Intel Core 5 330 vs Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded data delivers a decisive outcome: the Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX wins all 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons against the Intel Core 5 330. The Ultra 9 275HX delivers an average benchmark score of 67469, placing it in the 94th percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 5 330 averages 18345, sitting in the 72nd percentile. For workloads that scale with core count, the Ultra 9 275HX is the clear choice, showing multi-core deltas that range from 63.1% to 78.6% ahead of the Core 5 330 depending on the test. The Core 5 330 is a low-power, single-channel memory part aimed at efficiency-focused mobile systems, while the Ultra 9 275HX is a high-core-count mobile flagship with dual-channel memory and a 5.4 GHz boost clock. Users needing maximum throughput in rendering, encryption, or math-heavy tasks should select the Ultra 9 275HX. Users prioritizing a compact, low-power footprint with modest single-threaded capability may consider the Core 5 330, but the benchmark data shows no performance category where the Core 5 330 leads.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every foundational specification. The Core 5 330 uses 6 cores and 6 threads, while the Ultra 9 275HX uses 24 cores and 24 threads, a 4x increase in both counts. Base clocks are 1.50 GHz for the Core 5 330 versus 2.70 GHz for the Ultra 9 275HX, and boost clocks are 4.60 GHz versus 5.40 GHz respectively. Thermal design power differs substantially: the Core 5 330 is rated at 15 W, the Ultra 9 275HX at 55 W. The Core 5 330 uses the Intel BGA 1516 socket, while the Ultra 9 275HX uses Intel BGA 2114. Memory support also diverges: the Core 5 330 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth, while the Ultra 9 275HX supports only DDR5 over a dual-channel bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. The Core 5 330 provides PCIe Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only), versus PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only) on the Ultra 9 275HX. The Ultra 9 275HX has an unlocked multiplier, whereas the Core 5 330 does not. The release dates differ as well: the Core 5 330 launched on 2026-04-15, the Ultra 9 275HX on 2025-01-12. The Core 5 330 has a launch MSRP of $309, while the Ultra 9 275HX has no listed launch MSRP in the database.

Architecture Differences

Both chips are built on a 3 nm process node, but the foundries differ: the Core 5 330 is fabricated by Intel, while the Ultra 9 275HX is fabricated by TSMC. The Core 5 330 belongs to the Wildcat Lake family, while the Ultra 9 275HX uses the Arrow Lake architecture under the codename Arrow Lake-HX. The Ultra 9 275HX carries 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die, while transistor count and die size are not recorded for the Core 5 330. Cache hierarchies are very different. The Core 5 330 has 192 KB of L1, 2.5 MB of L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. The Ultra 9 275HX has 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3, a 6x increase in shared L3 capacity. Integrated graphics also differ: the Core 5 330 includes Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores, while the Ultra 9 275HX includes Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 EU. Neither chip supports ECC memory. The Ultra 9 275HX is part of the Core Ultra Series 2, while the Core 5 330 has no series designation recorded. The Core 5 330 part number is SAE3G, and the Ultra 9 275HX part number is SRVFK.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Ultra 9 275HX dominates every recorded benchmark, with the smallest margins appearing in single-threaded tests and the largest in multi-core workloads. In Cinebench R23, the Ultra 9 275HX scores 35589 multi-core versus 13150 for the Core 5 330, a delta of 63.1%. The single-core gap in R23 is much smaller: 2204 versus 1856, a 15.8% difference. Cinebench R20 shows a similar pattern: multi-core is 19899 versus 5523, a 72.2% delta, while single-core is 2809 versus 779, a 72.3% delta. Cinebench R15 multi-core is 5619.5 versus 1325, a 76.4% delta, and single-core is 334 versus 186, a 44.3% delta.

