 72nd percentile among all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 18345.

Its nearest rivals in the database are tightly clustered. The Intel Core i3-14100 averages 18318, a delta of 0.1 percent relative to the Core 5 330. The Intel Core 7 360 averages 18374, a delta of -0.2 percent. The Intel Core i3-13100 also averages 18380, another -0.2 percent delta, while the Intel Core 3 305 averages 18302, a +0.2 percent delta. The Core 5 330 therefore sits essentially at parity with all four of these chips, within a spread of less than half a percent. The data indicates that, on aggregate workload performance, the Core 5 330 is indistinguishable from this group of mainstream processors.

Because the Core Ultra 7 165UL has no benchmark scores in the database, no direct comparison of its performance against the Core 5 330 is possible from recorded measurements. The Core Ultra 7 165UL does have a percentile ranking of 50, which is below the Core 5 330's 72, but its average benchmark score is listed as zero due to missing data. The percentile value suggests the database places it in the middle of the distribution of all CPUs, but without actual test scores, that ranking cannot be substantiated with workload-level detail.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design generations and use different manufacturing processes. The Core 5 330 is built on a 3 nm process and belongs to the Wildcat Lake family, while the Core Ultra 7 165UL uses a 7 nm process and is part of the Meteor Lake architecture, specifically the Meteor Lake-PS variant. Both are fabricated by Intel, but the node difference is substantial: the Core 5 330's 3 nm process is two generations ahead of the Core Ultra 7 165UL's 7 nm node in the database's process notation.

Core configuration diverges sharply. The Core 5 330 has 6 cores and 6 threads, meaning no hyper-threading or equivalent thread-doubling. The Core Ultra 7 165UL has 12 cores and 14 threads, indicating a hybrid layout with some cores that do not add extra threads. The Core Ultra 7 165UL has double the core count and more than double the thread count of the Core 5 330.

Cache hierarchies also differ. The Core 5 330 has 192 KB of L1 cache, 2.5 MB of L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. The Core Ultra 7 165UL lists 112 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3. The per-core L1 and L2 figures for the Core Ultra 7 165UL are smaller on a per-core basis, but its shared L3 is double that of the Core 5 330. The total cache footprint across all levels favors the Core Ultra 7 165UL in L3, while the Core 5 330's L1 and L2 totals depend on how the per-core values scale across its 6 cores.

Memory interfaces are not identical. The Core 5 330 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a single-channel memory bus and a bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. The Core Ultra 7 165UL supports DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and a bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The Core Ultra 7 165UL therefore has a 49.8 percent higher memory bandwidth figure in the database. Neither chip supports ECC memory.

PCIe connectivity shows a modest difference. The Core 5 330 provides Gen 4 with 6 lanes from the CPU, while the Core Ultra 7 165UL provides Gen 4 with 8 lanes. Both are PCIe Gen 4, but the Core Ultra 7 165UL has two additional CPU-attached lanes.

Integrated graphics differ in branding and execution units. The Core 5 330 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The Core Ultra 7 165UL uses Arc Xe-LPG with 64 execution units. The database does not provide a direct performance comparison between these graphics solutions, but the naming and configuration suggest different architectures.

Clock speeds are close but favor the Core Ultra 7 165UL. The Core 5 330 has a base clock of 1.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. The Core Ultra 7 165UL has a base clock of 1.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz. Both have a 15 W TDP, so the higher clocks on the Core Ultra 7 165UL come at the same thermal design power on paper.

Sockets are incompatible. The Core 5 330 uses Intel BGA 1516, a mobile socket, while the Core Ultra 7 165UL uses Intel Socket 1851, a desktop socket. The market segments reflect this: the Core 5 330 is classified as Mobile, and the Core Ultra 7 165UL is classified as Desktop.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 5 330 wins in aggregate performance ranking. Its 72nd percentile placement among all CPUs in the database is well above the Core Ultra 7 165UL's 50th percentile. Its average benchmark score of 18345 is a concrete figure, whereas the Core Ultra 7 165UL has no recorded average score. For any workload covered by the Core 5 330's benchmark suite, the data shows a measurable result: 13150 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, 1856 in Cinebench R23 single-core, 4088 in Passmark single-thread, and 15471 in Passmark multithread. These are the only actual performance numbers available for either processor, so the Core 5 330 is the only chip here with validated workload performance in the database.

The Core Ultra 7 165UL wins on paper in several structural categories. It has 12 cores versus 6, 14 threads versus 6, a higher boost clock of 4.90 GHz versus 4.60 GHz, a higher base clock of 1.70 GHz versus 1.50 GHz, and a dual-channel memory bus versus single-channel. Its memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s exceeds the Core 5 330's 59.7 GB/s. Its 12 MB of shared L3 is double the Core 5 330's 6 MB. It also has more PCIe lanes from the CPU, 8 versus 6, and a larger integrated graphics configuration with 64 EU versus 2 Xe cores.

