Intel Core i5-10600KF vs Intel Core Ultra 5 115U Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data splits these two processors into clearly distinct roles. The Intel Core i5-10600KF takes the majority of the workload categories, winning 11 of the 17 head-to-head comparisons. The Intel Core Ultra 5 115U wins 6. That raw count, however, understates how lopsided some of the victories are in each direction.

The Core i5-10600KF dominates in tasks that reward sustained multi-threaded throughput and large data movement. Its most decisive win is in PassMark data compression, where it scores 211643 against 141945 for the Ultra 5 115U, a gap of 32.9%. Random string sorting follows a similar pattern, with the i5-10600KF posting 26532 versus 15124, a 43% advantage. These are workloads that stress memory bandwidth and integer pipeline efficiency, areas where the desktop part's higher power envelope and older but larger-core design still hold sway.

The i5-10600KF also wins every Cinebench iteration in the comparison, both single-core and multi-core. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 12003 against 10855, a 9.6% margin. Single-core R23 shows the same 9.6% edge, 1694 versus 1532. The consistency across all six Cinebench tests is notable: the desktop chip leads by 9.4% to 9.6% in every rendering workload recorded, regardless of thread count.

The Ultra 5 115U, by contrast, wins in a narrower set of specialized tasks. Its largest victory is in PassMark data encryption, where it scores 8606 against 4832, a 78.1% advantage. That is the single biggest delta in either direction across the entire comparison. It also wins PassMark find prime numbers by 17.8%, PassMark physics by 10.9%, and PassMark floating point math by 3.4%. In single-threaded PassMark tests, the Ultra 5 115U edges ahead with 3057 versus 2908, a 5.1% margin.

The pattern is clear: the Ultra 5 115U wins where cryptography, prime-number sieving, or floating-point throughput dominates. The i5-10600KF wins where compression, sorting, integer math, and rendering scale with raw core count and clock speed.

The Verdict

The choice between these two processors depends entirely on the workload profile, and the data supports a clean split.

For rendering, compression, sorting, and general integer-heavy productivity, the Intel Core i5-10600KF is the stronger pick. It wins every Cinebench test by roughly 9.5%, including the all-important R23 multi-core score of 12003. It also crushes the Ultra 5 115U in data compression by 32.9% and in random string sorting by 43%. Anyone whose daily tasks involve video encoding, 3D rendering, database compression, or large file archiving should favor the desktop chip without hesitation.

For encryption, physics simulation, prime-number workloads, and single-threaded PassMark performance, the Ultra 5 115U is the better option. Its 78.1% lead in data encryption is not a marginal edge; it is a generational difference in cryptographic throughput. The 10.9% win in PassMark physics and the 17.8% win in find prime numbers further indicate that certain mathematical workloads run significantly better on the Meteor Lake architecture. The 5.1% single-thread PassMark advantage also matters for lightly threaded interactive tasks.

The two processors sit at the same 70th percentile among all CPUs in the database, and their average benchmark scores are close: 16753 for the Ultra 5 115U versus 16228 for the i5-10600KF. The database also places the Ultra 5 115U within 0.6% of rivals like the Intel Core i3-12100E and AMD Ryzen 3 8440U, while the i5-10600KF trades blows with the Intel Core i7-10850H and AMD Ryzen 5 4600H. Neither chip is a runaway overall winner, but each is clearly better at specific jobs.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest margin in the entire comparison belongs to the Ultra 5 115U in PassMark data encryption. Its score of 8606 dwarfs the 4832 posted by the i5-10600KF, a 78.1% advantage. This is not a small statistical fluctuation; it is a workload where the newer architecture's integrated cryptographic instructions and memory subsystem deliver outsized gains.

The i5-10600KF answers with equally dramatic wins in data movement tasks. PassMark random string sorting shows the desktop chip at 26532 versus 15124, a 43% gap. Data compression is nearly as one-sided: 211643 versus 141945, a 32.9% deficit for the Ultra 5 115U. Extended instructions also favor the i5-10600KF by 39.2%, with scores of 14167 and 8620 respectively.

Cinebench results are uniform and telling. Across R15, R20, and R23, in both single-core and multi-core modes, the i5-10600KF leads by 9.4% to 9.6%. The R23 multi-core scores are 12003 and 10855; the R20 multi-core scores are 5041 and 4559; the R15 multi-core scores are 1209 and 1094. Single-core deltas mirror this pattern, with R23 at 1694 versus 1532. The consistency suggests a fundamental clock-speed and per-core efficiency advantage for the desktop part in rendering workloads, not a workload-specific quirk.

