Intel Core Ultra 5 225 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 336H Comparison

Intel Core Ultra 5 225 and Intel Core Ultra 5 336H are two very different processors that happen to share a family name. The 225 is a desktop chip aimed at fixed builds, while the 336H is a mobile chip for laptops. The benchmark data shows a clear split: the desktop part wins most tests, but the mobile part has specific strengths that matter for certain workloads.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 takes 14 of the 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons. Its wins are broad and consistent across rendering, encryption, math, and sorting workloads. The largest margins come in PassMark's find prime numbers test, where the 225 leads by 19.7%, and in floating point math, where it is 11.7% ahead. It also wins all three Cinebench R15 and R23 tests, including single-core and multicore, with a 7.9% margin in each.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H wins only three tests, but they are significant. It dominates Cinebench R20, both multicore and single-core, by a massive 37.3% margin. It also wins PassMark's physics test by 12.7%. These results point to a chip that handles certain heavily threaded or physics-based workloads better, likely due to its higher core count and different architecture.

For everyday use, the 225 is the stronger performer. The data shows it ahead in integer math (5.3%), multithread (6.7%), and single-thread (9.9%) PassMark tests. The 336H's wins are narrower in real-world terms except for Cinebench R20, which is a specific rendering workload. Users should expect the desktop chip to feel snappier in most applications, while the mobile chip pulls ahead in specific compute-heavy tasks.

Architecture Differences

The two chips come from different Intel generations and are built for different sockets. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 uses the Arrow Lake architecture and fits into Intel Socket 1851. It is a desktop part with a 65 TDP. The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H uses the Panther Lake architecture and fits into Intel BGA 2540, a mobile socket. It has a 25 TDP, which is expected for a laptop processor.

Both are built on a 3 nm process, but they use different foundries. The 225 is manufactured by TSMC, while the 336H is manufactured by Intel. The 225 has a transistor count of 17,800 million and a die size of 243 mm², while the 336H does not have published transistor or die size data in the database. The core counts differ significantly: the 225 has 10 cores and 10 threads, while the 336H has 16 cores and 16 threads. Neither chip supports hyperthreading, so threads equal cores.

Cache configurations also differ. Both have 192 KB of L1 cache per core, but the L2 cache is 3 MB per core on the 225 versus 2.5 MB per core on the 336H. The shared L3 cache is 20 MB on the desktop part and 18 MB on the mobile part. The 225 has a higher base clock at 3.30 GHz versus 1.90 GHz, and a higher boost clock at 4.90 GHz versus 4.60 GHz.

Memory support differs as well. The 225 supports DDR5 only with dual-channel memory and a bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. The 336H supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X with dual-channel memory and a higher bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. PCIe lanes also differ: the 225 has 20 Gen 5 lanes from the CPU, while the 336H has 12 Gen 5 lanes. The integrated graphics are different: the 225 uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 16 execution units, while the 336H uses Intel Xe3 Graphics.

The 225 was released in January 2025, while the 336H was released in January 2026. The 225 has a launch MSRP of $246, while the 336H has no listed launch MSRP. Both parts are actively in production and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results show the most interesting pattern. In Cinebench R15, the 225 wins both multicore (2609 vs 2418) and single-core (368 vs 341) by 7.9%. In Cinebench R23, the same pattern holds: the 225 wins multicore (25891 vs 23991) and single-core (3655 vs 3387) by 7.9%. But in Cinebench R20, the 336H reverses the result completely, winning multicore (10076 vs 6317) and single-core (1422 vs 891) by 37.3%. This is a dramatic swing that suggests the 336H's architecture is better optimized for the R20 workload specifically, possibly due to its higher core count and different memory bandwidth.

PassMark tests tell a cleaner story. The 225 wins every single PassMark test except physics. The biggest wins are in find prime numbers (358 vs 299, a 19.7% margin), floating point math (92038 vs 82415, 11.7%), and extended instructions (27162 vs 24542, 10.7%). The smallest win is in data encryption (22285 vs 21291, 4.7%). The 336H wins physics (2682 vs 2342) by 12.7%, which is notable because physics simulations often benefit from more cores.

Single-thread performance is clearly in the 225's favor. PassMark single-thread shows 4412 vs 4013, a 9.9% lead. This aligns with the higher boost clock of 4.90 GHz versus 4.60 GHz. Multithread performance is also ahead for the 225 (30459 vs 28545, 6.7%) despite having 6 fewer cores. This indicates the 225's higher clock speeds and larger caches compensate for the core deficit in most threaded workloads.

Data compression and random string sorting both favor the 225, with 8% and 6.4% leads respectively. Integer math is close at 5.3% (65345 vs 62070). The overall picture is that the 225 is faster in most compute tasks, with the 336H only winning where its extra cores and architecture give it a specific edge.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specification fields. The most obvious is socket: Intel Socket 1851 for the 225 versus Intel BGA 2540 for the 336H. This makes them incompatible with each other's motherboards. The core count is 10 for the 225 versus 16 for the 336H. Threads match cores on both: 10 and 16 respectively.

Base clock is 3.30 GHz on the 225 versus 1.90 GHz on the 336H. Boost clock is 4.90 GHz versus 4.60 GHz. TDP is 65 watts versus 25 watts. The L2 cache is 3 MB per core versus 2.5 MB per core, and L3 cache is 20 MB versus 18 MB. Memory bandwidth is 102.4 GB/s versus 115.2 GB/s. PCIe lanes are 20 versus 12. Integrated graphics differ: Arc Xe-LPG 16EU versus Intel Xe3.

The foundry differs: TSMC for the 225, Intel for the 336H. The 225 has published transistor count and die size, while the 336H does not. Release dates differ by about a year: January 2025 versus January 2026. The 225 has a launch MSRP of $246, while the 336H has none listed.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H has 16 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 225 has 10 cores and 10 threads.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 has a boost clock of 4.90 GHz, which is higher than the 336H's 4.60 GHz.

Q: Which processor wins in Cinebench R20 multicore?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H wins Cinebench R20 multicore with a score of 10076 versus 6317 for the 225, a 37.3% margin.

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 has 20 MB of shared L3 cache, while the 336H has 18 MB.

Q: Which processor supports LPDDR5X memory?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X, while the 225 supports DDR5 only.

Q: Which processor has a higher PassMark single-thread score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225 scores 4412 in PassMark single-thread, versus 4013 for the 336H, a 9.9% lead.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear choice for desktop builders: the Intel Core Ultra 5 225. It wins 14 of 17 benchmarks, including all the PassMark tests except physics, and has superior single-thread and most multithread scores. Its higher clock speeds, larger caches, and 20 PCIe Gen 5 lanes make it the better all-round performer for a fixed system. The 65 TDP is reasonable for a desktop part, and the 3 nm TSMC process keeps efficiency respectable.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H is the right pick for mobile systems, given its BGA 2540 socket and 25 TDP. It wins Cinebench R20 by a huge margin and physics by 12.7%, which suggests it handles certain threaded workloads better despite lower clock speeds. Its 16 cores and higher memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s give it an edge in specific compute tasks. The lack of a launch MSRP and its mobile socket mean it is not a direct alternative to the 225 for desktop builds.

Users who prioritize rendering in Cinebench R20 or physics simulations should consider the 336H, but for everything else, the 225 shows stronger benchmark results. The 225 also sits at the 85th percentile versus all CPUs, while the 336H sits at the 84th, confirming the desktop part is marginally better positioned in the overall performance landscape. The 225's nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen 5 5600F with a 0% delta, while the 336H's nearest rival is the Intel Core i7-13700HX at -0.2%, putting both chips in similar competitive tiers.