Intel Core 5 330 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX Comparison
Intel Core 5 330
Core Ultra 7 265HX
PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS
Analysis: Intel Core 5 330 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX
The Verdict
The data presents a decisive split between these two mobile processors. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX wins every single head-to-head benchmark in the database, 17 out of 17 comparisons. The Core 5 330 records zero wins. The average benchmark score tells the same story: the Ultra 7 265HX sits at 63173, while the Core 5 330 manages 18345. That places the Ultra 7 265HX in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, against the 72nd percentile for the Core 5 330. The Ultra 7 is not just faster, it operates in a different performance class entirely. For workloads that scale with cores and threads, the choice is obvious: the Ultra 7 265HX dominates. The Core 5 330 remains a functional mobile processor, but its role is limited to lighter tasks where its lower power envelope matters more than raw throughput.
Architecture Differences
The two chips share a 3 nm process node, but the similarities end there. The Core 5 330 uses the Wildcat Lake codename, built by Intel. The Core Ultra 7 265HX uses the Arrow Lake architecture, codenamed Arrow Lake-HX, and is fabricated by TSMC. The transistor counts diverge sharply: the Ultra 7 265HX packs 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die, while the Core 5 330 has no transistor or die size figures recorded. The core configurations could not be more different. The Core 5 330 offers 6 cores and 6 threads, meaning no hyperthreading. The Ultra 7 265HX provides 20 cores and 20 threads, also without hyperthreading, but with more than three times the physical cores. Clock speeds reflect the positioning: the Core 5 330 runs at a 1.50 GHz base and 4.60 GHz boost, while the Ultra 7 265HX runs at 2.60 GHz base and 5.30 GHz boost. The power envelopes differ accordingly, with the Core 5 330 rated at 15 W TDP and the Ultra 7 265HX at 55 W TDP.
Cache hierarchies show a similar gulf. The Core 5 330 has 192 KB of L1, 2.5 MB of L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. The Ultra 7 265HX has 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3. Memory support also diverges. The Core 5 330 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Ultra 7 265HX supports DDR5 over a dual-channel bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. PCIe connectivity follows the same pattern: the Core 5 330 uses Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes, while the Ultra 7 265HX uses Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes. The integrated graphics differ as well, with the Core 5 330 featuring Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores and the Ultra 7 265HX using Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units. The Ultra 7 265HX has an unlocked multiplier; the Core 5 330 does not.
Where Each One Wins
The head-to-head data leaves no ambiguity: the Ultra 7 265HX wins every recorded test. The question is not which chip wins, but by how much and in which workloads. The largest margins appear in integer math, where the Ultra 7 leads by 73.8%, and floating-point math, where it leads by 72.8%. Data encryption shows a 71.9% advantage, and prime number finding also shows 71.9%. These are heavily parallel workloads that scale with core count, and the 20-core Ultra 7 crushes the 6-core Core 5. Compression and random string sorting follow at 71.6% and 71.5% respectively. Extended instructions show a 68.6% gap, and multithread performance sits at 67.8%.
The Cinebench suite tells the same story. R23 multi-core shows a 67.6% advantage for the Ultra 7, while R23 single-core shows 67.6% as well. R20 and R15 multi-core and single-core all cluster around 67.6% to 67.8%. Interestingly, the single-thread PassMark tests show a much smaller gap of only 9.2%. That suggests the Core 5 330 has reasonably competitive single-thread performance, but the massive core count difference dominates everything else. The physics test shows the smallest margin of all at 59.7%, which is still a substantial lead for the Ultra 7.
The Core 5 330 does not win any benchmark, but the data implies its strength lies in efficiency and integration rather than performance. Its 15 W TDP, single-channel memory, and 6 cores suggest a thin-and-light design where battery life and thermals take priority. The Ultra 7 265HX, with its 55 W TDP and dual-channel memory, targets high-performance laptops and mobile workstations.
FAQ
Q: Which processor has more cores?
A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX has 20 cores and 20 threads, while the Intel Core 5 330 has 6 cores and 6 threads.
Q: What is the performance gap in multi-core rendering?