PassMark integer math goes to the i5-10600KF by 13.6%, 47508 versus 41043. PassMark multithread also favors the desktop chip, 14169 versus 13024, an 8.1% margin. These are broad workload indicators, and both point the same direction.

The Ultra 5 115U takes the remaining wins with smaller but still meaningful margins. PassMark find prime numbers: 53 versus 45, a 17.8% lead. PassMark physics: 898 versus 810, a 10.9% lead. PassMark floating point math: 30538 versus 29521, a 3.4% lead. Both PassMark single-thread entries show 3057 versus 2908, a 5.1% edge for the Ultra 5 115U.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Intel Core i5-10600KF scores 12003 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 115U scores 10855. The i5-10600KF leads by 9.6%.

Q: Is the Ultra 5 115U better at any single benchmark by a large margin?

A: Yes. In PassMark data encryption, the Ultra 5 115U scores 8606 against 4832 for the i5-10600KF, a 78.1% advantage. This is the largest delta in either direction in the entire comparison.

Q: How do the two processors compare in average benchmark score?

A: The Ultra 5 115U has an average benchmark score of 16753, while the i5-10600KF averages 16228. Both sit at the 70th percentile among all CPUs in the database.

Q: Which chip wins in single-threaded performance?

A: It depends on the benchmark. In PassMark single thread, the Ultra 5 115U scores 3057 versus 2908, a 5.1% win. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the i5-10600KF scores 1694 versus 1532, a 9.6% win.

Q: What are the closest rivals to each processor in the database?

A: The Ultra 5 115U sits within 0.6% of the Intel Core i3-12100E, AMD Ryzen 3 8440U, AMD Ryzen 3 7335U, and Intel Core i5-1235U. The i5-10600KF sits within 0.7% of the AMD Ryzen 5 4600H, Intel Core i7-1260U, Intel Core i7-10850H, and Intel Core 3 100U.

Q: Does the i5-10600KF win all rendering benchmarks?

A: Yes. It wins all six Cinebench tests in the comparison: R15, R20, and R23, each in both single-core and multi-core modes, with margins between 9.4% and 9.6%.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different eras and different design philosophies. The Intel Core Ultra 5 115U is a Meteor Lake part on a 7 nm process, built for mobile platforms on the Intel BGA 2049 socket. It has 8 cores and 10 threads, with a base clock of 1500 MHz and a boost clock of 4.20 GHz. Its thermal design power is 15 watts, which reflects its low-power mobile intent.

The Intel Core i5-10600KF is a Comet Lake desktop processor on a 14 nm process, using the Intel Socket 1200. It has 6 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 4.10 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. Its thermal design power is 95 watts, more than six times that of the Ultra 5 115U. The multiplier is unlocked on the i5-10600KF, allowing overclocking, while the Ultra 5 115U is locked.

Cache hierarchies differ substantially. The Ultra 5 115U provides 112 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 10 MB of shared L3 cache. The i5-10600KF provides 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3. The L3 allocation favors the desktop chip in total capacity, but the Ultra 5 115U has a much larger per-core L2 allocation.

Memory support diverges by platform generation. The Ultra 5 115U supports DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, though the exact modules depend on the motherboard. The i5-10600KF supports DDR4 with a dual-channel bus and a memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s. That is a 109.7% bandwidth advantage for the Ultra 5 115U, which helps explain its wins in memory-sensitive encryption and floating-point workloads.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The Ultra 5 115U offers PCIe Gen 4 with 12 CPU lanes, while the i5-10600KF offers PCIe Gen 3 with 16 CPU lanes. The newer standard on the mobile chip provides higher per-lane bandwidth, while the desktop chip offers more lanes.

The integrated graphics situation is one-sided. The Ultra 5 115U includes Arc Xe-LPG graphics with 48 execution units. The i5-10600KF has no integrated graphics at all, as indicated by the KF suffix, which requires a discrete GPU for display output. The Ultra 5 115U also carries ECC memory support as false, matching the i5-10600KF in that regard.

Release timing places the Ultra 5 115U in December 2023 and the i5-10600KF in April 2020. Both remain in active production status in the database. The process node difference, 7 nm versus 14 nm, explains much of the efficiency gap: the Ultra 5 115U achieves competitive average scores at a fraction of the power draw, while the i5-10600KF relies on higher clocks and more power to win throughput-bound tasks.