Intel Core i7-12800H vs Intel Core Ultra 5 225H Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data splits these two mobile processors into distinct use cases. The Intel Core i7-12800H, with 14 cores and 20 threads, claims victory in only two of the seventeen head-to-head tests, yet both wins are highly specialized. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225H, with 14 cores and 14 threads, dominates the remaining fifteen tests, making it the broader performer across most workloads.

The i7-12800H wins in Cinebench R23 multi-core (15283 versus 14629.5, a 4.5% edge) and in Passmark integer math (86488 versus 68520, a 26.2% advantage). These are compute-heavy, integer-based tasks where the older Alder Lake architecture's higher thread count appears to matter. The Cinebench R23 result is notable because the same processor loses in R15 and R20 multi-core, suggesting the workload scaling changes between benchmark versions.

The Ultra 5 225H takes everything else, including all single-core tests, all Passmark multithread tests, and every encryption, compression, and floating-point test. The single-thread delta is consistent: 8.1% in Cinebench R15, 15.7% in R20, 7.2% in R23, and 19.2% in Passmark. These are not marginal differences; the newer Arrow Lake design is clearly faster per thread.

For real-world use, the data implies the i7-12800H suits integer-heavy applications like certain compilation workloads or legacy software that scales with threads. The Ultra 5 225H suits everything else, from encryption to floating-point simulation to general multitasking. The 15-to-2 win count is decisive, but the two i7 wins are not trivial, particularly the 26.2% integer math lead.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel generations and foundries. The i7-12800H is Alder Lake-H, built on Intel's 10 nm process with a 217 mm² die. The Ultra 5 225H is Arrow Lake-H, built on TSMC's 3 nm process. The die size for the Ultra 5 is not recorded, but the process shrink is significant.

Core counts are identical at 14, but thread counts differ: 20 for the i7, 14 for the Ultra 5. This means the i7 uses Hyper-Threading, while the Ultra 5 does not. Cache layouts also diverge. The i7 has 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and 24 MB shared L3. The Ultra 5 has 192 KB L1 per core, 3 MB L2 per core, and 18 MB shared L3. The Ultra 5 has larger per-core caches but less total L3.

Base clocks tell a story: the i7 starts at 2.40 GHz, the Ultra 5 at 1.70 GHz. Boost clocks are closer, 4.80 GHz versus 4.90 GHz. The TDP differs substantially: 45 W for the i7, 28 W for the Ultra 5. The Ultra 5 achieves higher single-thread scores despite a lower base clock and lower TDP, which points to the efficiency of the 3 nm process and architectural improvements.

Memory support changes as well. The i7 supports DDR4 and DDR5, while the Ultra 5 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. The Ultra 5 also records a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s, while the i7 has no bandwidth figure in the database. PCIe lanes differ: the i7 has Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only), the Ultra 5 has Gen 5 with 8 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics differ too: Iris Xe 96EU on the i7, Arc Graphics 130T on the Ultra 5.

Sockets are not compatible: Intel BGA 1744 for the i7, Intel BGA 2049 for the Ultra 5. The production status is Active for both, but the release date for the Ultra 5 is recorded as 2025-01-12, while the i7 has no release date listed.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest win for the Ultra 5 225H is in Passmark find prime numbers, where it scores 220 versus 102, a 53.6% advantage. This is a pure integer workload, and the result is striking given the i7's lead in integer math. The Prime number test appears to favor the newer architecture's single-thread efficiency over raw thread count.

Floating-point math shows a 29.6% lead for the Ultra 5 (86540 versus 60961). Extended instructions follow at 25.1% (21915 versus 16408). Data encryption shows 24.2% (21428 versus 16234). These are large margins, consistent with the architectural improvements in Arrow Lake.

Single-thread results are uniformly in favor of the Ultra 5. Passmark single-thread shows 4258 versus 3440, a 19.2% lead. Cinebench R20 single-core shows 1417 versus 1194, also 15.7%. Cinebench R15 single-core shows 288.5 versus 265, an 8.1% lead. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 1969 versus 1828, a 7.2% lead. The consistency across different benchmark suites reinforces the conclusion that the Ultra 5 is the faster core.

