Intel Core Ultra 5 228V vs Intel Xeon D-1746TER Comparison

The Intel Xeon D-1746TER and Intel Core Ultra 5 228V represent two fundamentally different approaches to computing, yet the benchmark data places them within a stone's throw of each other in overall average score. The Xeon D-1746TER averages 21635, while the Core Ultra 5 228V sits at 21440, a delta of just 0.9%. This near-parity in aggregate, however, masks a dramatic split in their performance profiles. The data shows they are not interchangeable; they are specialized tools for different workloads.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark results indicate a clear division of labor based on the nature of the task. The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V asserts dominance in 12 of the 17 head-to-head tests, making it the clear winner for single-threaded and latency-sensitive operations. Its victories span the Cinebench R15 and R20 suites, both multi-core and single-core, where it leads by margins ranging from 10.7% to 29.2%. This pattern extends into PassMark tests that reward per-core efficiency, such as physics simulation, floating-point math, and prime number finding. The Ultra 5’s 4.50 GHz boost clock, compared to the Xeon’s 3.10 GHz, is a likely driver of this advantage, allowing it to tear through tasks that rely on quick, sequential decision-making.

Conversely, the Intel Xeon D-1746TER carves out its niche in sustained, multi-threaded workloads that can leverage its higher core count and thread count. The Xeon wins 5 tests, but its victories are often by substantial margins. The most significant is in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where it scores 13311 against the Ultra 5's 9932, a 34% advantage. It also excels in integer-heavy PassMark tests, winning integer math by 37.3% and random string sorting by 11.7%. Data compression, a classic server workload, also falls to the Xeon with a 10.2% edge. This suggests the Xeon is the appropriate choice for environments where the CPU is expected to grind through large datasets or handle many concurrent requests.

The architecture differences explain this split. The Xeon is a server/workstation part with 10 cores and 20 threads, designed for parallel throughput. The Ultra 5 is a mobile processor with 8 cores and 8 threads, prioritizing responsiveness and power efficiency. The data confirms that the Ultra 5 is the better choice for interactive and single-threaded applications, while the Xeon is the better choice for batch processing and multi-threaded server tasks.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on vastly different foundations. The Xeon D-1746TER is based on the Ice Lake architecture, specifically the Ice Lake-D variant, and is manufactured on Intel's 10 nm process node. In contrast, the Core Ultra 5 228V uses the newer Lunar Lake architecture, built on a 3 nm process node by TSMC. This process advantage is a major factor in the Ultra 5's efficiency and clock speed potential.

Core configurations differ significantly. The Xeon offers 10 cores and 20 threads, leveraging Hyper-Threading to double its logical processing units. The Ultra 5 has 8 cores and 8 threads, with no hyper-threading. This means the Xeon has 12 more logical threads available for parallel workloads, a key reason for its multi-core wins. Cache hierarchies also diverge. The Xeon has a smaller per-core L1 cache of 80 KB, but a larger shared L3 cache of 15 MB. The Ultra 5 has a much larger 192 KB per-core L1 cache and a 2.5 MB per-core L2 cache, but its shared L3 is only 8 MB. This larger per-core cache is likely a contributor to the Ultra 5's superior single-threaded performance, as it can keep more working data close to the core.

Memory support is another fundamental divider. The Xeon supports DDR4 memory with a triple-channel bus, offering a peak bandwidth of 64.0 GB/s. The Ultra 5's memory support is listed as unknown and depends on the motherboard, but it uses a dual-channel bus. Crucially, the Xeon supports ECC memory, a feature critical for data integrity in server environments, while the Ultra 5 does not. The integrated graphics also differ, with the Ultra 5 featuring Arc 130V graphics while the Xeon has none. Finally, the PCIe support is distinct: the Xeon provides Gen 4 with 16 CPU lanes, while the Ultra 5 provides Gen 5 with only 4 CPU lanes, reflecting their different expansion needs.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results reveal the stark contrast between the two processors. The Core Ultra 5 228V's advantages are frequently large. In Cinebench R15 single-core, it scores 267 against the Xeon's 189, a 29.2% lead. This pattern repeats in PassMark single-thread, where the Ultra 5's 3836 score is more than double the Xeon's 1785, a 53.5% delta. The Ultra 5 also wins PassMark physics by 44.1% (1538 vs 859) and floating-point math by 38.5% (53310 vs 32772). Its lead in find prime numbers is even more pronounced, 168 vs 68, a 59.5% gap, indicating a massive advantage in algorithms that are difficult to parallelize.

