5 315 vs Ultra 3 205
Aggregate performance score
Core Ultra 3 205 outperforms Core 5 315 by an impressive 71% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 600 | 1075 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 52.90 | 11.31 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Designer | Intel | Intel |
| Manufacturer | TSMC | Intel |
| Architecture codename | Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025) | Wildcat Lake (2026) |
| Release date | August 2025 (recently) | 16 April 2026 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $140 | $340 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Ultra 3 205 has 368% better value for money than Core 5 315.
Performance to price scatter graph
Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.
Detailed specifications
Basic parameters of Core Ultra 3 205 and Core 5 315: number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.
| Physical cores | 8 (Octa-Core) | 6 (Hexa-Core) |
| Threads | 8 | 6 |
| Base clock speed | 3.8 GHz | 1.5 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.9 GHz | 4.4 GHz |
| L1 cache | 192 KB (per core) | 192 KB |
| L2 cache | 3 MB (per core) | 2.5 MB |
| L3 cache | 15 MB (shared) | 6 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 3 nm | 3 nm |
| Die size | 243 mm2 | no data |
| Number of transistors | 17,800 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
Compatibility
Information on Core Ultra 3 205 and Core 5 315 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.
| Number of CPUs in a configuration | 1 | 1 |
| Socket | 1851 | Intel BGA 1516 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 57 Watt | 15 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core Ultra 3 205 and Core 5 315. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
Security technologies
Core Ultra 3 205 and Core 5 315 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core Ultra 3 205 and Core 5 315 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | + | + |
| VT-x | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core Ultra 3 205 and Core 5 315. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR5 | DDR5, LPDDR5X |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 16EU | Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core Ultra 3 205 and Core 5 315.
| PCIe version | 5.0 | 4.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 24 | 6 |
Synthetic benchmarks
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating.
Passmark
Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 15.14 | 8.87 |
| Physical cores | 8 | 6 |
| Threads | 8 | 6 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 57 Watt | 15 Watt |
Ultra 3 205 has a 71% higher aggregate performance score, and 33% more physical cores and 33% more threads.
Core 5 315, on the other hand, has 280% lower power consumption.
The Intel Core Ultra 3 205 is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Core 5 315 in performance tests.
Note that Core Ultra 3 205 is a desktop processor while Core 5 315 is a notebook one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
