Intel Core 5 330 vs Intel Core Ultra X9 378H Comparison

Intel Core 5 330 and Intel Core Ultra X9 378H represent two distinct tiers in Intel's mobile lineup. The data shows the Ultra X9 378H as the clear performance leader, winning all 17 recorded head-to-head benchmarks. However, the Core 5 330 serves a different purpose, trading heavily on efficiency and platform simplicity. This analysis breaks down where each processor fits based strictly on the recorded measurements.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data is unilateral. The Intel Core Ultra X9 378H wins every single recorded test, from single-thread to multi-thread workloads. The Core 5 330 does not hold a single victory in the database, so its appeal lies entirely outside raw compute performance.

The Core 5 330 wins on platform efficiency. It has a 15 W TDP compared to the Ultra X9 378H's 25 W TDP. It uses a single-channel memory bus, which reduces power draw and system complexity, and it supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory types. The Ultra X9 378H only supports LPDDR5X, which limits memory flexibility.

The Ultra X9 378H wins on every performance metric. In multi-threaded workloads, its 16 cores and 16 threads crush the 6 cores and 6 threads of the Core 5 330. The data shows the Ultra X9 378H's average benchmark score is 47468, placing it in the 89th percentile of all CPUs. The Core 5 330 averages 18345, sitting in the 72nd percentile.

For buyers who need sustained multi-core performance, the Ultra X9 378H is the only choice here. The Core 5 330 is the choice for fanless or ultra-thin designs where the 15 W TDP and single-channel memory matter more than benchmark scores.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural families. The Core 5 330 uses the Wildcat Lake codename, while the Ultra X9 378H uses Panther Lake. Both are built on a 3 nm process node at Intel's foundry.

The core counts differ dramatically. The Core 5 330 has 6 cores and 6 threads, meaning no hyperthreading. The Ultra X9 378H has 16 cores and 16 threads, also without hyperthreading but with nearly triple the physical cores. This core advantage shows in every multi-threaded test.

Cache hierarchies also differ. The Core 5 330 has 192 KB of L1, 2.5 MB of L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. The Ultra X9 378H has 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and a much larger 18 MB of shared L3. The "per core" designation on the Ultra X9 378H means its total L2 cache scales with the core count, giving it substantially more cache overall.

Clock speeds favor the Ultra X9 378H. Its base clock is 2.00 GHz with a boost of 5.00 GHz. The Core 5 330 runs at 1.50 GHz base and 4.60 GHz boost. The boost advantage of 0.40 GHz contributes to the single-thread performance gap.

Memory support differs. The Core 5 330 supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Ultra X9 378H is restricted to LPDDR5X but uses a dual-channel bus, doubling bandwidth to 153.6 GB/s. This bandwidth gap heavily impacts memory-sensitive workloads.

PCIe support also differs. The Core 5 330 offers Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes. The Ultra X9 378H offers Gen 5 with 4 CPU lanes. The newer Gen 5 standard provides higher per-lane bandwidth, but the Core 5 330 has more lanes.

The integrated graphics differ. The Core 5 330 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The Ultra X9 378H uses Arc B390, a higher-tier iGPU. Neither chip has an unlocked multiplier, so overclocking is not available.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-thread performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra X9 378H. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 4595 against the Core 5 330's 1856, a 59.6% difference. PassMark single-thread shows 4453 versus 4088, an 8.2% gap.

Q: How large is the multi-threaded performance gap?

A: The Ultra X9 378H leads by roughly 60% across Cinebench tests. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 32553 versus 13150, a 59.6% delta. PassMark multithread shows 38298 versus 15471, also a 59.6% delta.

Q: Which processor uses less power?

A: The Intel Core 5 330 has a 15 W TDP. The Intel Core Ultra X9 378H has a 25 W TDP. The Core 5 330 also uses a single-channel memory bus, which typically reduces platform power further.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory types?

A: No. The Core 5 330 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. The Ultra X9 378H supports only LPDDR5X. The Ultra X9 378H uses dual-channel memory with 153.6 GB/s bandwidth, while the Core 5 330 uses single-channel with 59.7 GB/s.

Q: What are the nearest rivals for each processor?