A: In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Ultra 7 265HX scores 40642 versus 13150 for the Core 5 330, a delta of 67.6% in favor of the Ultra 7.
Q: Is there any benchmark where the Core 5 330 wins?
A: No. The database records 17 head-to-head benchmarks, and the Ultra 7 265HX wins all 17.
Q: How do their memory bandwidth figures compare?
A: The Core 5 330 has 59.7 GB/s over a single-channel bus, while the Ultra 7 265HX has 102.4 GB/s over a dual-channel bus.
Q: What is the difference in their average benchmark scores?
A: The Ultra 7 265HX has an average benchmark score of 63173, while the Core 5 330 has an average of 18345.
Q: Are both processors on the same manufacturing node?
A: Both use a 3 nm process, but the Core 5 330 is fabricated by Intel, while the Ultra 7 265HX is fabricated by TSMC.
Head-to-Head Benchmarks
The Cinebench results establish the overall shape of the comparison. In R15 multi-core, the Ultra 7 scores 4096 against 1325 for the Core 5, a 67.7% gap. R15 single-core shows 578 versus 186, a 67.8% gap. R20 multi-core continues the pattern: 17069 versus 5523, a 67.6% gap. R20 single-core shows 2409 versus 779, again 67.7%. R23 multi-core delivers 40642 versus 13150, and R23 single-core delivers 5737 versus 1856, both at 67.6%. The consistency across Cinebench versions is striking; the Ultra 7 maintains roughly the same margin regardless of the test generation.
The PassMark suite reveals where the two chips differ most. Integer math shows the largest delta at 73.8%, with the Ultra 7 scoring 126954 against 33258. Floating-point math follows at 72.8%, with scores of 161605 and 43885. Data encryption shows a 71.9% gap, 39472 versus 11076. Prime number finding also shows 71.9%, 406 versus 114. Data compression shows 71.6%, 511817 versus 145287. Random string sorting shows 71.5%, 62458 versus 17771. Extended instructions show 68.6%, 40741 versus 12808.
Multithread performance shows a 67.8% advantage, with scores of 47985 and 15471. The physics test shows the smallest gap at 59.7%, with 2978 versus 1201. The single-thread PassMark tests show the least dramatic difference: 4500 versus 4088, a delta of only 9.2%. That result is notable because every other benchmark shows a gap of at least 59.7%. It suggests the Core 5 330 has a respectable single-core design, but the Ultra 7 still wins that test. The overall pattern is clear: the Ultra 7 265HX delivers roughly three times the multi-threaded performance of the Core 5 330, while its single-thread advantage is comparatively modest.
Specification Differences
The socket differs between the two: the Core 5 330 uses Intel BGA 1516, while the Ultra 7 265HX uses Intel BGA 2114. The Core 5 330 belongs to the Wildcat Lake generation, while the Ultra 7 265HX belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2, codenamed Arrow Lake-HX. The base clocks differ substantially, 1.50 GHz versus 2.60 GHz, as do the boost clocks, 4.60 GHz versus 5.30 GHz. The TDP rating is 15 W for the Core 5 and 55 W for the Ultra 7. The Core 5 has 6 cores and 6 threads; the Ultra 7 has 20 cores and 20 threads. L2 cache is 2.5 MB for the Core 5 versus 3 MB per core for the Ultra 7. L3 cache is 6 MB shared versus 30 MB shared. Memory support includes LPDDR5X for the Core 5 but not for the Ultra 7, which supports only DDR5. Memory bus is single-channel for the Core 5 and dual-channel for the Ultra 7. PCIe generation is Gen 4 for the Core 5 and Gen 5 for the Ultra 7, with 6 lanes versus 20 lanes. The integrated graphics are Xe3 with 2 Xe cores for the Core 5 and Arc Xe-LPG with 64 execution units for the Ultra 7. The Ultra 7 has an unlocked multiplier; the Core 5 does not. The Core 5 has a launch MSRP of $309, while the Ultra 7 has no recorded launch MSRP. The release dates differ as well: the Core 5 released on 2026-04-15, while the Ultra 7 released on 2025-01-12. The Core 5 has a part number of SAE3G, and the Ultra 7 has a part number of SRVFH.