Intel Core i5-12490F vs Intel Core Ultra 5 228V Comparison

Intel Core i5-12490F vs Intel Core Ultra 5 228V is a fascinating study in contrasting design philosophies. One is a desktop processor built for raw throughput, while the other is a mobile chip engineered for efficiency. The benchmark data reveals a clear split: the i5-12490F dominates in heavy multi-threaded workloads, while the Ultra 5 228V counters in specific single-thread and specialized tasks. The database shows the Ultra 5 228V holds a slightly higher overall percentile rank at 75, compared to the i5-12490F's 74, despite the i5 winning 10 of the 17 head-to-head tests.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most dramatic divergence appears in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the Intel Core i5-12490F scores 17,284 against the Ultra 5 228V's 9,932. That is a 74% lead, the largest margin in the entire comparison. This result is not an outlier; the i5 also wins Cinebench R20 multi-core with 7,259 versus 6,491, an 11.8% advantage, and Cinebench R15 multi-core with 1,742 versus 1,502.5, a 15.9% edge. The pattern is clear: when all cores are engaged, the desktop part pulls ahead decisively.

The single-core story is more nuanced. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the i5-12490F wins with 1,024 points against 916, a surprising 11.8% margin. However, in Cinebench R15 single-core, the Ultra 5 228V takes the win, scoring 267 versus 245, an 8.2% advantage. The PassMark single-thread test also favors the Ultra 5 228V, with 3,836 points versus 3,682, a 4% lead. This suggests the mobile chip has superior per-clock efficiency in certain legacy workloads, but the i5's higher boost clock of 4.60 GHz helps it win in others.

PassMark integer math shows the i5's strength in traditional processing, with 60,548 versus 39,679, a massive 52.6% advantage. The i5 also leads in data compression (237,304 versus 173,924, a 36.4% gain) and random string sorting (23,791 versus 21,254, an 11.9% gain). Conversely, the Ultra 5 228V wins in floating-point math with 53,310 versus 47,326, an 11.2% margin, and in prime number finding with 168 versus 87, a staggering 48.2% lead. Data encryption also goes to the Ultra 5 (13,032 versus 12,018, a 7.8% gain), as does physics simulation (1,538 versus 1,345, a 12.5% gain). The passmark extended instructions test is close, with the i5 winning 15,993 versus 14,801, an 8.1% margin.

The aggregate scores reflect these mixed results. The i5-12490F has an average benchmark score of 20,802, while the Ultra 5 228V sits at 21,440. The i5's nearest rival, the Intel Xeon 6325P, scores 20,821, a delta of -0.1%, meaning the i5 is statistically tied with that server chip. The Ultra 5's closest competitor, the AMD Ryzen 5 2600, scores 21,484, a delta of -0.2%, also a statistical tie. This puts the Ultra 5 in the company of older desktop parts, while the i5 matches a Xeon, highlighting how different workload mixes produce similar overall averages.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap is fundamental. The Intel Core i5-12490F is built on Intel's 10 nm process, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V uses TSMC's 3 nm process. This node advantage helps the Ultra 5 achieve a 17 W TDP, a massive reduction from the i5's 65 W TDP, but it comes with trade-offs in core count and cache. The i5 offers 6 cores and 12 threads, leveraging Hyper-Threading, while the Ultra 5 provides 8 physical cores and 8 threads, with no multi-threading. The i5's L3 cache is 20 MB shared, more than double the Ultra 5's 8 MB shared. Conversely, the Ultra 5 has larger per-core L1 and L2 caches: 192 KB and 2.5 MB per core, respectively, versus 80 KB and 1.25 MB per core on the i5.

The socket and platform also differ entirely. The i5 uses Intel Socket 1700, a desktop platform with PCIe Gen 5 and 20 lanes. The Ultra 5 is soldered to Intel BGA 2833, a mobile package, with only 4 PCIe Gen 5 lanes. The i5 supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in dual-channel mode, while the Ultra 5's memory support is listed as unknown, depending on the motherboard. The Ultra 5 does include integrated Arc 130V graphics, a feature absent from the i5-12490F, which requires a discrete GPU. The i5's die size is 163 mm², and its part number is SRL4X, while the Ultra 5's part number is SRPMVSRPMU. The Ultra 5 was released on 2024-09-23, while the i5's release date is not recorded. Neither chip has an unlocked multiplier, and both lack ECC memory support.

