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.

Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook

This comparison brings together gaming FPS, productivity performance, platform differences, power efficiency, pricing context, and upgrade path so you can see which CPU actually makes more sense.

Core Ultra 9 288V

2024

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +7.8% higher average FPS across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (8 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel Arc 140V, while Ryzen 5 230 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 16 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 33.8 vs 100.9 PassMark/$ ($600 MSRP vs $200 MSRP).

Ryzen 5 230

2025

Why buy it

✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (16 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Costs $400 less on MSRP ($200 MSRP vs $600 MSRP).
✅Delivers 198.6% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 100.9 vs 33.8 PassMark/$ ($200 MSRP vs $600 MSRP).
✅Draws 28W instead of 30W, a 2W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 9 288V across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (20,186 vs 20,280).
❌No integrated graphics, while Core Ultra 9 288V can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core Ultra 9 288V

2024

Ryzen 5 230

2025

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +7.8% higher average FPS across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (8 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel Arc 140V, while Ryzen 5 230 needs a discrete GPU.

Why buy it

✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (16 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Costs $400 less on MSRP ($200 MSRP vs $600 MSRP).
✅Delivers 198.6% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 100.9 vs 33.8 PassMark/$ ($200 MSRP vs $600 MSRP).
✅Draws 28W instead of 30W, a 2W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 16 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 33.8 vs 100.9 PassMark/$ ($600 MSRP vs $200 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 9 288V across 3 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (20,186 vs 20,280).
❌No integrated graphics, while Core Ultra 9 288V can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Core Ultra 9 288V better than Ryzen 5 230?

Yes. Core Ultra 9 288V is the better overall CPU here. You are getting a 7.8% average FPS lead across 3 shared CPU game tests in our data and 0.5% better PassMark, which makes it the stronger all-around choice.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core Ultra 9 288V is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 7.8% more average FPS across 3 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core Ultra 9 288V is the better fit. You are getting 0.5% better PassMark, backed by 8 cores and 8 threads.

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

Core Ultra 9 288V is the smarter buy by a wide margin for any fresh desktop build. Core Ultra 9 288V is 200.0% more expensive on MSRP at $600 MSRP versus $200 MSRP, and it gives you a 7.8% average FPS lead across 3 shared CPU game tests in our data. Ryzen 5 230 only looks good on raw value math because it is a cheap legacy laptop CPU, not because it is a serious desktop gaming option. It simply cannot keep up with modern games, especially when the gap is already 7.8% in the shared gaming data.

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

Ryzen 5 230 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2025 vs 2024) and 33.3% larger total L3 cache (16 MB vs 12 MB). That makes it the safer long-term pick.

Games Benchmarks

Paired with RTX 4090

To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.

Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

Core Ultra 9 288V Benchmark Check

Ryzen 5 230 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core Ultra 9 288V	Ryzen 5 230
1080p
low	278 FPS	261 FPS
medium	246 FPS	237 FPS
high	207 FPS	199 FPS
ultra	178 FPS	171 FPS
1440p
low	235 FPS	230 FPS
medium	187 FPS	190 FPS
high	153 FPS	155 FPS
ultra	135 FPS	137 FPS
4K
low	163 FPS	159 FPS
medium	132 FPS	133 FPS
high	102 FPS	103 FPS
ultra	89 FPS	91 FPS

Open Core Ultra 9 288V Open Ryzen 5 230

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core Ultra 9 288V	Ryzen 5 230
1080p
low	481 FPS	372 FPS
medium	383 FPS	309 FPS
high	337 FPS	272 FPS
ultra	298 FPS	236 FPS
1440p
low	426 FPS	313 FPS
medium	352 FPS	270 FPS
high	312 FPS	244 FPS
ultra	267 FPS	207 FPS
4K
low	311 FPS	234 FPS
medium	269 FPS	206 FPS
high	251 FPS	191 FPS
ultra	218 FPS	161 FPS

