Intel Core Ultra 5 225T vs Intel Core Ultra 5 235H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a clear overall winner: the Intel Core Ultra 5 235H wins 15 of the 17 recorded head-to-head comparisons, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 225T wins only 2. The average benchmark score confirms the gap, with the 235H at 37522 versus 30468 for the 225T, a difference of roughly 23%. The 235H also holds a higher percentile rank among all CPUs, sitting at 85 compared to 82 for the 225T.

The most decisive victories for the 235H come in data compression and encryption workloads. In Passmark data compression, the 235H scores 301979 against 233998 for the 225T, a delta of -22.5% from the perspective of the 225T. Data encryption shows a similar pattern: 23121 versus 18289, a -20.9% delta. Integer math follows closely, with the 235H delivering 74247 against 59543, a -19.8% margin. Random string sorting also favors the 235H substantially, 36208 versus 28774, a -20.5% difference.

Cinebench results are uniformly in favor of the 235H, with every multi-core and single-core test showing a -14.2% or -14.3% delta. The R23 multi-core score is 25598 for the 235H versus 21971 for the 225T, while the R23 single-core score is 3613 versus 3101. The R20 multi-core test shows 10751 against 9227, and the R15 multi-core test shows 2580 against 2214. Single-core R15 and R20 also go to the 235H, with 364 versus 312 and 1517 versus 1302, respectively.

The 225T does claim two wins. The largest is in Passmark find prime numbers, where it scores 284 against 239 for the 235H, a +18.8% delta. The other win is in Passmark physics, 2053 versus 1985, a +3.4% margin. These are the only two benchmarks where the 225T leads, and they are isolated to specific workloads rather than general compute performance.

The 235H also wins the remaining Passmark tests, including floating point math (93509 versus 82751, -11.5%), extended instructions (23354 versus 20083, -14%), multithread (30091 versus 25358, -15.7%), and single-thread (4359 versus 4348, a narrow -0.3% delta). The single-thread margin is the closest of any comparison, indicating that in lightly threaded tasks the two processors are nearly equivalent.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235H is the stronger processor across nearly every measured workload. Its wins span Cinebench rendering tests, data compression, encryption, integer and floating point math, extended instruction sets, multithread performance, random string sorting, and single-thread performance. The data indicates that the 235H is the better choice for tasks that depend on raw compute throughput, including content creation, data processing, and general productivity workloads that can use multiple cores.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T wins only in prime number finding and physics calculations. The prime number result is particularly notable because it shows a significant advantage, +18.8%, which suggests the 225T has a specific strength in workloads that rely on integer iteration and algorithm efficiency rather than raw core count. The physics score is a smaller win, +3.4%, but it still indicates that the 225T can edge ahead in certain simulation or physics-based tasks.

The 235H's broad dominance means that for most users, the 225T's two wins are unlikely to offset the losses seen in the other 15 benchmarks. The single-thread scores are nearly identical, so the 225T's advantage in prime numbers and physics does not translate into a general speed advantage in everyday tasks. The 235H is the more versatile processor in the recorded data.

Architecture Differences

Both processors belong to the Core Ultra Series 2 and share the Arrow Lake architecture, but they differ in their specific implementations. The 225T uses the Arrow Lake-S codename, while the 235H uses Arrow Lake-H. Both are built on a 3 nm process node at TSMC, and both have the same L1 cache of 192 KB per core and L2 cache of 3 MB per core.

The core counts differ substantially. The 225T has 10 cores and 10 threads, while the 235H has 14 cores and 14 threads. This means the 235H has 4 additional physical cores, and neither processor supports Hyper-Threading, as both have thread counts equal to their core counts. The extra cores in the 235H likely explain its consistent multi-core performance advantage across Cinebench and Passmark multithread tests.

