Intel Core 5 330 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 265 Comparison

The Intel Core 5 330 and Intel Core Ultra 7 265 occupy very different positions in the database, and the benchmark data reflects a wide performance gulf. The Core Ultra 7 265 wins all 17 recorded head-to-head comparisons, with the Core 5 330 failing to take a single test. The average benchmark score for the Core Ultra 7 265 is 64,640, placing it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 5 330 averages 18,345, landing in the 72nd percentile. The Core Ultra 7 265’s nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 4464P (0.3% lower average score), the Intel Core Ultra 7 265F (0.3% higher), and the AMD EPYC 9124 (0.7% higher). The Core 5 330, by contrast, sits near the Intel Core i3-14100 (0.1% higher average score) and the Intel Core 3 305 (0.2% higher).

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest single-core advantage for the Core Ultra 7 265 appears in Cinebench R15, where it scores 600 versus 186 for the Core 5 330, a 69% deficit. This pattern repeats in Cinebench R23 single-core: 5,960 versus 1,856, again a 68.9% gap. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the difference narrows somewhat, with the Core Ultra 7 265 scoring 884 against 779, an 11.9% lead. PassMark single-thread results show a similar moderate gap, 4,689 versus 4,088, which is a 12.8% advantage for the Core Ultra 7 265.

Multi-core performance shows an even more pronounced separation. Cinebench R23 multi-core gives the Core Ultra 7 265 a score of 42,216, which is 68.9% ahead of the Core 5 330’s 13,150. Cinebench R15 multi-core follows the same 68.9% delta, with scores of 4,255 and 1,325. Cinebench R20 multi-core is the outlier, showing only an 11.9% difference: 6,268 versus 5,523. This smaller delta in R20 suggests the test’s scaling characteristics differ from the other Cinebench versions, but the overall direction remains consistent.

PassMark workloads amplify the multi-core disparity. Integer math shows the Core Ultra 7 265 at 134,773 versus 33,258 for the Core 5 330, a 75.3% lead. Floating point math delivers 172,776 versus 43,885, a 74.6% gap. Data compression scores are 522,983 versus 145,287, a 72.2% difference, and data encryption shows 40,456 versus 11,076, a 72.6% gap. Extended instructions score 41,478 versus 12,808, a 69.1% difference. Random string sorting yields 63,833 versus 17,771, also 72.2% apart. Find prime numbers shows 418 versus 114, a 72.7% gap. The multithread PassMark score is 49,682 versus 15,471, a 68.9% lead, and physics delivers 2,923 versus 1,201, a 58.9% advantage.

The only test where the Core 5 330 comes within a single-digit percentage is Cinebench R20 single-core, where the 11.9% delta is the smallest in the entire dataset. Even there, the Core Ultra 7 265 wins decisively. No benchmark shows the Core 5 330 with any measurable advantage, and the win count stands at 0 for the Core 5 330 and 17 for the Core Ultra 7 265.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different designs. The Core 5 330 uses the Wildcat Lake codename and belongs to the Core 5 (Wildcat Lake) generation. It has 6 cores and 6 threads, with no hyper-threading. The Core Ultra 7 265 is part of the Core Ultra Series 2, uses the Arrow Lake architecture with the Arrow Lake-S codename, and has 20 cores and 20 threads. Both use a 3 nm process node, but the foundries differ: Intel manufactures the Core 5 330, while TSMC produces the Core Ultra 7 265.

The Core Ultra 7 265 has a transistor count of 17,800 million and a die size of 243 mm². The Core 5 330 has no recorded transistor or die size data in the database. Cache layouts also diverge significantly. 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 7 265 lists 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3 cache. This per-core L2 allocation, combined with the larger shared L3, gives the Core Ultra 7 265 substantially more on-die storage for working sets.

Memory support differs as well. The Core 5 330 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a single-channel memory bus, delivering 59.7 GB/s of bandwidth. The Core Ultra 7 265 supports DDR5 only, uses a dual-channel memory bus, and reaches 102.4 GB/s. The Core Ultra 7 265’s memory bandwidth is nearly double that of the Core 5 330, which matters for workloads that stream data through the cache hierarchy.