PassMark results reinforce the trend. The largest deltas occur in integer math, where the Ultra 9 275HX scores 155218 versus 33258, a 78.6% advantage. Floating-point math shows 191186 versus 43885, a 77% delta. Data encryption is 47112 versus 11076, a 76.5% delta. Data compression is 608381 versus 145287, a 76.1% delta. Extended instructions are 47016 versus 12808, a 72.8% delta. Find prime numbers is 448 versus 114, a 74.6% delta. Random string sorting is 74320 versus 17771, a 76.1% delta. The multi-thread PassMark score is 55759 versus 15471, a 72.3% delta. Physics is 3338 versus 1201, a 64% delta. The smallest PassMark gap is single-threaded: 4713 versus 4088, a 13.3% delta. The database also records Geekbench scores only for the Ultra 9 275HX: 20795 multi-core and 2458 single-core, with no corresponding Core 5 330 scores in the head-to-head set.

The data indicates the Ultra 9 275HX gains ground as core count utilization increases. The single-threaded deltas of 13.3% to 44.3% reflect clock speed and architecture advantages, while the multi-core deltas of 63.1% to 78.6% reflect the combined effect of 24 cores versus 6, larger caches, and dual-channel memory.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX has 24 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Core 5 330 has 6 cores and 6 threads.

Q: How much faster is the Ultra 9 275HX in multi-core rendering?

A: In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Ultra 9 275HX scores 35589 versus 13150 for the Core 5 330, a 63.1% lead. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the lead is 72.2% (19899 versus 5523).

Q: What is the single-threaded performance difference?

A: In PassMark single-thread, the Ultra 9 275HX scores 4713 versus 4088, a 13.3% advantage. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the margin is 15.8% (2204 versus 1856).

Q: Do both processors use the same memory type?

A: No. The Core 5 330 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Ultra 9 275HX supports only DDR5 over a dual-channel bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: The Ultra 9 275HX has 36 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Core 5 330 has 6 MB of shared L3 cache, a 6x difference.

Q: Are both processors currently in production?

A: Yes, both the Core 5 330 and the Ultra 9 275HX have an active production status in the database.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX wins every recorded benchmark category, so the use-case split is defined by the magnitude of its advantage rather than by any Core 5 330 victory. In multi-threaded workloads, the Ultra 9 275HX is overwhelmingly superior. The largest wins appear in integer math (78.6%), floating-point math (77%), data encryption (76.5%), and data compression (76.1%). These results make the Ultra 9 275HX the appropriate selection for heavy computational tasks such as 3D rendering, scientific simulation, large-scale data processing, and encryption workloads. The Cinebench multi-core deltas of 63.1% to 76.4% confirm that the Ultra 9 275HX is the stronger choice for content creation and CPU-intensive batch tasks.

The Core 5 330 has a narrower, but still losing, gap in single-threaded tests. In PassMark single-thread, the Ultra 9 275HX leads by only 13.3% (4713 versus 4088), and in Cinebench R23 single-core the lead is 15.8% (2204 versus 1856). For workloads that rely primarily on single-thread responsiveness, such as light office applications or basic web browsing, the Core 5 330 is closer in performance, but the data still favors the Ultra 9 275HX. The Core 5 330's advantages are not in performance but in physical characteristics: a 15 W TDP versus 55 W, a smaller 6 MB L3 cache footprint, and support for LPDDR5X memory, which may suit thin-and-light mobile designs. The Core 5 330 also uses the Intel BGA 1516 socket and has a launch MSRP of $309, whereas the Ultra 9 275HX uses a different socket and has no recorded launch MSRP.

For users who prioritize raw throughput in any multi-threaded application, the Ultra 9 275HX is the only logical pick based on the recorded data. Its 94th percentile ranking versus the 72nd percentile for the Core 5 330, combined with an average benchmark score of 67469 versus 18345, leaves no performance category where the Core 5 330 is competitive. The Ultra 9 275HX also offers PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes versus Gen 4 with 6 lanes, an unlocked multiplier, and 36 MB of L3 cache, all of which support demanding workflows. The Core 5 330 remains a viable option only for power-constrained systems where the 15 W TDP and single-channel memory are acceptable, and where the performance deficit of 63% to 78% in multi-core tests is not a factor. The data is unambiguous: the Ultra 9 275HX is the stronger processor in every benchmarked dimension.