Open Core Ultra 9 288V Open Ryzen 5 230

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core Ultra 9 288V	Ryzen 5 230
1080p
low	507 FPS	505 FPS
medium	507 FPS	505 FPS
high	507 FPS	505 FPS
ultra	507 FPS	505 FPS
1440p
low	507 FPS	505 FPS
medium	507 FPS	505 FPS
high	507 FPS	505 FPS
ultra	477 FPS	443 FPS
4K
low	507 FPS	493 FPS
medium	473 FPS	435 FPS
high	419 FPS	372 FPS
ultra	349 FPS	308 FPS

Open Core Ultra 9 288V Open Ryzen 5 230

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core Ultra 9 288V	Ryzen 5 230
1080p
low	507 FPS	505 FPS
medium	507 FPS	505 FPS
high	507 FPS	505 FPS
ultra	507 FPS	505 FPS
1440p
low	507 FPS	505 FPS
medium	507 FPS	505 FPS
high	507 FPS	505 FPS
ultra	507 FPS	505 FPS
4K
low	507 FPS	505 FPS
medium	507 FPS	501 FPS
high	496 FPS	442 FPS
ultra	433 FPS	380 FPS

Open Core Ultra 9 288V Open Ryzen 5 230

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core Ultra 9 288V and Ryzen 5 230

Core Ultra 9 288V

The Core Ultra 9 288V 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 3.3 GHz, with boost up to 5.1 GHz. L3 cache: 12 MB (total). L2 cache: 2.5 MB (per core). Built on 3 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA2833. Thermal design power (TDP): 30 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 20,280 points. Launch price was $299.

Ryzen 5 230

The Ryzen 5 230 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 6 January 2025 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Hawk Point (2024−2025) architecture. It features 6 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 3.5 GHz, with boost up to 4.9 GHz. L3 cache: 16 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: FP8. Thermal design power (TDP): 28 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 20,186 points. Launch price was $299.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core Ultra 9 288V packs 8 cores / 8 threads, while the Ryzen 5 230 offers 6 cores / 12 threads — the Core Ultra 9 288V has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 5.1 GHz on the Core Ultra 9 288V versus 4.9 GHz on the Ryzen 5 230 — a 4% clock advantage for the Core Ultra 9 288V (base: 3.3 GHz vs 3.5 GHz). The Core Ultra 9 288V uses the Lunar Lake (2024) architecture (3 nm), while the Ryzen 5 230 uses Hawk Point (2024−2025) (4 nm). In PassMark, the Core Ultra 9 288V scores 20,280 against the Ryzen 5 230's 20,186 — a 0.5% lead for the Core Ultra 9 288V. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core Ultra 9 288V vs 16 MB (total) on the Ryzen 5 230.

Feature	Core Ultra 9 288V	Ryzen 5 230
Cores / Threads	8 / 8+33%	6 / 12
Boost Clock	5.1 GHz+4%	4.9 GHz
Base Clock	3.3 GHz	3.5 GHz+6%
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)	16 MB (total)+33%
L2 Cache	2.5 MB (per core)+150%	1 MB (per core)
Process	3 nm-25%	4 nm
Architecture	Lunar Lake (2024)	Hawk Point (2024−2025)
PassMark	20,280	20,186
Cinebench R23 Multi	9,300	—
Geekbench 6 Single	2,800	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	10,000	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core Ultra 9 288V uses the FCBGA2833 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Ryzen 5 230 uses FP8 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core Ultra 9 288V	Ryzen 5 230
Socket	FCBGA2833	FP8
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+67%	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	LPDDR5X-8533	—
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	8	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: true (Core Ultra 9 288V) / not specified (Ryzen 5 230). The Core Ultra 9 288V includes integrated graphics (Intel Arc 140V), while the Ryzen 5 230 requires a dedicated GPU.

Feature	Core Ultra 9 288V	Ryzen 5 230
Integrated GPU	Yes	—
IGPU Model	Intel Arc 140V	—
AVX-512	No	—
Virtualization	true	—

💰

Value Analysis

The Core Ultra 9 288V launched at $600 MSRP, while the Ryzen 5 230 debuted at $200. On MSRP ($600 vs $200), the Ryzen 5 230 is $400 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core Ultra 9 288V delivers 33.8 pts/$ vs 100.9 pts/$ for the Ryzen 5 230 — making the Ryzen 5 230 the 99.7% better value option.