The L3 cache also differs. The 225T has 20 MB of shared L3 cache, while the 235H has 18 MB. Despite having less L3 cache, the 235H still outperforms the 225T in almost all tests, which suggests that the additional cores outweigh the cache deficit in the measured workloads.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The 225T uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 16 execution units, while the 235H uses Arc Graphics 140T. The database does not specify the execution unit count for the 235H, but the model names indicate different graphics solutions. The 225T is a desktop processor, while the 235H is a mobile processor, and this aligns with their different codenames and socket types.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specifications. The 225T has 10 cores and 10 threads, while the 235H has 14 cores and 14 threads. Base clocks are close, with the 225T at 2.50 GHz and the 235H at 2.40 GHz, a 0.10 GHz difference. Boost clocks show the 235H ahead, reaching 5.00 GHz versus 4.90 GHz for the 225T.

The thermal design power (TDP) differs significantly. The 225T has a TDP of 65, while the 235H has a TDP of 28. This reflects their intended market segments, desktop for the 225T and mobile for the 235H. The lower TDP of the 235H is notable because it delivers higher benchmark scores while consuming less power, according to the TDP figures.

The sockets are different: the 225T uses Intel Socket 1851, while the 235H uses Intel BGA 2049. This confirms the desktop versus mobile split. The PCIe configuration also differs, with the 225T offering Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only) and the 235H offering Gen 5 with 8 lanes (CPU only). The 225T has more PCIe lanes, which is consistent with a desktop platform that supports more expansion.

Memory support differs in the types accepted. The 225T supports DDR5, while the 235H supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Both have dual-channel memory buses and identical memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. Neither supports ECC memory, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

The release dates differ, with the 225T released on 2024-12-31 and the 235H on 2025-01-12. The 235H has a known part number, SRQAP, while the 225T part number is listed as unknown. The 225T has a die size of 243 mm² and a transistor count of 17,800 million, while the 235H does not have recorded die size or transistor figures in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 235H has 14 cores and 14 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 225T has 10 cores and 10 threads.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 235H reaches a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 225T reaches 4.90 GHz.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T has 20 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 235H has 18 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Which processor performs better in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 235H scores 25598 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, compared to 21971 for the Intel Core Ultra 5 225T, a -14.2% delta from the 225T's perspective.

Q: Are both processors based on the same architecture?

A: Yes, both are based on the Arrow Lake architecture and are built on a 3 nm process node at TSMC. The 225T uses the Arrow Lake-S codename, and the 235H uses Arrow Lake-H.

Q: Which processor has a higher TDP?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T has a TDP of 65, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 235H has a TDP of 28.

The Verdict

The benchmark data indicates that the Intel Core Ultra 5 235H is the superior processor for nearly all recorded workloads. It wins 15 of 17 head-to-head tests, with an average benchmark score of 37522 versus 30468 for the 225T. The 235H leads in every Cinebench test, every Passmark math and data test except prime numbers and physics, and both single-thread tests. Its 14 cores provide a clear advantage in multi-threaded tasks, and its boost clock of 5.00 GHz supports its single-thread lead, albeit by a small margin.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T is the better choice only for workloads that resemble prime number finding and physics calculations. Its +18.8% lead in find prime numbers is substantial, and its +3.4% lead in physics is modest but real. For users whose primary tasks are prime number computation or physics simulations, the 225T offers a measurable benefit. However, these are narrow use cases, and the 225T falls behind in every other measured category.

The 225T does offer advantages outside of raw performance. It has a larger L3 cache of 20 MB, more PCIe lanes (20 versus 8), and a desktop socket that supports a broader range of motherboards. The 235H, meanwhile, supports LPDDR5X memory in addition to DDR5, which aligns with its mobile market segment. Its lower TDP of 28 versus 65 indicates it achieves higher performance while consuming less power, according to the recorded specifications.

The data supports picking the Intel Core Ultra 5 235H for users who prioritize compute performance across a range of tasks, from rendering to data compression to integer math. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T is only preferable for the specific workloads where it wins, and even then, the overall benchmark gap means the 235H is the stronger processor for general use. The 225T's niche wins in prime numbers and physics are the only reasons to select it over the 235H, based on the recorded measurements.