Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus vs Intel Core Ultra 5 336H Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus records an average benchmark score of 66855, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 336H scores 34485. The desktop part sits in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, whereas the mobile part ranks in the 84th percentile.

Q: How do the two chips compare in multi-core rendering workloads?

A: The Ultra 5 250K Plus leads in every multi-core Cinebench test. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 30867 against 23991 for the 336H, a 28.7% advantage. The gap widens in Cinebench R15 multi-core, where the desktop chip scores 4640 versus 2418, a 91.9% lead.

Q: Does the mobile processor win any benchmark categories?

A: The Ultra 5 336H wins two tests: Cinebench R15 single-core (341 vs 328, a 3.8% advantage) and Cinebench R23 single-core (3387 vs 2261, a 33.2% advantage). The desktop chip wins the remaining 15 head-to-head tests.

Q: What are the core and thread configurations of each processor?

A: The Ultra 5 250K Plus has 18 cores and 18 threads. The Ultra 5 336H has 16 cores and 16 threads. Neither processor uses simultaneous multithreading according to the recorded data.

Q: Which processor supports error-correcting memory?

A: The Ultra 5 250K Plus supports ECC memory. The Ultra 5 336H does not list ECC support. Both use dual-channel memory with 115.2 GB/s bandwidth, but the desktop chip supports DDR5 only, while the mobile chip supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X.

Q: What are the platform differences between the two?

A: The Ultra 5 250K Plus uses Intel Socket 1851, has an unlocked multiplier, and carries a launch MSRP of $199. The Ultra 5 336H uses Intel BGA 2540, has a locked multiplier, and has no launch MSRP recorded. The desktop chip provides Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes; the mobile chip provides Gen 5 with 12 CPU lanes.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus dominates the overall performance picture, winning 15 of 17 head-to-head benchmarks. Its strengths concentrate in heavily threaded workloads and memory-intensive operations. The PassMark data compression test shows the desktop chip at 568721 versus 280340 for the mobile part, a 102.9% advantage. Integer math follows a similar pattern: 125091 against 62070, a 101.5% lead. Random string sorting delivers 69090 versus 34402, a 100.8% gap. These results indicate the 250K Plus handles data transformation tasks with roughly double the throughput of the 336H.

The desktop processor also excels in floating-point math, scoring 162692 against 82415 for a 97.4% margin. Data encryption shows a 97.9% lead (42144 vs 21291), while extended instructions land at 81.6% (44565 vs 24542). Prime number finding favors the desktop chip by 62.5% (486 vs 299). Physics simulation in PassMark gives the 250K Plus a 30.3% edge (3494 vs 2682). Multi-threaded PassMark performance sits at 51596 versus 28545, an 80.8% difference.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H claims two wins, both in single-core Cinebench tests. Its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3387 exceeds the 250K Plus's 2261 by 33.2%. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the mobile chip scores 341 against 328, a 3.8% margin. These results suggest the Panther Lake architecture in the 336H delivers strong single-thread efficiency, but the desktop chip still wins PassMark single-thread by 18.5% (4757 vs 4013).

For users focused on sustained multi-core workloads, rendering, compression, or encryption, the 250K Plus is the clear choice. The 336H's single-core wins matter most in lightly threaded applications where per-core speed drives responsiveness, though its overall benchmark profile places it closer to mid-range mobile processors like the Intel Core i7-13700HX and Core i5-13450HX.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel series and generations. The Ultra 5 250K Plus belongs to Core Ultra Series 2 with the code name Arrow Lake Refresh, listed under the Ultra 5 (Arrow Lake) generation. The Ultra 5 336H belongs to Core Ultra Series 3 with the code name Panther Lake, listed under the Ultra 5 (Panther Lake-H) generation. Both use a 3 nm process node, but the foundries differ: TSMC produces the 250K Plus, while Intel produces the 336H.

The desktop chip integrates 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. The mobile chip does not have recorded transistor or die size data. Cache structures differ as well. Both share 192 KB of L1 per core, but the 250K Plus carries 3 MB of L2 per core and 30 MB of shared L3. The 336H carries 2.5 MB of L2 per core and 18 MB of shared L3. The larger L3 on the desktop part likely contributes to its substantial lead in data compression and random string sorting, where cache capacity directly affects throughput.

Integrated graphics also diverge. The 250K Plus uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units, while the 336H uses Intel Xe3 Graphics. The mobile part supports LPDDR5X memory in addition to DDR5, which aligns with its mobile platform. The desktop chip supports ECC memory, a feature absent from the mobile part. PCIe lane counts differ: 20 CPU lanes on the desktop versus 12 on the mobile. The 250K Plus has an unlocked multiplier, while the 336H does not.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every core specification. The 250K Plus has 18 cores and 18 threads versus 16 cores and 16 threads on the 336H. Base clocks diverge sharply: 4.20 GHz for the desktop part versus 1.90 GHz for the mobile part. Boost clocks show 5.30 GHz against 4.60 GHz. Thermal design power reflects the platform gap: 125 W for the desktop versus 25 W for the mobile chip.

Memory support differs in type but not in bus width or bandwidth. Both use dual-channel buses with 115.2 GB/s bandwidth, but the 250K Plus supports only DDR5, while the 336H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. ECC support appears only on the desktop model. PCIe generation matches at Gen 5, but lane counts differ: 20 lanes for the desktop, 12 for the mobile. The socket platforms are entirely different: Intel Socket 1851 for the desktop versus Intel BGA 2540 for the mobile. The 250K Plus has an unlocked multiplier and a recorded launch MSRP of $199; the 336H has no recorded launch MSRP and a locked multiplier. Release dates place the mobile chip first at 2026-01-04 and the desktop chip later at 2026-03-10.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The desktop processor's largest win comes in PassMark data compression, where the 250K Plus scores 568721 versus 280340 for a 102.9% advantage. Integer math follows closely at 101.5% (125091 vs 62070), and random string sorting sits at 100.8% (69090 vs 34402). Data encryption shows a 97.9% gap (42144 vs 21291), floating-point math a 97.4% gap (162692 vs 82415), and Cinebench R15 multi-core a 91.9% gap (4640 vs 2418). Cinebench R20 multi-core gives the desktop chip an 83% lead (18442 vs 10076), and PassMark multi-thread shows 80.8% (51596 vs 28545). Extended instructions land at 81.6% (44565 vs 24542). Prime number finding delivers 62.5% (486 vs 299). PassMark physics shows a 30.3% edge (3494 vs 2682), while Cinebench R23 multi-core carries a 28.7% margin (30867 vs 23991). PassMark single-thread gives the desktop chip 4757 versus 4013, an 18.5% win.

The mobile processor's wins are concentrated in single-core Cinebench tests. Cinebench R23 single-core shows the 336H at 3387 versus 2261, a 33.2% advantage. Cinebench R15 single-core shows 341 versus 328, a 3.8% margin. The single Cinebench R20 single-core test goes the other way: the desktop chip scores 2603 against 1422, an 83.1% lead.

The overall head-to-head record stands at 15 wins for the 250K Plus and 2 wins for the 336H. The desktop chip's average benchmark score of 66855 places it near the AMD EPYC 4465P (66925, 0.1% behind) and Intel Xeon 6515P (67006, 0.2% behind). The mobile chip's average of 34485 puts it close to the Intel Core i7-13700HX (34554, 0.2% behind) and the AMD Ryzen 7 3700X (34260, 0.7% ahead). These nearest-rival positions confirm the 250K Plus competes in server-class territory for average throughput, while the 336H aligns with high-end mobile and older desktop mid-range parts.