Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus vs Intel Core Ultra 5 338H Comparison

The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus and the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H represent two distinct endpoints of Intel’s mobile and desktop strategy. The 250K Plus is a desktop part aimed at maximum throughput, while the 338H is a low-power mobile processor designed for efficiency. The recorded data shows a complete sweep for the desktop chip across all 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, but the margin of victory varies significantly depending on the workload.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most lopsided results appear in memory-heavy and data-processing tasks. In PassMark data compression, the 250K Plus scores 568,721 against 276,539 for the 338H, a massive 105.7% advantage. Similarly, random string sorting shows a 102.7% delta, with scores of 69,090 and 34,082. The desktop chip also doubles up in data encryption, posting 42,144 versus 21,367, a 97.2% lead. These are the kinds of workloads that scale with core count, memory bandwidth, and cache size.

Multi-core rendering tests reinforce the pattern. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the 250K Plus scores 30,867, which is 89% ahead of the 338H’s 16,331. The R20 multicore result is 18,442 versus 10,213, a 80.6% delta, and R15 multicore shows 4,640 against 2,504, a 85.3% gap. These results indicate that the 18-core desktop processor sustains its advantage across all three generations of the Cinebench test.

Floating-point and integer math follow the same trajectory. PassMark floating point math shows 162,692 for the 250K Plus against 84,067, a 93.5% delta. Integer math is close behind at 92.6%, with 125,091 versus 64,934. Extended instructions deliver 44,565 versus 23,906, an 86.4% margin. Prime number finding is the smallest multi-threaded gap at 59.9%, with 486 versus 304, but it is still a decisive win.

Single-core performance is a tighter contest. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 2,261 versus 2,044, a 10.6% lead for the desktop chip. The R15 single-core result is 328 versus 305, a 7.5% delta, and PassMark single-thread shows 4,757 versus 4,180, a 13.8% margin. The 338H is competitive here, but the 250K Plus still wins every test. The smallest overall delta in the entire dataset is Cinebench R15 single-core at 7.5%, which shows that the mobile chip’s architecture narrows the gap when only one core is active.

The remaining workload, PassMark physics, shows 3,494 versus 2,697, a 29.6% lead. This is a moderate win compared to the data-heavy tests, but it still falls in favor of the desktop part.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on different foundations. The 250K Plus uses the Arrow Lake Refresh codename and belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2, while the 338H uses the Panther Lake architecture and belongs to Core Ultra Series 3. Both are fabricated on a 3 nm process, but the 250K Plus is produced by TSMC, whereas the 338H is produced by Intel. The desktop chip carries 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die, while the mobile chip’s transistor count and die size are not recorded.

Core configuration is a major differentiator. The 250K Plus has 18 cores and 18 threads, with no hyperthreading. The 338H has 12 cores and 12 threads. Both parts use a 192 KB L1 cache per core. The L2 cache differs: the 250K Plus has 3 MB per core, while the 338H has 2.5 MB per core. The L3 cache is 30 MB shared on the desktop part versus 18 MB shared on the mobile part.

Clock speeds reflect their intended operating envelopes. The 250K Plus has a base clock of 4.20 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. The 338H has a base clock of 1.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz. The thermal design power also diverges sharply: 125 watts for the desktop chip versus 25 watts for the mobile chip. That five-fold difference in power allowance explains much of the performance gap in sustained workloads.

Memory support is another split. The 250K Plus uses DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration with 115.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The 338H uses LPDDR5X in a dual-channel configuration with 136.5 GB/s of bandwidth. Despite the mobile chip’s higher memory bandwidth figure, the desktop chip still wins every memory-sensitive test, which suggests that core count and cache size play a larger role than raw bandwidth in these benchmarks. The 250K Plus supports ECC memory; the 338H does not.

The desktop chip uses Intel Socket 1851 and is unlocked, meaning the multiplier can be adjusted. The mobile chip is soldered to Intel BGA 2540 and has a locked multiplier. PCIe connectivity also differs: the 250K Plus provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU, while the 338H provides Gen 5 with 4 lanes. Integrated graphics are present on both, with the 250K Plus using Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units and the 338H using Arc B370.

Where Each One Wins

The 250K Plus wins every benchmark in the database, so the question is not whether it wins, but by how much. Its largest advantages are in data compression (105.7%), random string sorting (102.7%), and data encryption (97.2%). These are workloads that benefit from the combination of 18 cores, 30 MB of L3 cache, and higher sustained clock speeds. For users running heavy multi-threaded rendering, batch encoding, or large dataset manipulation, the desktop part is the clear choice.

The 338H’s best results are in single-core tests. Its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2,044 is only 10.6% behind the 250K Plus, and its R15 single-core score of 305 is only 7.5% behind. For tasks that rely on a single thread, such as older software or lightly threaded applications, the mobile chip is surprisingly close. The 338H also uses far less power, with a 25-watt TDP versus 125 watts, which makes it suitable for compact laptops where thermal headroom is limited.

The 338H also has a higher memory bandwidth rating at 136.5 GB/s compared to 115.2 GB/s for the desktop part. That advantage does not translate into benchmark wins, but it does indicate that the mobile platform is designed for efficient data movement within its power budget. The integrated Arc B370 graphics on the 338H are a separate feature set, but no graphics benchmarks are included in the database.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus wins all 17 head-to-head comparisons, with deltas ranging from 7.5% in Cinebench R15 single-core to 105.7% in PassMark data compression. Its average benchmark score of 66,855 places it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, while the 338H’s average of 33,989 places it in the 84th percentile. The desktop chip sits near competitors like the AMD EPYC 4465P, which trails by 0.1%, and the Intel Xeon 6515P, which trails by 0.2%. It also leads its direct sibling, the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus, by 1.1%.

The 338H competes in a different class. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 7 165H, which leads by 0.3%, and the Intel Core i7-12800HX, which trails by 0.3%. The mobile chip’s 84th percentile ranking is respectable for a 25-watt part, but it operates at a different performance tier entirely.

For users building a desktop workstation or gaming rig, the 250K Plus is the only choice based on this data. It offers roughly double the multi-threaded performance of the 338H in most tests, with a launch MSRP of $199. For users who need a mobile processor in a thin laptop, the 338H provides adequate single-core performance and a much lower power draw, but it cannot match the desktop part in any recorded benchmark. The choice is simply between desktop throughput and mobile efficiency.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has 18 cores and 18 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H has 12 cores and 12 threads.

Q: How large is the single-core performance gap?

A: The 250K Plus leads by 7.5% in Cinebench R15 single-core, 10.6% in Cinebench R23 single-core, and 13.8% in PassMark single-thread.

Q: What is the difference in thermal design power?

A: The 250K Plus has a TDP of 125 watts, while the 338H has a TDP of 25 watts.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The 250K Plus supports ECC memory, while the 338H does not.

Q: Which processor has a higher memory bandwidth rating?

A: The 338H has a memory bandwidth of 136.5 GB/s with LPDDR5X, while the 250K Plus has 115.2 GB/s with DDR5.

Q: How do the two compare in multi-threaded rendering?

A: The 250K Plus scores 30,867 in Cinebench R23 multicore, which is 89% ahead of the 338H’s 16,331.