PCIe connectivity shows a generational split. The Core 5 330 provides Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes, while the Core Ultra 7 265 provides Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes. Integrated graphics also differ: the Core 5 330 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores, while the Core Ultra 7 265 uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 32 execution units. Neither processor supports ECC memory. The Core 5 330 is a mobile part with an Intel BGA 1516 socket, while the Core Ultra 7 265 is a desktop part on Intel Socket 1851. The Core 5 330 has a base clock of 1.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz, with a 15 W TDP. The Core Ultra 7 265 has a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz, with a 65 W TDP.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher single-core score in Cinebench R23?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265 scores 5,960 in Cinebench R23 single-core, while the Core 5 330 scores 1,856. This represents a 68.9% advantage for the Core Ultra 7 265.

Q: How large is the multi-core performance gap in PassMark multithread?

A: The Core Ultra 7 265 records 49,682 in PassMark multithread, versus 15,471 for the Core 5 330. The delta is 68.9%, favoring the Core Ultra 7 265.

Q: What memory bandwidth does each processor support?

A: The Core 5 330 has a single-channel memory bus and achieves 59.7 GB/s, supporting DDR5 and LPDDR5X. The Core Ultra 7 265 has a dual-channel memory bus and achieves 102.4 GB/s, supporting DDR5 only.

Q: Are both processors built on the same process node?

A: Yes, both use a 3 nm process node. However, the Core 5 330 is fabricated by Intel, while the Core Ultra 7 265 is fabricated by TSMC.

Q: What is the core and thread count difference?

A: The Core 5 330 has 6 cores and 6 threads. The Core Ultra 7 265 has 20 cores and 20 threads.

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Core Ultra 7 265 averages 64,640, placing it in the 93rd percentile. The Core 5 330 averages 18,345, placing it in the 72nd percentile.

Specification Differences

The table below lists only the fields where the two processors differ, based on recorded data.

| Specification | Intel Core 5 330 | Intel Core Ultra 7 265 |

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

| Series | None | Core Ultra Series 2 |

| Cores | 6 | 20 |

| Threads | 6 | 20 |

| Base Clock | 1.50 GHz | 2.40 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.60 GHz | 5.30 GHz |

| TDP | 15 W | 65 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1516 | Intel Socket 1851 |

| Architecture | None | Arrow Lake |

| Codename | Wildcat Lake | Arrow Lake-S |

| Generation | Core 5 (Wildcat Lake) | Ultra 7 (Arrow Lake) |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Transistors | None | 17,800 million |

| Die Size | None | 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 | 102.4 GB/s |

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

| Integrated Graphics | Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 32EU |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Release Date | 2026-04-15 | 2025-01-06 |

| Launch MSRP | $309 | $394 |

| Part Number | SAE3G | SRQCX |

Both processors have locked multipliers, do not support ECC memory, and are currently marked as Active in production status.

The Verdict

The data shows a clear performance hierarchy. The Core Ultra 7 265 leads every recorded benchmark, with advantages ranging from 11.9% in Cinebench R20 single-core to 75.3% in PassMark integer math. Its 20 cores, dual-channel memory, and larger caches provide a consistent multi-core edge, and even single-thread tests favor it by at least 11.9%. The Core 5 330, with 6 cores and a single-channel memory bus, cannot close the gap in any workload.

The Core 5 330 is positioned for mobile use with a 15 W TDP and a 1.50 GHz base clock. Its 72nd percentile ranking puts it near the Intel Core i3-14100 and Intel Core 3 305 in average score. The Core Ultra 7 265, a desktop part with a 65 W TDP and a 5.30 GHz boost clock, sits in the 93rd percentile, alongside server-class EPYC processors in its nearest rival list. The launch MSRP for the Core 5 330 is $309, while the Core Ultra 7 265 has a launch MSRP of $394.

For workloads that rely on multi-threaded throughput, such as data compression or integer math, the Core Ultra 7 265 delivers between 68.9% and 75.3% higher scores. For single-threaded tasks, the gap is smaller but still decisive, with the Core Ultra 7 265 ahead by 12.8% in PassMark single-thread and 11.9% in Cinebench R20 single-core. The Core 5 330 does not win a single recorded comparison, making the choice straightforward from a performance standpoint. The Core Ultra 7 265 is the faster processor across the board, and the Core 5 330 serves a different market segment with lower power requirements and a mobile socket.