A: The Core 5 330's closest rival is the Intel Core i3-14100, with an average score difference of 0.1%. The Ultra X9 378H's closest rival is the AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 5945, with a delta of -0.1%. The Ultra X9 378H also sits within 0.6% of the Intel Core i9-12900F.

Q: Which processor has a higher percentile ranking?

A: The Ultra X9 378H ranks in the 89th percentile of all CPUs. The Core 5 330 ranks in the 72nd percentile.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 5 330 | Intel Core Ultra X9 378H |

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

| Cores | 6 | 16 |

| Threads | 6 | 16 |

| Base clock | 1.50 GHz | 2.00 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.60 GHz | 5.00 GHz |

| TDP | 15 W | 25 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1516 | Intel BGA 2540 |

| Codename | Wildcat Lake | Panther Lake |

| L1 cache | 192 KB | 192 KB per core |

| L2 cache | 2.5 MB | 2.5 MB per core |

| L3 cache | 6 MB shared | 18 MB shared |

| Memory support | DDR5, LPDDR5X | LPDDR5X |

| Memory bus | Single-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory bandwidth | 59.7 GB/s | 153.6 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 6 lanes | Gen 5, 4 lanes |

| Integrated graphics | Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) | Arc B390 |

| Launch MSRP | $309 | None recorded |

| Release date | 2026-04-15 | 2026-04-03 |

| Average benchmark score | 18345 | 47468 |

| Percentile | 72 | 89 |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench suite shows a consistent pattern. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Ultra X9 378H scores 3281 against 1325, a 59.6% lead. Single-core R15 shows 462 versus 186, a 59.7% lead. The R20 tests mirror this: multi-core 13672 versus 5523 and single-core 1929 versus 779, both at 59.6% deltas. Cinebench R23 continues the trend: 32553 versus 13150 multi-core and 4595 versus 1856 single-core, again at 59.6%.

PassMark results show similar gaps with some variation. The largest delta is in PassMark find prime numbers, where the Ultra X9 378H scores 357 against 114, a 68.1% lead. Integer math shows 92603 versus 33258, a 64.1% lead. Physics shows 3404 versus 1201, a 64.7% lead. Data encryption shows 29840 versus 11076, a 62.9% lead.

The smallest gap appears in PassMark single-thread. The Ultra X9 378H scores 4453 against 4088, an 8.2% lead. This is the only test where the two processors are remotely close, confirming that the Ultra X9 378H's advantage is far more pronounced in multi-threaded work.

Data compression shows 386591 versus 145287, a 62.4% lead. Floating point math shows 114500 versus 43885, a 61.7% lead. Extended instructions show 31315 versus 12808, a 59.1% lead. Random string sorting shows 44648 versus 17771, a 60.2% lead. PassMark multithread shows 38298 versus 15471, a 59.6% lead.

The Ultra X9 378H's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 5945 and the Intel Core i7-13700KF. The Core 5 330's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i3-14100 and the Intel Core 7 360. This places the two chips in entirely different competitive tiers.

The Verdict

The Intel Core Ultra X9 378H delivers more than double the average benchmark score of the Core 5 330, 47468 versus 18345. It wins every recorded benchmark and sits in the 89th percentile of all CPUs. For multi-threaded rendering, data compression, or physics workloads, the 16-core configuration with 18 MB of L3 and dual-channel memory at 153.6 GB/s provides definitive advantages.

The Intel Core 5 330 has a 15 W TDP, a single-channel memory bus, and support for both DDR5 and LPDDR5X. It uses the older BGA 1516 socket and PCIe Gen 4. These traits suit compact, power-sensitive mobile designs where the 59.7 GB/s memory bandwidth is sufficient and the 6-core layout keeps thermals low. Its 72nd percentile ranking shows it is still a capable processor for everyday tasks.

The recorded data offers no ambiguity. The Ultra X9 378H is the performance pick for workloads that scale with cores, cache, and memory bandwidth. The Core 5 330 is the efficiency pick for systems where the 15 W TDP and simpler memory topology take priority over compute throughput. The 8.2% single-thread gap in PassMark shows the Core 5 330 is closer in lightly threaded tasks, but the 59.6% multi-thread deficits across Cinebench make the Ultra X9 378H the clear choice for demanding applications.