Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus vs Intel Core Ultra 7 255H Comparison

Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus vs Intel Core Ultra 7 255H

The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus and Intel Core Ultra 7 255H represent two very different approaches within the same Core Ultra Series 2 family. One is a desktop processor built for sustained high performance, the other a mobile chip designed for efficiency. The recorded data shows a decisive performance gap between them, with the desktop part winning every single benchmark in the comparison set.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result in the database is the multicore performance difference. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus scores 30,867 points against 9,240 for the Core Ultra 7 255H, a delta of 234.1%. This is the largest margin in the entire head-to-head set. Similarly, Cinebench R20 multicore shows 18,442 versus 6,381, a 189% advantage, and Cinebench R15 multicore has 4,640 versus 1,515, a 206.3% lead.

Single-core results are closer but still favor the desktop chip. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 2,261 versus 1,843, a 22.7% delta. Cinebench R20 single-core records 2,603 versus 900, which is 189.2% ahead, though this specific gap appears unusually large relative to other single-threaded tests. Cinebench R15 single-core has 328 versus 251, a 30.7% advantage.

In PassMark tests, the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus dominates across the board. Random string sorting shows 69,090 versus 36,058, a 91.6% delta, one of the larger wins. Data compression scores 568,721 versus 298,850, a 90.3% margin. Extended instructions produce 44,565 versus 23,755, an 87.6% difference. Data encryption shows 42,144 versus 23,395, an 80.1% lead.

Floating point math favors the desktop part with 162,692 versus 98,796, a 64.7% margin. Integer math records 125,091 versus 77,975, a 60.4% delta. Prime number finding shows 486 versus 303, also 60.4% ahead. The multithread test has 51,596 versus 30,703, a 68% lead, while physics shows 3,494 versus 2,254, a 55% advantage.

Single-threaded PassMark results are the narrowest gap overall. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus scores 4,757 against 4,317 for the Core Ultra 7 255H, a 10.2% delta. This suggests that for lightly threaded workloads, the two processors are relatively close, while heavily threaded tasks expose the true performance divide.

Where Each One Wins

The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus wins all 17 head-to-head benchmarks, leaving zero wins for the mobile part. This is not a nuanced comparison. The desktop processor delivers higher scores in every measured category, from short bursts of single-core activity to prolonged multithreaded rendering.

The Core Ultra 7 255H does not win any test, but the data still indicates where it might be relevant. Its single-threaded PassMark score of 4,317 is within 10.2% of the desktop chip, meaning everyday applications that rely on a few fast cores will perform at a similar level. The mobile processor also maintains a 83rd percentile ranking against all CPUs, which places it above the majority of processors in the database.

For workloads that stress all cores simultaneously, the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is clearly the stronger choice. Cinebench R23 multicore, which is often used to represent rendering and video encoding tasks, shows the desktop part at more than triple the mobile score. Data compression and encryption, common in file archiving and security software, also show substantial leads of 90.3% and 80.1% respectively.

The Core Ultra 7 255H, despite losing every benchmark, still holds a respectable 83rd percentile overall. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 5 240 with an average score of 33,542 and a 0% delta, the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS at 33,667 with a -0.4% delta, and the AMD Ryzen 5 7645HX at 33,668 with a -0.4% delta. This places the mobile chip in a competitive position within its own power envelope.

Architecture Differences

Both processors use the 3 nm process node from TSMC, but they diverge in almost every other architectural detail. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is built on Arrow Lake Refresh, while the Core Ultra 7 255H uses Arrow Lake-H. The desktop part carries 18 cores and 18 threads, while the mobile part has 16 cores and 16 threads. Neither uses simultaneous multithreading, so thread counts equal core counts.

The desktop chip has a base clock of 4.20 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. The mobile chip operates at a 2.00 GHz base and 5.10 GHz boost. This 2.2 GHz difference in base clocks is a major factor in the multicore performance gap, as lower clocks reduce sustained throughput even when core counts are similar.

Cache hierarchies are identical in per-core allocation. Both have 192 KB of L1 cache per core and 3 MB of L2 per core. The shared L3 cache differs: the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has 30 MB, while the Core Ultra 7 255H has 24 MB. This 6 MB difference in last-level cache can affect workloads with large working sets that benefit from more on-die storage.

Transistor count and die size are only recorded for the desktop part. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. The mobile chip does not have these figures in the database, so a direct comparison is not possible.

Memory support shows a clear split. The desktop processor supports DDR5 memory only, while the mobile chip supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Both use a dual-channel memory bus. Memory bandwidth is higher on the desktop part at 115.2 GB/s versus 102.4 GB/s for the mobile chip. Both support ECC memory.

PCIe connectivity is identical: Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU only. The integrated graphics differ. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units, while the Core Ultra 7 255H uses Arc Graphics 140T. The database does not provide benchmark scores for these iGPUs, so their relative performance cannot be quantified here.

The desktop part has an unlocked multiplier, allowing overclocking, while the mobile chip is locked. The desktop processor uses Intel Socket 1851, and the mobile part uses Intel BGA 2049. The desktop part has a TDP of 125 watts, while the mobile chip has a TDP of 28 watts. This thermal design power difference is significant, as it directly influences sustained clock behavior and cooling requirements.

Release dates differ by over a year. The Core Ultra 7 255H was released on January 12, 2025, while the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus came later, on March 10, 2026. The desktop part has a launch MSRP of $199, while the mobile chip has no recorded MSRP.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has an average benchmark score of 66,855, while the Core Ultra 7 255H has 33,537.

Q: How does the desktop part compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has a 93rd percentile ranking. Its closest competitor is the AMD EPYC 4465P with an average score of 66,925, a -0.1% delta. The Intel Xeon 6515P scores 67,006, a -0.2% delta, and the Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX scores 67,469, a -0.9% delta. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus scores 66,159, a 1.1% delta.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has 18 cores and 18 threads. The Core Ultra 7 255H has 16 cores and 16 threads.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus and the Core Ultra 7 255H support ECC memory.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has a boost clock of 5.30 GHz, while the Core Ultra 7 255H has a boost clock of 5.10 GHz.

Q: Is the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus overclockable?

A: Yes, the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has an unlocked multiplier. The Core Ultra 7 255H does not have an unlocked multiplier.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus | Intel Core Ultra 7 255H |

|----------------|------------------------------|--------------------------|

| Cores | 18 | 16 |

| Threads | 18 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 4.20 GHz | 2.00 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.30 GHz | 5.10 GHz |

| TDP | 125 W | 28 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1851 | Intel BGA 2049 |

| Codename | Arrow Lake Refresh | Arrow Lake-H |

| Generation | Ultra 5 (Arrow Lake) | Ultra 7 (Arrow Lake-H) |

| Process Node | 3 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | TSMC |

| Transistors | 17,800 million | Not recorded |

| Die Size | 243 mm² | Not recorded |

| L1 Cache | 192 KB (per core) | 192 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 3 MB (per core) | 3 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 30 MB (shared) | 24 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR5 | DDR5, LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 115.2 GB/s | 102.4 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 20 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 20 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU | Arc Graphics 140T |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Production Status | Active | Active |

| Release Date | 2026-03-10 | 2025-01-12 |

| Launch MSRP | $199 | Not recorded |

| Multiplier Unlocked | Yes | No |