Intel Core i5-110 vs Intel Core Ultra 9 285 Comparison

The Verdict

The Intel Core i5-110 and Intel Core Ultra 9 285 occupy opposite ends of the desktop processor spectrum. The Core i5-110 is a 6-core, 12-thread Comet Lake part on Intel Socket 1200, while the Core Ultra 9 285 is a 24-core, 24-thread Arrow Lake-S flagship on Intel Socket 1851. The benchmark data shows the Core Ultra 9 285 delivering massive multi-core and single-core advantages across every recorded test, placing it in the 95th percentile of all CPUs. The Core i5-110 has no recorded benchmark scores and sits at the 50th percentile, meaning its performance position is unquantified in the database.

The Core Ultra 9 285 is the clear choice for workloads that scale with core count, threaded throughput, and raw compute speed. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 48,945 and PassMark multithread score of 56,602 indicate exceptional rendering and productivity performance. The Core i5-110, with its older architecture and lower core count, targets basic desktop usage, though its lack of benchmark data prevents a direct performance comparison. The Core Ultra 9 285 also supports ECC memory, which the Core i5-110 does not, making it suitable for error-sensitive computing environments. For users building on a strict platform budget, the Core i5-110 uses the older DDR4 memory standard and PCIe Gen 3, while the Core Ultra 9 285 requires DDR5 and PCIe Gen 5, which typically entails a more expensive platform overall.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel generations and manufacturing approaches. The Core i5-110 uses Comet Lake architecture on a 14 nm process fabricated by Intel itself. It has 6 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. The Core Ultra 9 285 uses Arrow Lake-S architecture on a 3 nm process fabricated by TSMC. It has 24 cores and 24 threads, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.60 GHz. The Core Ultra 9 285 contains 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die, while the Core i5-110 does not have recorded transistor or die size data.

Cache hierarchies differ substantially. The Core i5-110 uses 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 cache per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 9 285 uses 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 9 285 has triple the L3 cache and over ten times the per-core L2 cache compared to the older part. Memory support also diverges: the Core i5-110 uses DDR4 with dual-channel memory and 42.7 GB/s bandwidth, while the Core Ultra 9 285 uses DDR5 with dual-channel memory and 102.4 GB/s bandwidth, which is 2.4 times higher bandwidth.

PCIe connectivity differs as well. The Core i5-110 provides PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the Core Ultra 9 285 provides PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU. Integrated graphics are also different: the Core i5-110 has UHD Graphics 630, while the Core Ultra 9 285 has Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU. The Core Ultra 9 285 supports ECC memory, a feature absent on the Core i5-110. Both processors are locked with no unlocked multiplier, and both are marked as Active in production status. The Core Ultra 9 285 belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2 family and was released on 2024-12-31, while the Core i5-110 has a release date of 2025-09-10 and no series designation.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 has 24 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Core i5-110 has 6 cores and 12 threads. The Core Ultra 9 285 offers 4 times the core count and 2 times the thread count.

Q: What is the maximum boost clock difference?

A: The Core Ultra 9 285 boosts to 5.60 GHz, which is 1.30 GHz higher than the Core i5-110's 4.30 GHz boost clock. The Core i5-110 has a higher base clock of 2.90 GHz versus 2.50 GHz on the Core Ultra 9 285.

Q: Which processor has faster memory bandwidth?

A: The Core Ultra 9 285 delivers 102.4 GB/s of memory bandwidth with DDR5 support, which is 2.4 times higher than the Core i5-110's 42.7 GB/s with DDR4. Both use dual-channel memory buses.

Q: Does either processor support ECC memory?

A: The Core Ultra 9 285 supports ECC memory, while the Core i5-110 does not. This makes the Core Ultra 9 285 suitable for workstations and servers that require error-correcting memory.

Q: Which processor has a more advanced manufacturing process?

A: The Core Ultra 9 285 uses a 3 nm process from TSMC, while the Core i5-110 uses a 14 nm process from Intel. The Core Ultra 9 285 also has 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die.

Q: How do the integrated graphics compare?

A: The Core Ultra 9 285 uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU, while the Core i5-110 uses UHD Graphics 630. The Core Ultra 9 285's integrated graphics are from a newer architecture generation.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification field. The Core i5-110 has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Core Ultra 9 285 has 24 cores and 24 threads. Base clocks are 2.90 GHz for the Core i5-110 and 2.50 GHz for the Core Ultra 9 285. Boost clocks are 4.30 GHz versus 5.60 GHz, respectively. Both have a 65 W TDP.

