Intel Core Ultra 7 155U vs Intel Core Ultra 7 256V Comparison

The Intel Core Ultra 7 155U and the Intel Core Ultra 7 256V are two mobile processors from consecutive Intel generations, yet they offer starkly different philosophies. The 155U is a 12-core Meteor Lake chip designed for efficiency, while the 256V is an 8-core Lunar Lake part focused on single-threaded performance and power efficiency. Benchmark data reveals that while the older 155U holds onto a few specific strengths, the 256V dominates the vast majority of tests, making it the clear performance leader despite its lower core count.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result is the sheer volume of wins for the Core Ultra 7 256V. Out of 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, the 256V takes 15 victories. The 155U manages only two wins, and one of those is by a razor-thin margin.

The 256V’s dominance is most pronounced in single-threaded and integer-heavy workloads. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the 256V scores 285.5 against the 155U’s 238.5, a 16.5% advantage. This trend continues in Cinebench R20 single-core, where the 256V’s 982 score beats the 155U’s 813 by 17.2%. The gap is similar in PassMark single-thread tests, with the 256V posting 4029 versus 3372, a 16.3% lead. These results indicate the Lunar Lake architecture delivers a substantial per-core performance uplift.

Multi-threaded results are more complex. The 256V wins most of these, but the margins vary. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the 256V scores 6958 against 5765, a 17.1% lead. PassMark multi-thread shows a 16.1% advantage for the 256V (19530 vs 16382). However, Cinebench R23 multi-core tells a closer story: the 256V’s 10399 beats the 155U’s 9674.5 by only 7%. This suggests that while the 256V generally has better multi-threaded throughput, the 155U’s extra cores help it stay competitive in certain sustained workloads.

The 155U’s one significant triumph is in PassMark integer math, where it scores 57564 against the 256V’s 43358—a massive 32.8% advantage. This is an outlier that points to the 155U’s 12-core/14-thread configuration providing an edge in highly parallel integer operations. The other 155U win is in Cinebench R15 multi-core, where it edges out the 256V by just 0.1% (1585 vs 1583.5), a statistical tie.

The 256V also shows decisive wins in specialized tests. PassMark find prime numbers shows the 256V scoring 192 versus 65, a 66.1% advantage—the largest margin in the entire dataset. PassMark extended instructions follow with a 36.7% lead for the 256V (15643 vs 9903). PassMark floating point math also favors the 256V by 31.3% (58576 vs 40256). These results indicate the 256V’s newer cores are significantly better at complex mathematical operations and extended instruction sets.

Data compression and encryption favor the 256V as well, though by smaller margins. PassMark data compression shows the 256V at 184985 versus 177122, a 4.3% lead. PassMark data encryption is more decisive, with the 256V winning 13998 to 11333, a 19% advantage. The 256V also wins PassMark physics by 32% (1595 vs 1084) and random string sorting by 12.1% (22481 vs 19767).

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 155U has a slightly higher average benchmark score of 21174, while the Core Ultra 7 256V scores 21112. The 155U is 0.3% ahead of the 256V in this aggregate metric, and the 256V is 0.3% behind the 155U when viewed from its perspective.

Q: Is the Core Ultra 7 256V always faster than the 155U?

A: No. The 155U wins in PassMark integer math by 32.8% and in Cinebench R15 multi-core by 0.1%. The 256V wins the other 15 benchmarks, so the 155U is not always slower, but it is only competitive in a narrow set of workloads.

Q: How do these chips compare to common rivals?

A: The 155U is 0.2% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 5 7530U and 0.4% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 5 5600G. The 256V is 0.1% behind the Ryzen 5 7530U and 0.1% ahead of the Ryzen 5 5600G. Both sit at the 75th percentile of all CPUs.

Q: Which CPU has better single-threaded performance?

A: The Core Ultra 7 256V is clearly superior in single-threaded tests. It leads by 16.5% in Cinebench R15 single-core, 17.2% in Cinebench R20 single-core, 11.3% in Cinebench R23 single-core, and 16.3% in PassMark single-thread.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap between the two?

A: The largest difference is in PassMark find prime numbers, where the 256V scores 192 versus the 155U’s 65, a 66.1% advantage for the 256V.

Q: Does the 155U have any meaningful advantage?

A: Yes, in PassMark integer math, the 155U’s score of 57564 is 32.8% higher than the 256V’s 43358. This is a substantial lead in a specific test that suggests better performance in certain integer-heavy parallel workloads.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural generations and are built on different process nodes. The Core Ultra 7 155U uses the Meteor Lake architecture and is fabricated on Intel’s 7 nm process. In contrast, the Core Ultra 7 256V uses the Lunar Lake architecture and is built on TSMC’s 3 nm process. This node advantage is a likely contributor to the 256V’s higher efficiency and per-core performance.

Core configurations differ significantly. The 155U has 12 cores and 14 threads, while the 256V has 8 cores and 8 threads. This means the 155U has more physical cores and supports hyper-threading, while the 256V does not. The 155U’s extra cores help in multi-threaded scenarios, but the 256V’s newer core design appears to compensate in most tests.

