PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Core Ultra 5 238V vs Xeon W-3225 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Core Ultra 5 238V vs Xeon W-3225: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Core Ultra 5 238V

2024

Why buy it

✅Costs $865 less on MSRP ($454 MSRP vs $1,319 MSRP).
✅Delivers 190.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 40.1 vs 13.8 PassMark/$ ($454 MSRP vs $1,319 MSRP).
✅Draws 17W instead of 160W, a 143W reduction.
✅Newer platform on FCBGA2833 with DDR5 support instead of LGA3647 and DDR4.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Arc Graphics 130V, while Xeon W-3225 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Xeon W-3225 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (10,000 vs 11,500).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (8 MB vs 17 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon W-3225, which brings 8 cores / 16 threads and 64 PCIe lanes.

Xeon W-3225

2019

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +17.1% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+106.3% larger total L3 cache (17 MB vs 8 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 8 cores / 16 threads, plus 64 PCIe lanes vs 8.
✅700% more PCIe lanes (64 vs 8) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 13.8 vs 40.1 PassMark/$ ($1,319 MSRP vs $454 MSRP).
❌841.2% higher power demand at 160W vs 17W.
❌Older platform position on LGA3647 with DDR4, while Core Ultra 5 238V moves to FCBGA2833 and DDR5.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core Ultra 5 238V can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon W-3225 better than Core Ultra 5 238V?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon W-3225 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core Ultra 5 238V is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Xeon W-3225 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 17.1% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon W-3225 is the stronger fit. You are getting 15% better Cinebench R23 multi-core, backed by 8 cores and 16 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 106.3% larger total L3 cache (17 MB vs 8 MB).

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Xeon W-3225 is the easy recommendation for a fresh desktop build. Xeon W-3225 comes in 190.5% more expensive on MSRP at $1,319 MSRP versus $454 MSRP, and it still gives you a 17.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core Ultra 5 238V only looks good on raw value math because it is a cheap legacy laptop chip, not because it is a real desktop gaming recommendation. It simply does not keep up in modern games, especially when the gap is already 17.1% in the shared gaming data.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Core Ultra 5 238V makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2024 vs 2019) and a healthier platform with FCBGA2833 and DDR5 instead of LGA3647. That gives you a healthier platform runway for motherboard, RAM, and later CPU upgrades.

Core Ultra 5 238V vs Xeon W-3225 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Core Ultra 5 238V

The Core Ultra 5 238V is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 24 September 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Lunar Lake (2024) architecture. It features 8 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 2.1 GHz, with boost up to 4.7 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 2.5 MB (per core). Built on 3 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA2833. Thermal design power (TDP): 17 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 18,219 points. Launch price was $299.

Xeon W-3225

The Xeon W-3225 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 3 June 2019 (6 years ago). It is based on the Cascade Lake (2019−2020) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 3.7 GHz, with boost up to 4.4 GHz. L3 cache: 16.5 MB. L2 cache: 8 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA3647. Thermal design power (TDP): 160 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2666. Passmark benchmark score: 18,251 points. Launch price was $1,199.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core Ultra 5 238V packs 8 cores / 8 threads, matching the Xeon W-3225's 8 cores. Boost clocks reach 4.7 GHz on the Core Ultra 5 238V versus 4.4 GHz on the Xeon W-3225 — a 6.6% clock advantage for the Core Ultra 5 238V (base: 2.1 GHz vs 3.7 GHz). The Core Ultra 5 238V uses the Lunar Lake (2024) architecture (3 nm), while the Xeon W-3225 uses Cascade Lake (2019−2020) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core Ultra 5 238V scores 18,219 against the Xeon W-3225's 18,251 — a 0.2% lead for the Xeon W-3225. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 10,000 vs 11,500 (14% advantage for the Xeon W-3225). Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 2,683 vs 1,150, a 80% lead for the Core Ultra 5 238V that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 10,130 vs 9,100 (10.7% advantage for the Core Ultra 5 238V). L3 cache: 8 MB (total) on the Core Ultra 5 238V vs 16.5 MB on the Xeon W-3225.

Feature	Core Ultra 5 238V	Xeon W-3225
Cores / Threads	8 / 8	8 / 16
Boost Clock	4.7 GHz+7%	4.4 GHz
Base Clock	2.1 GHz	3.7 GHz+76%
L3 Cache	8 MB (total)	16.5 MB+106%
L2 Cache	2.5 MB (per core)	8 MB+220%
Process	3 nm-79%	14 nm
Architecture	Lunar Lake (2024)	Cascade Lake (2019−2020)
PassMark	18,219	18,251
Cinebench R23 Multi	10,000	11,500+15%
Geekbench 6 Single	2,683+133%	1,150
Geekbench 6 Multi	10,130+11%	9,100

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core Ultra 5 238V uses the FCBGA2833 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Xeon W-3225 uses LGA3647 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches LPDDR5x-8533 on the Core Ultra 5 238V versus DDR4-2933 on the Xeon W-3225 — the Core Ultra 5 238V supports 190.9% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Xeon W-3225 supports up to 1024 GB of RAM compared to 32 GB — 3100% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core Ultra 5 238V) vs 6 (Xeon W-3225). PCIe lanes: 8 (Core Ultra 5 238V) vs 64 (Xeon W-3225) — the Xeon W-3225 offers 56 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SoC (Core Ultra 5 238V) and C621 (Xeon W-3225).

Feature	Core Ultra 5 238V	Xeon W-3225
Socket	FCBGA2833	LGA3647
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0	PCIe 5.0
Max RAM Speed	LPDDR5x-8533+191%	DDR4-2933
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB	1024 GB+3100%
RAM Channels	2	6+200%
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	8	64+700%

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Only the Xeon W-3225 supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core Ultra 5 238V) vs VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Xeon W-3225). The Core Ultra 5 238V includes integrated graphics (Arc Graphics 130V), while the Xeon W-3225 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core Ultra 5 238V targets Productivity, Xeon W-3225 targets Workstation. Direct competitor: Core Ultra 5 238V rivals Ryzen 5 8640U; Xeon W-3225 rivals Ryzen Threadripper 2920X.

Feature	Core Ultra 5 238V	Xeon W-3225
Integrated GPU	Yes	No
IGPU Model	Arc Graphics 130V	None
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	Yes
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	VT-x, VT-d, EPT
Target Use	Productivity	Workstation

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Core Ultra 5 238V was priced at $454, while the Xeon W-3225 came in at $1319. On launch pricing ($454 vs $1319), Core Ultra 5 238V was $865 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core Ultra 5 238V delivers 40.1 pts/$ vs 13.8 pts/$ for the Xeon W-3225 — making the Core Ultra 5 238V the 97.4% better value option.

Feature	Core Ultra 5 238V	Xeon W-3225
MSRP	$454-66%	$1319
Performance per Dollar	40.1+191%	13.8
Release Date	2024	2019

Search Core Ultra 5 238V on Amazon

Search Xeon W-3225 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.