The Core i5-110 uses Intel Socket 1200 with Comet Lake architecture on a 14 nm Intel process. The Core Ultra 9 285 uses Intel Socket 1851 with Arrow Lake architecture on a 3 nm TSMC process. The Core Ultra 9 285 has 17,800 million transistors and a 243 mm² die size, while the Core i5-110 has no recorded transistor or die data.

Cache configurations differ: L1 is 64 KB per core on the Core i5-110 versus 192 KB per core on the Core Ultra 9 285. L2 is 256 KB per core versus 3 MB per core. L3 is 12 MB shared versus 36 MB shared. Memory support is DDR4 versus DDR5, with memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s versus 102.4 GB/s. ECC memory is unsupported on the Core i5-110 and supported on the Core Ultra 9 285.

PCIe connectivity is Gen 3 with 16 lanes on the Core i5-110, while the Core Ultra 9 285 offers Gen 5 with 20 lanes. Integrated graphics are UHD Graphics 630 versus Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU. Release dates are 2025-09-10 for the Core i5-110 and 2024-12-31 for the Core Ultra 9 285. The Core Ultra 9 285 has a launch MSRP of $579, while the Core i5-110 has a launch MSRP of $200. Both have locked multipliers, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark comparisons between the Core i5-110 and Core Ultra 9 285. The Core i5-110 has no recorded benchmark scores, while the Core Ultra 9 285 has a comprehensive set of 17 benchmark results. The Core Ultra 9 285's average benchmark score is 75,488, placing it in the 95th percentile of all CPUs. It has no wins recorded in head-to-head comparisons because no such comparisons exist in the database.

The Core Ultra 9 285's benchmark data shows strong performance across multiple test suites. In Cinebench R15, it scores 4,933 in multi-core and 696 in single-core. In Cinebench R20, it scores 20,556 multi-core and 2,901 single-core. In Cinebench R23, it scores 48,945 multi-core and 6,909 single-core. PassMark results include 602,121 in data compression, 46,949 in data encryption, 45,357 in extended instructions, 459 in find prime numbers, 194,988 in floating point math, 164,869 in integer math, 56,602 in multithread, 3,598 in physics, 73,651 in random string sorting, and 4,881 in single-thread tests.

The nearest rivals to the Core Ultra 9 285, based on average score, are AMD EPYC 8224P at 75,582 with a delta of -0.1%, AMD EPYC 4545P at 75,373 with a delta of 0.2%, AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 9755X3D at 75,716 with a delta of -0.3%, and AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 9755 at 75,738 with a delta of -0.3%. These deltas indicate the Core Ultra 9 285 performs within a fraction of a percentage point of these server and workstation processors, confirming its high-end placement.

Where Each One Wins

The Core Ultra 9 285 wins in every category where benchmark data exists. Its 24-core configuration and 5.60 GHz boost clock give it dominant multi-threaded performance, as shown by the Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 48,945 and PassMark multithread score of 56,602. The single-core scores are equally strong, with Cinebench R23 single-core at 6,909 and PassMark single-thread at 4,881. These results indicate the Core Ultra 9 285 handles both heavily threaded workloads and lightly threaded tasks with high efficiency.

The Core Ultra 9 285's memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s with DDR5 gives it an advantage in memory-intensive applications such as large dataset processing, virtualization, and scientific computing. Its ECC memory support further extends its applicability to error-sensitive workloads. The PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes provides higher bandwidth for modern GPUs and NVMe storage devices. The 36 MB of shared L3 cache and 3 MB per-core L2 cache support data-heavy workloads that benefit from large on-die storage.

The Core i5-110 has no recorded benchmark scores, so it cannot claim any measured performance wins. Its advantages are structural rather than performance-based: it uses the older DDR4 memory standard, which often corresponds to lower platform costs, and it has a lower launch MSRP of $200 versus $579 for the Core Ultra 9 285. Its 14 nm process and Comet Lake architecture represent an older design, but its 65 W TDP matches the Core Ultra 9 285, suggesting similar thermal envelopes. The Core i5-110's 6 cores and 12 threads are sufficient for basic desktop tasks, though the database provides no quantitative evidence of its performance level.

For use-case planning, the Core Ultra 9 285 is appropriate for rendering, compilation, scientific simulation, and any workload that scales across 24 cores. Its 95th percentile ranking and near-parity with AMD EPYC server processors in average score indicate it competes at the workstation level. The Core i5-110, without benchmark data, remains a specification-only option for entry-level desktop builds where the older platform and lower launch MSRP are the primary considerations. The data does not support any performance-based recommendation for the Core i5-110, as no measurements exist for it in the database.