Intel Core 7 240H vs Intel Core Ultra 5 225T Comparison

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T and Intel Core 7 240H are two very different processors that happen to share a 10-core count. The Ultra 5 225T is a desktop part built on Arrow Lake, while the Core 7 240H is a mobile chip from the Raptor Lake family. The database records an overall average score of 30468 for the Ultra 5 225T and 31483 for the Core 7 240H, yet the direct head-to-head tests tell a more nuanced story: the Ultra 5 wins 13 of 17 comparisons, while the Core 7 takes only 4. This split suggests that the two chips are optimized for different workloads, and the benchmark data reveals exactly where each one excels.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most lopsided victory belongs to the Ultra 5 225T in the Cinebench R23 single-core test, where it scores 3101 against the Core 7's 1719, a delta of 80.4%. That is a massive gap, and it is not an isolated result. The Ultra 5 also leads in Cinebench R15 single-core by 25.3% (312 vs 249) and in R20 single-core by 7.8% (1302 vs 1208). Passmark's single-thread test shows a 15% advantage (4348 vs 3782). The pattern is clear: the Ultra 5's single-thread performance is decisively superior across every recorded test.

Multi-threaded results are more mixed, but the Ultra 5 still dominates most of them. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Ultra 5 scores 21971 versus 15764, a 39.4% lead. R20 multi-core goes to the Ultra 5 by 7.8% (9227 vs 8562). Passmark's multithread test also favors the Ultra 5, with a 5.8% edge (25358 vs 23975). However, the Core 7 240H wins the older Cinebench R15 multi-core test, scoring 2360 against 2214, a 6.2% advantage. That is the only Cinebench multi-core test the Core 7 wins, and it is worth remembering the R15 test is from an older generation of the benchmark.

Beyond Cinebench, the Ultra 5 225T shows strong results in several specialized workloads. It leads in Passmark's find prime numbers test by a staggering 178.4% (284 vs 102). Floating point math goes to the Ultra 5 by 40.5% (82751 vs 58905). Data encryption is 20.7% faster (18289 vs 15155), and extended instructions are 18.9% ahead (20083 vs 16897). Physics simulation also favors the Ultra 5, with a 19.2% lead (2053 vs 1723). These are not marginal differences; they represent substantial performance advantages in compute-heavy tasks.

The Core 7 240H, meanwhile, wins in four specific areas. Its biggest win is in Passmark's integer math test, where it scores 80396 against the Ultra 5's 59543, a 25.9% advantage. Data compression also goes to the Core 7, with a 13.9% lead (271774 vs 233998). Random string sorting is nearly a tie, but the Core 7 edges ahead by 0.3% (28866 vs 28774). And as mentioned, it wins Cinebench R15 multi-core by 6.2%. These wins are concentrated in integer-heavy and compression-oriented workloads, which suggests a different design philosophy.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T is the better choice for anyone who prioritizes single-thread performance, rendering, floating-point math, encryption, and most multi-threaded tasks. Its 80.4% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core and 39.4% lead in R23 multi-core are particularly compelling for content creation and scientific workloads. The Core 7 240H, on the other hand, is the stronger option for integer-heavy applications like data compression, integer math, and random string sorting. Its 25.9% win in integer math and 13.9% win in data compression are significant for those specific use cases.

However, the overall average score in the database favors the Core 7 240H (31483 vs 30468), which may reflect a broader set of benchmarks beyond the head-to-head list. That said, the head-to-head results are the most direct comparison, and they show the Ultra 5 winning 13 of 17 tests. For a desktop user who needs a well-rounded processor, the Ultra 5 225T is the safer bet. For a mobile user who values integer throughput and compression, the Core 7 240H has a niche advantage. The Core 7 also has a higher boost clock (5.20 GHz vs 4.90 GHz) and more threads (16 vs 10), but those advantages do not translate into wins in most tests.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different architectures. The Ultra 5 225T uses Arrow Lake, a 3 nm process from TSMC, while the Core 7 240H uses Raptor Lake, a 10 nm process from Intel. The process node difference is stark: 3 nm versus 10 nm, which likely explains the Ultra 5's superior efficiency and single-thread performance. The Ultra 5 has 10 cores and 10 threads, meaning no hyperthreading, while the Core 7 has 10 cores and 16 threads, indicating hyperthreading is enabled. Despite having fewer threads, the Ultra 5 still wins most multi-threaded tests, which reflects its architectural efficiency.

Cache layouts also differ. The Ultra 5 has 192 KB of L1 cache per core and 3 MB of L2 per core, while the Core 7 has 80 KB of L1 and 2 MB of L2 per core. The Ultra 5's larger per-core caches likely contribute to its single-thread advantage. However, the Core 7 has a larger shared L3 cache: 24 MB versus 20 MB. This may help in workloads that benefit from a larger pool of shared data, such as integer math and compression.