The release timeline also differs. The Core Ultra 7 165UL was released in April 2024, while the Core 5 330 is dated April 2026. The Core 5 330 is a newer product by two years in the database's release dates.

The Core 5 330 wins in process technology with its 3 nm node compared to 7 nm. It also supports LPDDR5X memory in addition to DDR5, which the Core Ultra 7 165UL does not list.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every major specification field. Core count is 6 versus 12. Thread count is 6 versus 14. Base clock is 1.50 GHz versus 1.70 GHz. Boost clock is 4.60 GHz versus 4.90 GHz. Process node is 3 nm versus 7 nm. Codename is Wildcat Lake versus Meteor Lake-PS. Generation is Core 5 (Wildcat Lake) versus Ultra 7 (Meteor Lake-PS).

Cache specifications differ across all levels. The Core 5 330 has 192 KB L1, 2.5 MB L2, and 6 MB shared L3. The Core Ultra 7 165UL has 112 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 12 MB shared L3.

Memory support differs: the Core 5 330 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, while the Core Ultra 7 165UL supports DDR5 with the note that it depends on the motherboard. Memory bus is single-channel versus dual-channel. Memory bandwidth is 59.7 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s.

PCIe is Gen 4 with 6 lanes on the Core 5 330 and Gen 4 with 8 lanes on the Core Ultra 7 165UL. Integrated graphics are Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) versus Arc Xe-LPG 64EU. Socket is Intel BGA 1516 versus Intel Socket 1851. Market segment is Mobile versus Desktop.

Release dates are April 2026 for the Core 5 330 and April 2024 for the Core Ultra 7 165UL. The launch MSRP for the Core 5 330 is $309. The launch MSRP for the Core Ultra 7 165UL is $447. The series field is null for the Core 5 330, while the Core Ultra 7 165UL belongs to the Core Ultra Series 1. Part numbers are SAE3G and SRN95 respectively. Both have a TDP of 15 W, neither has ECC support, neither has an unlocked multiplier, and both are marked Active in production status.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 165UL has 12 cores and 14 threads. The Intel Core 5 330 has 6 cores and 6 threads.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The Core Ultra 7 165UL has a dual-channel memory bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Core 5 330 has a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Core Ultra 7 165UL boosts to 4.90 GHz. The Core 5 330 boosts to 4.60 GHz.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Core 5 330 has an average benchmark score of 18345 and sits at the 72nd percentile among all CPUs. The Core Ultra 7 165UL has no recorded benchmark scores and an average score of zero, with a 50th percentile ranking.

Q: Are they on the same socket?

A: No. The Core 5 330 uses Intel BGA 1516, a mobile socket. The Core Ultra 7 165UL uses Intel Socket 1851, a desktop socket.

Q: What are the process nodes?

A: The Core 5 330 is built on a 3 nm process. The Core Ultra 7 165UL is built on a 7 nm process. Both are fabricated by Intel.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear split between measured performance and structural specification. The Intel Core 5 330 is the only one of the two with any benchmark results in the database. Its scores across Cinebench and Passmark are fully recorded, and its 72nd percentile ranking places it above the Core Ultra 7 165UL's 50th percentile. Its average benchmark score of 18345 is substantial, and its nearest rivals in the database, the Core i3-14100, Core 7 360, Core i3-13100, and Core 3 305, all sit within 0.2 percent of it. This indicates the Core 5 330 performs in line with a well-established group of mainstream processors.

The Intel Core Ultra 7 165UL, by contrast, has no benchmark scores in the database. Its only performance-related data point is the 50th percentile ranking, which is lower than the Core 5 330's 72nd percentile. Its structural advantages are real on paper: 12 cores, 14 threads, higher clocks, dual-channel memory, more PCIe lanes, double the L3 cache, and a larger integrated graphics unit. But none of these advantages are backed by recorded workload measurements in the database.

For users who rely on validated benchmark data, the Core 5 330 is the only chip with a complete performance profile. For users who prioritize the Core Ultra 7 165UL's multicore configuration, higher memory bandwidth, and desktop socket, the database offers no measured confirmation of its capabilities. The two chips target different market segments as classified in the database: Mobile for the Core 5 330 and Desktop for the Core Ultra 7 165UL. The Core 5 330 also carries a lower launch MSRP of $309 versus $447 for the Core Ultra 7 165UL, and it uses a more advanced 3 nm process. The verdict from the recorded data is that the Core 5 330 has the proven performance record, while the Core Ultra 7 165UL remains an unverified specification sheet with structural advantages that lack benchmark support.