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 i5-11600

2021

Why buy it

✅+0.1% higher PassMark.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 750, while Core Ultra 7 265U needs a discrete GPU.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core Ultra 7 265U.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 7 265U across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Launch MSRP is still $213 MSRP, while Core Ultra 7 265U mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌364.3% higher power demand at 65W vs 14W.
❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while Core Ultra 7 265U moves to FCBGA2049 and DDR5.

Core Ultra 7 265U

2025

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +12.8% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 14W instead of 65W, a 51W reduction.
✅Newer platform on FCBGA2049 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (17,900 vs 17,912).
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i5-11600 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-11600.

Core i5-11600

2021

Core Ultra 7 265U

2025

Why buy it

✅+0.1% higher PassMark.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 750, while Core Ultra 7 265U needs a discrete GPU.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core Ultra 7 265U.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +12.8% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 14W instead of 65W, a 51W reduction.
✅Newer platform on FCBGA2049 with DDR5 support instead of LGA1200 and DDR4.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 7 265U across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Launch MSRP is still $213 MSRP, while Core Ultra 7 265U mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌364.3% higher power demand at 65W vs 14W.
❌Older platform position on LGA1200 with DDR4, while Core Ultra 7 265U moves to FCBGA2049 and DDR5.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (17,900 vs 17,912).
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i5-11600 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-11600.

Quick Answers

So, is Core Ultra 7 265U better than Core i5-11600?

It depends on what matters more to you. For gaming, Core Ultra 7 265U is ahead with a 12.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Core i5-11600 pulls ahead with 0.1% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i5-11600 is the better fit. You are getting 0.1% better PassMark, backed by 6 cores and 12 threads.

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

Core Ultra 7 265U is still the faster CPU overall, but Core i5-11600 makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. Core Ultra 7 265U is at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $213 MSRP, and it gives you a 12.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The trade-off is that Core i5-11600 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 0.1% better PassMark. Core i5-11600 is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (84.1 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), which is why it is easier to justify for price-conscious builds on paper.

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

Core Ultra 7 265U is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2025 vs 2021) and a healthier platform with FCBGA2049 and DDR5 instead of LGA1200. That should give you a better long-term upgrade path for motherboard, RAM, and future CPU swaps.

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 i5-11600 Benchmark Check

Core Ultra 7 265U Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-11600	Core Ultra 7 265U
1080p
low	292 FPS	278 FPS
medium	258 FPS	249 FPS
high	217 FPS	210 FPS
ultra	186 FPS	181 FPS
1440p
low	239 FPS	231 FPS
medium	191 FPS	186 FPS
high	156 FPS	153 FPS
ultra	138 FPS	134 FPS
4K
low	166 FPS	161 FPS
medium	134 FPS	131 FPS
high	104 FPS	102 FPS
ultra	91 FPS	89 FPS

Open Core i5-11600 Open Core Ultra 7 265U

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-11600	Core Ultra 7 265U
1080p
low	448 FPS	448 FPS
medium	370 FPS	372 FPS
high	334 FPS	327 FPS
ultra	291 FPS	287 FPS
1440p
low	401 FPS	415 FPS
medium	325 FPS	344 FPS
high	296 FPS	303 FPS
ultra	257 FPS	256 FPS
4K
low	335 FPS	310 FPS
medium	275 FPS	268 FPS
high	252 FPS	249 FPS
ultra	211 FPS	211 FPS

Open Core i5-11600 Open Core Ultra 7 265U

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-11600	Core Ultra 7 265U
1080p
low	448 FPS	448 FPS
medium	448 FPS	448 FPS
high	448 FPS	448 FPS
ultra	448 FPS	448 FPS
1440p
low	448 FPS	448 FPS
medium	448 FPS	448 FPS
high	448 FPS	448 FPS
ultra	420 FPS	448 FPS
4K
low	448 FPS	448 FPS
medium	420 FPS	448 FPS
high	360 FPS	415 FPS
ultra	294 FPS	348 FPS

Open Core i5-11600 Open Core Ultra 7 265U

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-11600	Core Ultra 7 265U
1080p
low	448 FPS	448 FPS
medium	448 FPS	448 FPS
high	448 FPS	448 FPS
ultra	448 FPS	448 FPS
1440p
low	448 FPS	448 FPS
medium	448 FPS	448 FPS
high	448 FPS	448 FPS
ultra	448 FPS	448 FPS
4K
low	448 FPS	448 FPS
medium	448 FPS	448 FPS
high	448 FPS	448 FPS
ultra	426 FPS	414 FPS

Open Core i5-11600 Open Core Ultra 7 265U

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-11600 and Core Ultra 7 265U

Core i5-11600

The Core i5-11600 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 16 March 2021 (4 years ago). It is based on the Rocket Lake (2021) architecture. It features 6 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 2.8 GHz, with boost up to 4.8 GHz. L3 cache: 12 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1200. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 17,912 points. Launch price was $299.

Core Ultra 7 265U

The Core Ultra 7 265U is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 January 2025 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Arrow Lake-U (2025) architecture. It features 12 cores and 14 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 5.3 GHz. L3 cache: 12 MB. Built on 5 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA2049. Thermal design power (TDP): 14 MB + 12 MB. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 17,900 points. Launch price was $299.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-11600 packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Core Ultra 7 265U offers 12 cores / 14 threads — the Core Ultra 7 265U has 6 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.8 GHz on the Core i5-11600 versus 5.3 GHz on the Core Ultra 7 265U — a 9.9% clock advantage for the Core Ultra 7 265U (base: 2.8 GHz vs 2.4 GHz). The Core i5-11600 uses the Rocket Lake (2021) architecture (14 nm), while the Core Ultra 7 265U uses Arrow Lake-U (2025) (5 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-11600 scores 17,912 against the Core Ultra 7 265U's 17,900 — a 0.1% lead for the Core i5-11600. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-11600 vs 12 MB on the Core Ultra 7 265U.

Feature	Core i5-11600	Core Ultra 7 265U
Cores / Threads	6 / 12	12 / 14+100%
Boost Clock	4.8 GHz	5.3 GHz+10%
Base Clock	2.8 GHz+17%	2.4 GHz
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)	12 MB
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	—
Process	14 nm	5 nm-64%
Architecture	Rocket Lake (2021)	Arrow Lake-U (2025)
PassMark	17,912	17,900
Cinebench R23 Multi	10,500	—
Geekbench 6 Single	2,130	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	8,000	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i5-11600 uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the Core Ultra 7 265U uses FCBGA2049 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i5-11600	Core Ultra 7 265U
Socket	LGA1200	FCBGA2049
PCIe Generation	PCIe 4.0	PCIe 5.0+25%
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-3200	—
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	20	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-11600) / not specified (Core Ultra 7 265U). The Core i5-11600 includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 750), while the Core Ultra 7 265U requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i5-11600 targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-11600 rivals Ryzen 5 5600X.