Intel Core i5-12490F vs Intel Core Ultra 7 155U Comparison

Intel's Core Ultra 7 155U and Core i5-12490F occupy an interesting crossover point in the database: a Meteor Lake mobile chip with a hybrid core layout and modern process node, against an Alder Lake-S desktop part that trades architectural novelty for raw sustained throughput. On paper the matchup looks close, since their aggregate scores sit barely apart (21174 versus 20802) and their percentiles are nearly identical (75 versus 74 against all recorded CPUs). The individual benchmarks tell a very different story, and unpacking why the averages converge while the tests diverge is the interesting part of this comparison.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clean sweep: the Core i5-12490F wins all 17 shared benchmarks, and the Core Ultra 7 155U wins none. Yet the margin varies enormously, which is where the real insight lives.

The gap is smallest in older, lighter workloads. Cinebench R15 single-core is nearly a tie: 245 for the i5-12490F versus 238.5 for the 155U, a delta of only 2.7 percent. Cinebench R15 multi-core is similar at 1742 versus 1585, or 9 percent. These are tests where burst behavior and per-clock output dominate, and the two parts arrive close together.

Move to newer, longer, more demanding tests and the spread widens dramatically. Cinebench R23 multi-core is the starkest example: 17284 for the desktop chip against 9674.5 for the mobile part, a 44 percent deficit. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 2440 versus 1666, a 31.7 percent gap. Cinebench R20 sits in between on both axes, with 7259 versus 5765 multi-core (-20.6 percent) and 1024 versus 813 single-core (again -20.6 percent, an unusual symmetry worth noting).

The PassMark suite follows the same pattern. Extended instructions is the widest gap in the set: 15993 versus 9903, a 38.1 percent difference, suggesting the i5-12490F extracts far more from SIMD-heavy code paths. Data compression (-25.4 percent, 237304 versus 177122) and find-prime-numbers (-25.3 percent, 87 versus 65) are close behind. The narrower results are data encryption at -5.7 percent (12018 versus 11333) and integer math at -4.9 percent (60548 versus 60548's counterpart, 57564), two areas where the 155U holds its ground most respectably. Floating point math (-14.9 percent), string sorting (-16.9 percent), physics (-19.4 percent), multithread (-18.9 percent), and single-thread (-8.4 percent, 3682 versus 3372) fill out the middle.

The pattern implies a sustained-load and instruction-throughput story: short bursts are competitive, long runs are not.

Architecture Differences

These are two fundamentally different designs, and the benchmark spread maps onto their specs.

The Core Ultra 7 155U is a Meteor Lake part built on Intel's 7 nm process. It pairs 12 cores with 14 threads, a layout that signals a hybrid arrangement of performance and efficiency cores where the efficiency units run single-threaded. Base clock is 1.7 GHz with a 4.8 GHz boost, and the whole package is governed by a 15 W TDP. It is a mobile-segment chip soldered to an Intel BGA 2049 socket, meaning it ships integrated into systems rather than as a standalone retail purchase. Cache allocation is 112 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3.

The Core i5-12490F is an Alder Lake-S desktop processor on Intel's 10 nm process, with a known die size of 163 mm². It runs 6 cores and 12 threads, all apparently symmetric given the clean two-threads-per-core ratio. Clocks are higher across the board: 3.0 GHz base and 4.6 GHz boost, inside a 65 W TDP. Its L3 cache is larger at 20 MB shared, though per-core L1 (80 KB) and L2 (1.25 MB) are smaller than the 155U's allocations. It uses Socket 1700, a standard desktop socket.

Connectivity also diverges sharply. The i5-12490F offers PCIe Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes; the 155U offers Gen 4 with 12 CPU lanes. Memory differs in both kind and reach: the desktop chip supports DDR4 and DDR5, while the mobile part supports DDR5 only (motherboard dependent) but with a recorded bandwidth figure of 89.6 GB/s over a dual-channel bus. The 155U includes Arc Xe-LPG 64EU integrated graphics; the 12490F has none, the "F" suffix confirming a discrete graphics requirement. Neither supports ECC, and both have locked multipliers.

Where Each One Wins

Strictly by the recorded data, the i5-12490F wins everywhere, so the honest question is where the 155U comes closest and what that implies for use.

The 155U's best relative results are Cinebench R15 single-core (-2.7 percent), data encryption (-5.7 percent), integer math (-4.9 percent), and single-thread PassMark (-8.4 percent). That profile suggests the 155U remains reasonable for bursty, lightly threaded office-class work: document editing, browsing, short compiles, encryption tasks. Its integrated Arc graphics and 15 W envelope mean it can operate in thin, quiet, fanless-adjacent systems where a 65 W desktop part with mandatory discrete graphics simply cannot exist.