Cache hierarchies also differ. The 155U has 112 KB of L1 cache per core and 2 MB of L2 cache per core. The 256V has 192 KB of L1 cache per core and 2.5 MB of L2 cache per core. Both share 12 MB of L3 cache. The larger L1 and L2 caches on the 256V likely contribute to its superior single-threaded and latency-sensitive performance.

Memory support differs as well. The 155U supports DDR5 memory with a dual-channel bus and a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The 256V also uses a dual-channel bus, but its memory bandwidth is listed as unknown, and its memory support is listed as unknown as well. The 155U has a clear specification in this area, while the 256V’s details are not provided.

PCIe connectivity is a notable difference. The 155U supports PCIe Gen 4 with 12 lanes (CPU only), while the 256V supports PCIe Gen 5 with 4 lanes (CPU only). The 256V offers a newer generation standard but with fewer lanes, which may affect expandability options.

Integrated graphics also vary. The 155U features Arc Xe-LPG with 64 execution units, while the 256V features Arc 140V. The specific execution unit count for the 256V is not provided, but the different naming suggests a newer graphics architecture.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specifications. The 155U has 12 cores and 14 threads, while the 256V has 8 cores and 8 threads. Base clocks differ: the 155U runs at 1700 MHz, while the 256V runs at 2200 MHz. Both have a boost clock of 4.80 GHz.

Thermal design power (TDP) differs slightly. The 155U has a TDP of 15 watts, while the 256V has a TDP of 17 watts. The 256V uses more power at its base specification but delivers higher performance.

Sockets are different. The 155U uses Intel BGA 2049, while the 256V uses Intel BGA 2833. This means they are not socket-compatible and require different motherboards.

Process nodes and foundries differ. The 155U is built on a 7 nm process by Intel, while the 256V is built on a 3 nm process by TSMC.

L1 and L2 cache sizes differ per core. The 155U has 112 KB L1 and 2 MB L2 per core, while the 256V has 192 KB L1 and 2.5 MB L2 per core. Both have 12 MB of shared L3 cache.

Memory bandwidth is specified for the 155U at 89.6 GB/s, but is unknown for the 256V. PCIe support differs: the 155U has PCIe Gen 4 with 12 lanes, while the 256V has PCIe Gen 5 with 4 lanes.

Integrated graphics differ, with the 155U using Arc Xe-LPG 64EU and the 256V using Arc 140V. The 155U has a launch MSRP of $490, while the 256V has no launch MSRP listed. The 155U was released in December 2023, while the 256V was released in September 2024. The 155U has part number SRN6B, while the 256V has part number SRPMPSRPMZ.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the Intel Core Ultra 7 256V is the superior processor for nearly every task. It wins 15 of 17 direct comparisons, including all Cinebench tests except a near-tie in R15 multi-core. The 256V’s single-threaded performance is consistently 11-17% higher, and its multi-threaded scores are generally 7-17% higher. The 256V also excels in math-intensive and encryption workloads, often by 30% or more.

The only reason to choose the 155U is if your workload is heavily dependent on parallel integer math. The 155U’s 32.8% lead in PassMark integer math is significant and suggests its 12-core/14-thread configuration handles certain integer operations far better. For general productivity, content creation, or everyday use, the 256V’s higher clocks and newer architecture make it the faster and more responsive chip.

The 155U’s advantage in average benchmark score is negligible at 0.3%, and that is largely driven by its strong integer math result. In real-world usage, the 256V’s wins in more common tests like Cinebench and PassMark multi-thread will be felt more often. The 256V also benefits from a newer 3 nm process, which typically means better power efficiency, though the TDP is slightly higher at 17 watts versus 15 watts.

For a new laptop purchase, the Core Ultra 7 256V is the recommended choice based on performance data. The 155U may still be relevant in existing systems or specific niches where its integer math advantage and extra cores are useful, but the 256V is the more capable processor overall.

Where Each One Wins

The Core Ultra 7 256V wins in the vast majority of scenarios. It is the better choice for single-threaded applications, such as web browsing, office productivity, and light coding, where its 16.3% PassMark single-thread lead provides snappier responsiveness. It also wins in multi-threaded rendering workloads, as shown by its 17.1% lead in Cinebench R20 multi-core and 7% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core. The 256V is also superior for encryption and data security tasks, with a 19% advantage in PassMark data encryption, and for scientific computing, with a 31.3% lead in floating-point math and a 36.7% lead in extended instructions.

The Core Ultra 7 155U wins in two specific areas. Its 32.8% advantage in PassMark integer math makes it the better choice for workloads that involve heavy integer arithmetic, such as certain types of data processing or compression algorithms. It also wins Cinebench R15 multi-core by 0.1%, though this is effectively a tie and not a meaningful advantage.

For users who need maximum single-threaded speed, the 256V is the clear winner. For users who need maximum multi-threaded throughput in most modern benchmarks, the 256V also wins. The 155U is only preferable for integer-heavy parallel workloads, where its 12 cores and 14 threads provide a distinct edge. In all other scenarios, the 256V’s newer architecture and higher clock speeds deliver better performance.