However, the Xeon D-1746TER's wins are just as decisive in its target areas. The Cinebench R23 multi-core result is the standout: 13311 vs 9932, a 34% victory. The PassMark integer math test shows a similar story, with the Xeon scoring 54482 versus the Ultra 5's 39679, a 37.3% lead. The Xeon also wins random string sorting by 11.7% and data compression by 10.2%. Interestingly, the Xeon even edges out a win in Cinebench R23 single-core, scoring 1879 versus 1758, a 6.9% advantage, which is an outlier compared to its other single-threaded losses. The overall win count is 12 for the Ultra 5 and 5 for the Xeon, but the magnitude of the Xeon's wins in multi-threaded tests makes the aggregate average score nearly identical.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts are the most obvious difference: the Xeon D-1746TER has 10 cores and 20 threads, while the Core Ultra 5 228V has 8 cores and 8 threads. Clock speeds also differ, with the Xeon having a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost of 3.10 GHz, while the Ultra 5 has a higher base of 2.10 GHz and a much higher boost of 4.50 GHz. The TDP is a major divider, with the Xeon rated at 67 W and the Ultra 5 at a remarkably low 17 W, making the Ultra 5 far more power-efficient.

The sockets are incompatible, with the Xeon using Intel BGA 2227 and the Ultra 5 using Intel BGA 2833. The process node is also different, with the Xeon on 10 nm and the Ultra 5 on 3 nm. Cache sizes differ, with the Xeon having 80 KB L1 and 1.25 MB L2 per core, and 15 MB shared L3, while the Ultra 5 has 192 KB L1 and 2.5 MB L2 per core, and 8 MB shared L3. The Xeon supports DDR4 memory with a triple-channel bus and a bandwidth of 64.0 GB/s, while the Ultra 5's memory support is motherboard-dependent and uses a dual-channel bus. The Xeon has ECC memory support, the Ultra 5 does not. PCIe support differs, with the Xeon offering Gen 4 with 16 lanes and the Ultra 5 offering Gen 5 with 4 lanes. The Xeon has no integrated graphics, while the Ultra 5 has Arc 130V. The launch MSRP of the Xeon is $1069; the Ultra 5 has no listed launch MSRP.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in single-threaded tasks?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V is significantly faster. It wins the PassMark single-thread test with a score of 3836 versus the Xeon's 1785, a 53.5% advantage, and also leads in Cinebench R15 and R20 single-core by 29.2% and 13.9%, respectively.

Q: Which processor is better for multi-threaded workloads?

A: It depends on the specific test. The Intel Xeon D-1746TER wins Cinebench R23 multi-core by 34% (13311 vs 9932) and PassMark integer math by 37.3%. However, the Core Ultra 5 228V wins Cinebench R15 and R20 multi-core by 10.7% and 13.9%, and PassMark multithread by 14.1%.

Q: What is the TDP difference and what does it imply?

A: The Xeon D-1746TER has a TDP of 67 W, while the Core Ultra 5 228V has a TDP of 17 W. This indicates the Ultra 5 is designed for power-constrained mobile environments, while the Xeon is designed for sustained server workloads where power draw is less of a concern.

Q: Does the Xeon support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Intel Xeon D-1746TER supports ECC memory, which is a critical feature for error correction in server and workstation applications. The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V does not support ECC memory.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V has a significantly higher boost clock of 4.50 GHz, compared to the Intel Xeon D-1746TER's boost clock of 3.10 GHz.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: They are nearly identical. The Xeon D-1746TER has an average benchmark score of 21635, while the Core Ultra 5 228V has an average score of 21440, a difference of only 0.9% in favor of the Xeon.

The Verdict

The data paints a clear picture for potential buyers. The Intel Core Ultra 5 228V is the processor for interactive, client-side computing. Its massive wins in single-threaded performance, physics, and floating-point math make it ideal for responsive desktop applications, content creation with lighter loads, and any workload where per-core speed is paramount. Its low 17 W TDP also makes it the only choice for fanless or ultra-portable designs. If the task involves immediate, user-facing computation, the Ultra 5 is the clear winner.

The Intel Xeon D-1746TER, with its 20 threads and ECC memory support, is the processor for background, data-centric processing. Its dominant wins in Cinebench R23 multi-core, integer math, and data compression point to a system designed for servers, network appliances, or edge computing. It is the appropriate choice for workloads that involve compiling, transcoding, or processing large databases where data integrity and parallel throughput are more critical than single-threaded latency. The choice is not about which is "better," but which workload matches the processor's strengths. For interactive speed, choose the Ultra 5. For sustained multi-threaded server tasks, choose the Xeon.