Intel Core 5 330 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 265K Comparison
Intel Core 5 330
Core Ultra 7 265K
PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS
Analysis: Intel Core 5 330 vs Intel Core Ultra 7 265K
The database's head-to-head record is one-sided. Across 17 benchmark comparisons, the Intel Core Ultra 7 265K records 17 wins and the Intel Core 5 330 records none. The aggregate average scores are 70879 for the Ultra 7 265K and 18345 for the Core 5 330, which places them in the 94th and 72nd percentiles of all CPUs, respectively.
Head-to-Head Benchmarks
The largest margins belong to data-heavy workloads. In PassMark data compression, the Ultra 7 265K scores 665554 against 145287, a delta of -78.2%. Random string sorting follows at 79752 vs 17771, or -77.7%. Data encryption is 48246 vs 11076, or -77.0%. Extended instructions show 54333 vs 12808, or -76.4%. Floating point math is 189629 vs 43885, or -76.9%, and integer math is 143242 vs 33258, or -76.8%. Find prime numbers goes 491 vs 114, also -76.8%.
Multi-threaded rendering is similarly lopsided. Cinebench R15 multi-core is 5020 vs 1325 (-73.6%), R20 multi-core 20918 vs 5523 (-73.6%), and R23 multi-core 35850 vs 13150 (-63.3%). PassMark multithread is 58594 vs 15471 (-73.6%), and PassMark physics is 3731 vs 1201 (-67.8%).
Single-threaded tests provide the Core 5 330's best results. Cinebench R23 single-core is 2020 vs 1856, a -8.1% gap. PassMark single-thread is 4928 vs 4088, a -17% gap. Cinebench R15 single-core (708 vs 186, -73.7%) and R20 single-core (2953 vs 779, -73.6%) show a much larger separation.
Relative to the broader database, the two chips occupy different neighborhoods. The Core 5 330's 18345 average is 0.1% above the Core i3-14100 (18318), 0.2% above the Core 3 305 (18302), 0.2% below the Core 7 360 (18374), and 0.2% below the Core i3-13100 (18380). The Ultra 7 265K's 70879 average is 1% above the Core i7-14700KF (70163), 1.3% above the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F (69996), 0.2% below the Intel Xeon 6511P (71051), and 0.7% below the Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 (71370).
Architecture Differences
The two processors are both 3 nm parts, but they are built by different foundries. Intel fabricates the Core 5 330, while TSMC fabricates the Core Ultra 7 265K. The Core 5 330 is a Wildcat Lake mobile chip on Intel BGA 1516 with a release date of 2026-04-15. Its generation is listed as Core 5 (Wildcat Lake). The Ultra 7 265K is an Arrow Lake-S desktop chip on Intel Socket 1851 with a release date of 2024-10-23. Its series is Core Ultra Series 2, its generation is listed as Ultra 7 (Arrow Lake), and its architecture is Arrow Lake. Both parts have active production status.
Core resources differ substantially. The Core 5 330 has 6 cores and 6 threads. The Core Ultra 7 265K has 20 cores and 20 threads. The Core 5 330 runs at 1.50 GHz base and 4.60 GHz boost. The Ultra 7 265K runs at 3.90 GHz base and 5.50 GHz boost. TDP is 15 W for the mobile part and 125 W for the desktop part.
Cache and memory configurations reinforce the gap. The Core 5 330 lists 192 KB L1, 2.5 MB L2, and 6 MB shared L3. The Ultra 7 265K lists 192 KB L1 per core, 3 MB L2 per core, and 30 MB shared L3. The Ultra 7 265K also reports 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die; the Core 5 330 does not report transistor or die size data. Memory support is DDR5 and LPDDR5X on a single-channel 59.7 GB/s bus for the Core 5 330, versus DDR5 on a dual-channel 102.4 GB/s bus for the Ultra 7 265K. ECC memory is supported only on the Ultra 7 265K.
Expansion and graphics also differ. The Core 5 330 offers PCIe Gen 4, 6 lanes (CPU only) and Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe). The Ultra 7 265K offers PCIe Gen 5, 20 lanes (CPU only) and Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU. The Ultra 7 265K has an unlocked multiplier; the Core 5 330 does not. Market segments are Mobile for the Core 5 330 and Desktop for the Ultra 7 265K.