Multi-thread results are mixed. Cinebench R15 multi-core: 2397.5 versus 2222, a 7.3% lead for the Ultra 5. Cinebench R20 multi-core: 10041 versus 8463, a 15.7% lead. Passmark multithread: 28119 versus 24346, a 13.4% lead. But Cinebench R23 multi-core flips: 15283 versus 14629.5, a 4.5% lead for the i7. The R23 result is the outlier, as all other multi-thread tests favor the Ultra 5.

The i7's other win is Passmark integer math: 86488 versus 68520, a 26.2% lead. This is the single largest margin for the i7 in either direction. It suggests that the i7's 20 threads provide a real advantage in specific integer-heavy, highly parallel workloads, even though the Ultra 5 wins the prime number test within the same category.

Passmark data compression shows a 3.6% lead for the Ultra 5 (283451 versus 273247). Random string sorting shows 9.5% (33654 versus 30453). Physics shows 10.4% (1877 versus 1682). These are moderate margins, indicating the Ultra 5 is broadly superior but not overwhelmingly so in every task.

The Verdict

The data clearly favors the Intel Core Ultra 5 225H for most users. It wins 15 of 17 benchmarks, with large margins in single-thread, encryption, floating-point, and extended instructions. Its 28 W TDP versus the i7's 45 W makes it the more efficient choice on paper, and the 3 nm TSMC process delivers higher performance per watt.

The Intel Core i7-12800H is not obsolete. Its 26.2% lead in integer math and 4.5% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core are real advantages for specific workloads. The 20 threads versus 14 threads matter in applications that scale well with thread count and rely on integer operations. Users running such software may prefer the i7.

For general productivity, content creation, encryption, and single-threaded responsiveness, the Ultra 5 225H is the superior processor. The database shows it is 19.2% faster in single-thread Passmark, 24.2% faster in encryption, and 29.6% faster in floating-point math. These are not niche differences; they affect everyday performance.

The i7-12800H remains a viable option for users with legacy software that benefits from Hyper-Threading and higher thread counts. The Ultra 5 225H is the better all-rounder, and the recorded data supports that conclusion without reservation.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more threads?

A: The Intel Core i7-12800H has 20 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 225H has 14 threads. Both have 14 cores.

Q: What is the largest benchmark margin between the two?

A: The largest margin is in Passmark find prime numbers, where the Ultra 5 225H scores 220 versus 102 for the i7-12800H, a 53.6% difference.

Q: Does the i7-12800H win any benchmarks?

A: Yes, it wins two: Cinebench R23 multi-core (15283 versus 14629.5, 4.5% ahead) and Passmark integer math (86488 versus 68520, 26.2% ahead).

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225H has a 4.90 GHz boost clock, while the i7-12800H has a 4.80 GHz boost clock.

Q: What are the TDP differences?

A: The i7-12800H has a 45 W TDP, while the Ultra 5 225H has a 28 W TDP.

Q: Which processor supports PCIe Gen 5?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225H supports PCIe Gen 5 with 8 lanes (CPU only). The i7-12800H supports PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only).

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i7-12800H | Intel Core Ultra 5 225H |

|---|---|---|

| Series | Core 12th Gen | Core Ultra Series 2 |

| Threads | 20 | 14 |

| Base Clock | 2.40 GHz | 1.70 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.80 GHz | 4.90 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 28 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1744 | Intel BGA 2049 |

| Architecture | Alder Lake | Arrow Lake |

| Codename | Alder Lake-H | Arrow Lake-H |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Die Size | 217 mm² | Not recorded |

| L1 Cache | 80 KB (per core) | 192 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core) | 3 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 24 MB (shared) | 18 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR5, LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bandwidth | Not recorded | 102.4 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 20 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 8 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Iris Xe 96EU | Arc Graphics 130T |

| Part Number | SRLD2 | SRQAM |

| Release Date | Not recorded | 2025-01-12 |