Intel Core 7 150U vs Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus wins every single recorded head-to-head test, 17 out of 17 comparisons. The Intel Core 7 150U does not secure a single victory in any workload category measured. For applications that stress multi-core performance, the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is dramatically faster, often by 70% or more. The Core 7 150U is a mobile processor with a 15 W TDP, while the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is a desktop part with a 125 W TDP; the data shows the desktop chip delivers massively higher throughput.

The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus sits in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 66855. The Core 7 150U sits in the 71st percentile, with an average score of 17395. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is the clear choice for desktop builds where multi-threaded performance, large cache, and PCIe Gen 5 connectivity are priorities. The Core 7 150U is the sensible pick only for compact, low-power mobile systems where the 15 W TDP and BGA socket are mandatory constraints. Based strictly on the recorded data, the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is the superior processor for almost any performance-oriented task.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel generations and foundries. The Core 7 150U uses the Raptor Lake architecture, specifically Raptor Lake-U, built on Intel's 10 nm process node. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus uses the Arrow Lake Refresh codename from the Core Ultra Series 2, fabricated by TSMC on a 3 nm node. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus also has significantly more transistors: 17,800 million, with a die size of 243 mm². The Core 7 150U has no listed transistor count or die size in the database.

Core configuration differs sharply. The Core 7 150U has 10 cores and 12 threads, indicating a hybrid layout with performance and efficiency cores. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has 18 cores and 18 threads, meaning every core has its own thread, no simultaneous multithreading. Cache hierarchies also diverge. The Core 7 150U has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3 cache. The larger L3 on the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is 2.5 times the size of the Core 7 150U's L3.

Memory support differs as well. The Core 7 150U supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory on a dual-channel bus. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus supports only DDR5, also dual-channel, but with a listed memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus also supports ECC memory, while the Core 7 150U does not. PCIe connectivity is another major split: the Core 7 150U offers Gen 4 with 8 CPU lanes, while the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus offers Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes. The integrated graphics differ: Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units on the Core 7 150U versus Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units on the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus leads by enormous margins in every multi-core benchmark. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus scores 30867 versus the Core 7 150U's 8883, a delta of 71.2% in favor of the desktop chip. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows a similar gap: 18442 against 5248, a 71.5% difference. Cinebench R15 multi-core sees the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus at 4640 versus 1505.5, a 67.6% lead.

Single-core performance also favors the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus, but by smaller margins. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus scores 2261 versus 1875.5, a 17% advantage. Cinebench R20 single-core shows 2603 versus 740, a 71.6% lead, which is an outlier compared to the other single-core tests. Cinebench R15 single-core has the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus at 328 versus 254, a 22.6% lead. PassMark single-thread tests show 4757 versus 3508, a 26.3% difference.

PassMark workloads reveal where the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus excels most. The largest deltas are in extended instructions (44565 versus 8748, an 80.4% gap), find prime numbers (486 versus 58, an 88.1% gap), and floating point math (162692 versus 34405, a 78.9% gap). Data encryption shows a 76.2% lead (42144 versus 10025), and random string sorting shows a 73.6% lead (69090 versus 18269). Data compression shows a 72.1% lead (568721 versus 158622). The smallest delta outside of single-core tests is integer math, where the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus leads by 59.2% (125091 versus 51057). PassMark multithread shows 51596 versus 14700, a 71.5% lead, and physics shows 3494 versus 1012, a 71% lead.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ on nearly every specification field. The Core 7 150U has 10 cores and 12 threads; the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has 18 cores and 18 threads. Base clocks are 1.80 GHz for the Core 7 150U and 4.20 GHz for the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus. Boost clocks are closer: 5.40 GHz versus 5.30 GHz, with the Core 7 150U actually having a 0.10 GHz higher boost. TDP is a major differentiator: 15 W for the Core 7 150U, 125 W for the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus.

Sockets are incompatible: Intel BGA 1744 for the Core 7 150U, Intel Socket 1851 for the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus. The Core 7 150U uses a 10 nm process from Intel; the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus uses a 3 nm process from TSMC. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has a listed transistor count of 17,800 million and a die size of 243 mm²; the Core 7 150U has neither listed. L1 cache per core is 80 KB versus 192 KB, L2 per core is 1.25 MB versus 3 MB, L3 shared is 12 MB versus 30 MB. The Core 7 150U supports DDR4 and DDR5; the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus supports only DDR5. Memory bandwidth is listed only for the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus at 115.2 GB/s. ECC memory is available only on the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus. PCIe is Gen 4 with 8 lanes versus Gen 5 with 20 lanes. Integrated graphics are Iris Xe 96EU versus Arc Xe-LPG 64EU. The Core 7 150U is a mobile part; the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is a desktop part. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has an unlocked multiplier; the Core 7 150U does not. Release dates are 2024-01-07 for the Core 7 150U and 2026-03-10 for the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has a launch MSRP of $199.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has 18 cores and 18 threads. The Intel Core 7 150U has 10 cores and 12 threads.

Q: How much larger is the L3 cache on the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus?

A: The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has 30 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core 7 150U has 12 MB of shared L3 cache, making the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus's cache 2.5 times larger.

Q: What is the performance gap in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus scores 30867, while the Core 7 150U scores 8883. This represents a 71.2% advantage for the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus.

Q: Does the Core 7 150U win any benchmark?

A: No. The head-to-head data records 17 benchmark comparisons, and the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus wins all 17. The Core 7 150U records zero wins.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus supports ECC memory. The Intel Core 7 150U does not support ECC memory.

Q: What are the boost clock speeds of the two processors?

A: The Core 7 150U has a boost clock of 5.40 GHz. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. The Core 7 150U has a slightly higher boost clock by 0.10 GHz.

Where Each One Wins

The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus wins every recorded benchmark, so the use-case split is determined by the magnitude of its advantages and the platform constraints. The largest deltas are in extended instructions (80.4% ahead), find prime numbers (88.1% ahead), and floating point math (78.9% ahead). These are compute-heavy workloads, and the data indicates the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is the dominant choice for scientific computing, encryption, and any task that scales with core count and large cache. The 18 cores, 30 MB L3, and 125 W TDP provide the raw resources for sustained multi-threaded throughput.

The Core 7 150U retains relevance only in one specific scenario: mobile computing. Its 15 W TDP and Intel BGA 1744 socket are designed for laptops and compact devices where power draw and physical footprint are limiting factors. The Core 7 150U's boost clock of 5.40 GHz is higher than the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus's 5.30 GHz, but in practice the single-core benchmark results still favor the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus by 17% to 26.3% depending on the test. The Core 7 150U also supports DDR4 memory, which may be advantageous for systems with older memory modules, but the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus offers higher memory bandwidth at 115.2 GB/s with DDR5.

For desktop builders who can accommodate a Socket 1851 motherboard and a 125 W TDP cooler, the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is the only logical choice from this dataset. It delivers 3.8 times the average benchmark score (66855 versus 17395), sits in the 93rd percentile versus the 71st percentile, and offers PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes versus Gen 4 with 8 lanes. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus also has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking, which the Core 7 150U lacks. The data shows no workload category where the Core 7 150U comes out ahead, so its only advantage is the low-power mobile form factor.