Where Each One Wins

The data indicates the Intel Core i5-12490F is the clear choice for multi-threaded productivity. Its wins in Cinebench R23, R20, and R15 multi-core, along with PassMark multithread (20,202 versus 18,227, a 10.8% lead), make it suitable for video rendering, 3D modeling, and software compilation. The 52.6% lead in integer math reinforces its strength in general-purpose computing, database operations, and office workloads. The 36.4% advantage in data compression points to archivists and file-heavy tasks favoring this chip.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V wins where architecture efficiency matters. Its 48.2% lead in prime number finding and 11.2% lead in floating-point math suggest a niche for scientific simulations and financial modeling. The physics test win (1,538 versus 1,345) indicates better performance in certain game physics engines, despite the i5's overall multi-core dominance. The Ultra 5 also excels in data encryption, scoring 13,032 versus 12,018, a 7.8% advantage, which could matter for security-focused tasks. Its single-thread wins in PassMark (3,836 versus 3,682) and Cinebench R15 (267 versus 245) show it can handle lightweight, latency-sensitive applications with ease.

The presence of integrated Arc 130V graphics on the Ultra 5 makes it viable for basic visual tasks without a discrete GPU, while the i5 has no integrated graphics at all. For a desktop user with a dedicated graphics card, the i5's extra cache and thread count offer more headroom. For a mobile user prioritizing battery life and portability, the Ultra 5's 17 W TDP is a decisive factor, though the database does not include battery test results.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every core specification. The i5-12490F has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Ultra 5 228V has 8 cores and 8 threads. The i5's base clock is 3.00 GHz, boosting to 4.60 GHz; the Ultra 5 starts at 2.10 GHz and boosts to 4.50 GHz. The i5's TDP is 65 W, while the Ultra 5's is 17 W. The i5 uses an Intel Socket 1700, and the Ultra 5 uses Intel BGA 2833. Process node differs: 10 nm for the i5, 3 nm for the Ultra 5. The foundry is Intel for the i5 and TSMC for the Ultra 5.

Cache hierarchies are distinct: the i5 has 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and 20 MB shared L3; the Ultra 5 has 192 KB L1 per core, 2.5 MB L2 per core, and 8 MB shared L3. Memory support varies: the i5 supports DDR4 and DDR5, while the Ultra 5's support is unknown and motherboard-dependent; both use dual-channel buses. PCIe lanes differ significantly: the i5 offers Gen 5 with 20 lanes, the Ultra 5 only 4 lanes. The i5 has no integrated graphics, while the Ultra 5 includes Arc 130V. The market segment is Desktop for the i5 and Mobile for the Ultra 5. The Ultra 5 has a recorded release date of 2024-09-23, while the i5's is absent. Die size is 163 mm² for the i5, with no die size recorded for the Ultra 5. Part numbers also differ: SRL4X versus SRPMVSRPMU.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V has a higher average benchmark score of 21,440, compared to the Intel Core i5-12490F's 20,802.

Q: Does the Intel Core i5-12490F support integrated graphics?

A: No, the i5-12490F has no integrated graphics, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 228V includes Arc 130V integrated graphics.

Q: How significant is the i5-12490F's lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The i5-12490F scores 17,284 versus 9,932 for the Ultra 5 228V, a 74% difference, the largest margin in the head-to-head data.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two chips?

A: The i5-12490F has a TDP of 65 W, while the Ultra 5 228V has a TDP of 17 W, a substantial difference reflecting their desktop and mobile design targets.

Q: In which benchmark does the Ultra 5 228V show the biggest advantage?

A: The Ultra 5 228V leads by 48.2% in PassMark find prime numbers, scoring 168 versus 87 for the i5-12490F.

Q: Which chip has more L3 cache?

A: The i5-12490F has 20 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Ultra 5 228V has 8 MB of shared L3 cache.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split based on use case. The Intel Core i5-12490F is the superior choice for desktop users who need maximum multi-threaded performance. Its 74% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core, 52.6% lead in integer math, and 36.4% lead in data compression make it ideal for content creation, compile workloads, and heavy productivity. The 65 W TDP is higher, but for a desktop system with a discrete GPU, that is a manageable trade-off. The i5 also holds a higher boost clock at 4.60 GHz, which helps in some single-thread tests like Cinebench R20.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V is the better option for mobile users prioritizing efficiency. Its 17 W TDP is a fraction of the i5's, and its 3 nm process node provides a modern foundation. The wins in floating-point math, prime number finding, and data encryption show specialized strengths. The integrated Arc 130V graphics eliminate the need for a discrete GPU in basic systems. Its lower average score in multi-thread tests, however, means it is not a replacement for desktop-class compute.

The overall percentile ranks are nearly identical, with the Ultra 5 at 75 and the i5 at 74. The average scores are close, 21,440 versus 20,802. This tells a story of two chips that, on aggregate, perform similarly, but achieve that parity through opposing means. The i5 wins with brute force and thread count; the Ultra 5 wins with architectural efficiency and specialized instruction handling. The choice comes down to platform and workload, not raw capability. Pick the i5 for desktop power, pick the Ultra 5 for mobile flexibility.