Memory support is another differentiator. The Ultra 5 supports only DDR5, with a dual-channel bus and a recorded memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. The Core 7 supports both DDR4 and DDR5, also dual-channel, but no bandwidth figure is recorded in the database. The Ultra 5 also offers more PCIe lanes: 20 lanes of Gen 5, compared to 8 lanes for the Core 7. This makes the Ultra 5 more suitable for desktop expansion, while the Core 7 is limited to a mobile platform.

Integrated graphics differ as well. The Ultra 5 has Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 16 execution units, while the Core 7 has Iris Xe Graphics with 64 EUs. The Core 7's iGPU has more EUs, but the Ultra 5's is based on a newer architecture. Neither is a gaming powerhouse, but the Core 7 may have an edge in graphics compute if needed.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has better single-thread performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T wins every single-thread test. It leads by 25.3% in Cinebench R15, 7.8% in R20, 80.4% in R23, and 15% in Passmark's single-thread test.

Q: Which CPU is better for multi-threaded workloads?

A: The Ultra 5 225T wins most multi-threaded tests, including Cinebench R20 (7.8% ahead) and R23 (39.4% ahead), plus Passmark multithread (5.8% ahead). The Core 7 240H wins only Cinebench R15 multi-core by 6.2%.

Q: Why does the Core 7 240H have a higher overall average score?

A: The database records an average score of 31483 for the Core 7 versus 30468 for the Ultra 5. This may reflect a broader set of benchmarks beyond the head-to-head list, but in direct comparisons the Ultra 5 wins 13 of 17 tests.

Q: Which CPU is better for integer math?

A: The Core 7 240H is significantly better, scoring 80396 versus 59543 in Passmark's integer math test, a 25.9% advantage. It also wins data compression by 13.9%.

Q: Does the Core 7 240H have more threads?

A: Yes, the Core 7 has 16 threads versus 10 for the Ultra 5, thanks to hyperthreading. Despite this, the Ultra 5 wins most multi-threaded tests.

Q: What is the process node difference?

A: The Ultra 5 225T is built on a 3 nm process from TSMC, while the Core 7 240H uses a 10 nm process from Intel. This is a major architectural difference that likely explains the Ultra 5's performance efficiency.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T is the clear winner for rendering and content creation. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 21971 is 39.4% higher than the Core 7's 15764, and its single-core score is 80.4% higher. For scientific computing, the Ultra 5's 40.5% lead in floating-point math and 178.4% lead in prime number finding make it the obvious choice. Encryption workloads also favor the Ultra 5, with a 20.7% advantage in data encryption. If you need a desktop processor for video editing, 3D rendering, or numerical simulation, the Ultra 5 225T is the stronger pick.

The Intel Core 7 240H, on the other hand, is the winner for integer-heavy tasks. Its 25.9% lead in integer math and 13.9% lead in data compression are substantial. Random string sorting is nearly tied, but the Core 7 edges ahead by 0.3%. These workloads are common in database operations, file compression, and some financial modeling. The Core 7 also wins the older Cinebench R15 multi-core test, which may be relevant for legacy software. For a mobile user who primarily runs compression tools or integer-based analytics, the Core 7 240H offers a specific advantage.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specifications. The Ultra 5 225T has 10 threads, while the Core 7 240H has 16. The boost clock is higher on the Core 7 (5.20 GHz vs 4.90 GHz), but the base clock is identical at 2.50 GHz. TDP differs: 65 W for the Ultra 5 versus 45 W for the Core 7. The socket is different: Intel Socket 1851 for the Ultra 5, Intel BGA 1744 for the Core 7. The architecture is Arrow Lake for the Ultra 5 and Raptor Lake for the Core 7. The process node is 3 nm (TSMC) for the Ultra 5 and 10 nm (Intel) for the Core 7. Cache sizes differ: L1 is 192 KB per core on the Ultra 5 versus 80 KB per core on the Core 7; L2 is 3 MB per core versus 2 MB per core; L3 is 20 MB shared versus 24 MB shared. Memory support: the Ultra 5 supports only DDR5, while the Core 7 supports DDR4 and DDR5. The Ultra 5 has a recorded memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s, while the Core 7 has no recorded figure. PCIe lanes: 20 Gen 5 lanes for the Ultra 5, 8 Gen 5 lanes for the Core 7. Integrated graphics: Arc Xe-LPG with 16 EUs on the Ultra 5, Iris Xe with 64 EUs on the Core 7. Market segment: Desktop for the Ultra 5, Mobile for the Core 7. Release dates: the Ultra 5 launched on 2024-12-31, the Core 7 on 2024-12-17. The Core 7 has a launch MSRP of $502, while the Ultra 5 has no recorded MSRP. The part number for the Core 7 is SRQ6TQ5ML, while the Ultra 5's is unknown.