The i5-12490F's dominance compounds as workloads scale. The 44 percent R23 multi-core gap and the 38.1 percent extended-instructions gap are the headline figures. Anything sustained and parallel, rendering, simulation, compression (237304 versus 177122), physics (1345 versus 1084), favors it decisively. For a fixed workstation doing hours of throughput work, the data shows no contest.

Context from the rivals list reinforces the picture. The 155U's average score of 21174 sits within a fraction of a percent of the AMD Ryzen 5 7530U (21133, delta 0.2), AMD EPYC 9454 (21223, -0.2), Intel Core Ultra 7 256V (21112, 0.3), and AMD Ryzen 5 5600G (21088, 0.4). The 12490F's 20802 clusters with the Intel Xeon 6325P (20821), Intel Core Ultra 5 125U (20826), AMD EPYC 7J13 (20845), and AMD Ryzen 5 5600GT (20733). Each sits in a tight neighborhood of comparable aggregate performance, which explains the near-identical percentiles despite the one-sided head-to-head.

FAQ

Q: Does the Core Ultra 7 155U win any benchmark against the i5-12490F?

A: No. The recorded head-to-head covers 17 tests and the i5-12490F wins all 17, with deltas ranging from 2.7 to 44 percent in its favor.

Q: Where is the gap smallest?

A: Cinebench R15 single-core (245 versus 238.5, -2.7 percent), integer math (60548 versus 57564, -4.9 percent), and data encryption (12018 versus 11333, -5.7 percent).

Q: Where is it largest?

A: Cinebench R23 multi-core: 17284 versus 9674.5, a 44 percent gap. PassMark extended instructions is close behind at 15993 versus 9903, or 38.1 percent.

Q: Why do their average scores look so similar if one wins everything?

A: Averaging blurs distribution. The 155U's average of 21174 and the 12490F's 20802 land in overlapping rival clusters, but every individual shared test favors the desktop chip.

Q: Can either chip run without a graphics card?

A: The 155U can, via its Arc Xe-LPG 64EU integrated graphics. The 12490F has no integrated graphics at all and requires a discrete card.

Q: Are these chips overclockable?

A: No. Both have locked multipliers.

The Verdict

For any sustained computational workload, the data is unambiguous: the Core i5-12490F wins every shared test, often by margins of 20 to 44 percent. A user choosing a machine for rendering, compression, physics, or long-running parallel tasks should take the desktop part, accepting its 65 W envelope, Socket 1700 platform, and mandatory discrete graphics.

The Core Ultra 7 155U is not competing on throughput. Its case rests on what the head-to-head cannot capture: a 15 W TDP, integrated Arc graphics, a 7 nm Meteor Lake design with 12 cores and 14 threads, DDR5 at 89.6 GB/s, and a BGA form factor suited to mobile systems. Its launch MSRP was $490. In bursty and lightly threaded work the deficits shrink to single digits, so for portable, efficiency-bound systems the data shows it holding reasonable ground. The question a buyer should ask is not which is faster, it is which power envelope and platform they actually need, because on raw benchmark performance the 12490F answers every time.

Specification Differences

• Cores/threads: 155U: 12 cores, 14 threads; 12490F: 6 cores, 12 threads.
• Clocks: 155U: 1.7 GHz base, 4.8 GHz boost; 12490F: 3.0 GHz base, 4.6 GHz boost.
• TDP: 15 W versus 65 W.
• Process node: 7 nm (Meteor Lake) versus 10 nm (Alder Lake-S).
• Socket: Intel BGA 2049 versus Intel Socket 1700.
• Cache: 155U: 112 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, 12 MB L3; 12490F: 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, 20 MB L3.
• PCIe: Gen 4, 12 CPU lanes versus Gen 5, 20 CPU lanes.
• Memory: 155U: DDR5, 89.6 GB/s recorded; 12490F: DDR4 and DDR5, bandwidth unrecorded.
• Integrated graphics: Arc Xe-LPG 64EU versus none.
• Die size: unrecorded for the 155U; 163 mm² for the 12490F.
• Market segment: Mobile versus Desktop.
• Release date: the 155U launched 2023-12-13; the 12490F's date is unrecorded.
• Launch MSRP: $490 for the 155U; unrecorded for the 12490F.
• Series: Core Ultra Series 1 versus Core 12th Gen.