Where Each One Wins
In terms of recorded benchmark wins, this section has a single outcome: the Core Ultra 7 265K wins all 17 head-to-head tests. The Core 5 330 wins none. The closest that the Core 5 330 comes to a victory is Cinebench R23 single-core, where it trails 1856 to 2020, a -8.1% margin. PassMark single-thread is the next closest at 4088 vs 4928, a -17% margin. Every other head-to-head test has a gap of -63.3% or worse.
The workload split is therefore not about which chip wins a category, but about how large the Ultra 7 265K's advantage is. Data compression, encryption, extended instructions, prime number finding, floating point math, integer math, and random string sorting all show deficits between -76.4% and -78.2% for the Core 5 330. Multithread and physics tests show deficits around -67.8% to -73.6%. The single-threaded Cinebench R23 test is the only one where the gap is below 10%.
The Core 5 330's non-benchmark characteristics point to a different use case. It is a 15 W mobile processor with single-channel memory, LPDDR5X support, and Intel Xe3 Graphics. The Ultra 7 265K is a 125 W desktop processor with dual-channel memory, ECC support, and Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU. The database records no benchmark where the mobile chip is ahead.
FAQ
Q: Which CPU wins the head-to-head benchmark suite?
A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K wins all 17 recorded head-to-head comparisons. The Intel Core 5 330 wins 0. The largest margin is -78.2% in PassMark data compression, and the smallest is -8.1% in Cinebench R23 single-core.
Q: How do the two compare in Cinebench R23?
A: In multi-core, the Ultra 7 265K scores 35850 and the Core 5 330 scores 13150, a -63.3% delta. In single-core, the Ultra 7 265K scores 2020 and the Core 5 330 scores 1856, a -8.1% delta.
Q: What are the core, thread, and cache counts?
A: The Core 5 330 has 6 cores, 6 threads, 2.5 MB L2, and 6 MB shared L3. The Ultra 7 265K has 20 cores, 20 threads, 3 MB L2 per core, and 30 MB shared L3. L1 is 192 KB for the Core 5 330 and 192 KB per core for the Ultra 7 265K.
Q: Do the two CPUs use the same process node?
A: Both are listed on a 3 nm process. The Core 5 330 is fabricated by Intel, while the Core Ultra 7 265K is fabricated by TSMC.
Q: What memory and PCIe capabilities differ?
A: The Core 5 330 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X on a single-channel 59.7 GB/s bus with no ECC and PCIe Gen 4, 6 lanes (CPU only). The Ultra 7 265K supports DDR5 on a dual-channel 102.4 GB/s bus with ECC and PCIe Gen 5, 20 lanes (CPU only).
Q: What is the average benchmark score and percentile for each?
A: The Core 5 330 has an average benchmark score of 18345 and sits in the 72nd percentile. The Ultra 7 265K has an average benchmark score of 70879 and sits in the 94th percentile.
The Verdict
The recorded data is unambiguous. The Core Ultra 7 265K is faster in every benchmark where the two are compared, and its aggregate average score of 70879 is far higher than the Core 5 330's 18345. It brings 20 cores, 30 MB shared L3, dual-channel 102.4 GB/s memory, PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes, ECC support, and an unlocked multiplier. It is a desktop part with a 125 W TDP.
The Core 5 330 is the mobile option: 15 W TDP, single-channel memory, 6 cores, 6 MB shared L3, and BGA 1516. It does not win any recorded comparison, but its single-threaded Cinebench R23 result is only 8.1% behind, and its PassMark single-thread result is 17% behind. The database places it near the Core i3-14100 and Core 3 305, while the Ultra 7 265K sits near the Intel Xeon 6511P and Core i7-14700KF.
For a desktop system where maximum multi-threaded, encryption, compression, and single-thread performance is the goal, the data supports the Core Ultra 7 265K. For a mobile, low-power platform, the Core 5 330 is the part that matches that segment, though it does not offer the Ultra 7 265K's benchmark performance.