Core Ultra 9 288V vs Xeon Gold 5315Y

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 9 288V vs Xeon Gold 5315Y 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 9 288V vs Xeon Gold 5315Y: 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 9 288V

2024

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +15.0% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 30W instead of 140W, a 110W reduction.
✅Newer platform on FCBGA2833 with DDR5 support instead of LGA4189 and DDR4.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (8 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel Arc 140V, while Xeon Gold 5315Y needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (20,280 vs 20,477).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon Gold 5315Y, which brings 8 cores / 16 threads.
❌Launch MSRP is still $600 MSRP, while Xeon Gold 5315Y mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Xeon Gold 5315Y

2021

Why buy it

✅+1% higher PassMark.
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 8 cores / 16 threads.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 9 288V across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌366.7% higher power demand at 140W vs 30W.
❌Older platform position on LGA4189 with DDR4, while Core Ultra 9 288V moves to FCBGA2833 and DDR5.
❌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 Xeon Gold 5315Y?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon Gold 5315Y makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core Ultra 9 288V is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon Gold 5315Y is the stronger fit. You are getting 1% better PassMark, backed by 8 cores and 16 threads.

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

Core Ultra 9 288V is the better buy right now. Core Ultra 9 288V comes in at an unclear MSRP at $600 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 15.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The compromise is that Xeon Gold 5315Y is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 1% better PassMark. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (33.8 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Core Ultra 9 288V makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2024 vs 2021) and a healthier platform with FCBGA2833 and DDR5 instead of LGA4189. That gives you a healthier platform runway for motherboard, RAM, and later CPU upgrades.

Core Ultra 9 288V vs Xeon Gold 5315Y Technical Specifications

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

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.

Xeon Gold 5315Y

The Xeon Gold 5315Y is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2015-01-01. It is based on the Ice Lake-SP (2021) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 3.6 GHz. L3 cache: 12 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 10 nm process technology. Socket: LGA4189. Thermal design power (TDP): 140 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2933. Passmark benchmark score: 20,477 points. Launch price was $800.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core Ultra 9 288V packs 8 cores / 8 threads, matching the Xeon Gold 5315Y's 8 cores. Boost clocks reach 5.1 GHz on the Core Ultra 9 288V versus 3.6 GHz on the Xeon Gold 5315Y — a 34.5% clock advantage for the Core Ultra 9 288V (base: 3.3 GHz vs 3.2 GHz). The Core Ultra 9 288V uses the Lunar Lake (2024) architecture (3 nm), while the Xeon Gold 5315Y uses Ice Lake-SP (2021) (10 nm). In PassMark, the Core Ultra 9 288V scores 20,280 against the Xeon Gold 5315Y's 20,477 — a 1% lead for the Xeon Gold 5315Y. Both processors carry 12 MB (total) of L3 cache.

Feature	Core Ultra 9 288V	Xeon Gold 5315Y
Cores / Threads	8 / 8	8 / 16
Boost Clock	5.1 GHz+42%	3.6 GHz
Base Clock	3.3 GHz+3%	3.2 GHz
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)	12 MB (total)
L2 Cache	2.5 MB (per core)+150%	1 MB (per core)
Process	3 nm-70%	10 nm
Architecture	Lunar Lake (2024)	Ice Lake-SP (2021)
PassMark	20,280	20,477
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 Xeon Gold 5315Y uses LGA4189 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core Ultra 9 288V	Xeon Gold 5315Y
Socket	FCBGA2833	LGA4189
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+25%	PCIe 4.0
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 (Xeon Gold 5315Y). The Core Ultra 9 288V includes integrated graphics (Intel Arc 140V), while the Xeon Gold 5315Y requires a dedicated GPU.