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 5 225T

2025

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +15.6% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 65W instead of 150W, a 85W reduction.
✅Newer platform on LGA1851 with DDR5 support instead of LGA3647 and DDR4.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (24 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Arc Graphics (16EU), while Xeon Gold 6252 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (26,874 vs 27,148).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 36 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon Gold 6252, which brings 24 cores / 48 threads.
❌Launch MSRP is still $240 MSRP, while Xeon Gold 6252 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Xeon Gold 6252

2019

Why buy it

✅+1% higher PassMark.
✅+78.8% larger total L3 cache (36 MB vs 20 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 24 cores / 48 threads.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 5 225T across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌130.8% higher power demand at 150W vs 65W.
❌Older platform position on LGA3647 with DDR4, while Core Ultra 5 225T moves to LGA1851 and DDR5.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core Ultra 5 225T can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core Ultra 5 225T

2025

Xeon Gold 6252

2019

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +15.6% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 65W instead of 150W, a 85W reduction.
✅Newer platform on LGA1851 with DDR5 support instead of LGA3647 and DDR4.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (24 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Arc Graphics (16EU), while Xeon Gold 6252 needs a discrete GPU.

Why buy it

✅+1% higher PassMark.
✅+78.8% larger total L3 cache (36 MB vs 20 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 24 cores / 48 threads.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (26,874 vs 27,148).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (20 MB vs 36 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon Gold 6252, which brings 24 cores / 48 threads.
❌Launch MSRP is still $240 MSRP, while Xeon Gold 6252 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 5 225T across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌130.8% higher power demand at 150W vs 65W.
❌Older platform position on LGA3647 with DDR4, while Core Ultra 5 225T moves to LGA1851 and DDR5.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core Ultra 5 225T can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Core Ultra 5 225T better than Xeon Gold 6252?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. Xeon Gold 6252 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core Ultra 5 225T is the better mainstream desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and day-to-day practicality.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon Gold 6252 is the better fit. You are getting 1% better PassMark, backed by 24 cores and 48 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 78.8% larger total L3 cache (36 MB vs 20 MB).

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

Core Ultra 5 225T is the smarter buy today. Core Ultra 5 225T is at an unclear MSRP at $240 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it gives you a 15.6% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. The trade-off is that Xeon Gold 6252 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 1% better PassMark. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (112.0 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so the better CPU is not just faster, it is also the cleaner value play on paper.

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

Core Ultra 5 225T is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2025 vs 2019) and a healthier platform with LGA1851 and DDR5 instead of LGA3647. 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 Ultra 5 225T Benchmark Check

Xeon Gold 6252 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core Ultra 5 225T	Xeon Gold 6252
1080p
low	253 FPS	195 FPS
medium	244 FPS	158 FPS
high	206 FPS	128 FPS
ultra	175 FPS	100 FPS
1440p
low	217 FPS	157 FPS
medium	186 FPS	123 FPS
high	153 FPS	96 FPS
ultra	132 FPS	76 FPS
4K
low	148 FPS	72 FPS
medium	126 FPS	60 FPS
high	98 FPS	47 FPS
ultra	86 FPS	38 FPS

Open Core Ultra 5 225T Open Xeon Gold 6252

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core Ultra 5 225T	Xeon Gold 6252
1080p
low	595 FPS	233 FPS
medium	508 FPS	207 FPS
high	420 FPS	174 FPS
ultra	377 FPS	145 FPS
1440p
low	498 FPS	200 FPS
medium	438 FPS	180 FPS
high	370 FPS	153 FPS
ultra	317 FPS	123 FPS
4K
low	299 FPS	125 FPS
medium	264 FPS	114 FPS
high	246 FPS	104 FPS
ultra	217 FPS	86 FPS

Open Core Ultra 5 225T Open Xeon Gold 6252

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core Ultra 5 225T	Xeon Gold 6252
1080p
low	672 FPS	679 FPS
medium	672 FPS	679 FPS
high	609 FPS	679 FPS
ultra	522 FPS	657 FPS
1440p
low	672 FPS	679 FPS
medium	588 FPS	614 FPS
high	515 FPS	580 FPS
ultra	439 FPS	515 FPS
4K
low	504 FPS	459 FPS
medium	422 FPS	363 FPS
high	377 FPS	322 FPS
ultra	318 FPS	263 FPS

Open Core Ultra 5 225T Open Xeon Gold 6252

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core Ultra 5 225T	Xeon Gold 6252
1080p
low	672 FPS	679 FPS
medium	672 FPS	679 FPS
high	672 FPS	679 FPS
ultra	672 FPS	609 FPS
1440p
low	672 FPS	679 FPS
medium	672 FPS	625 FPS
high	611 FPS	536 FPS
ultra	535 FPS	458 FPS
4K
low	550 FPS	514 FPS
medium	501 FPS	459 FPS
high	448 FPS	402 FPS
ultra	393 FPS	348 FPS

Open Core Ultra 5 225T Open Xeon Gold 6252

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core Ultra 5 225T and Xeon Gold 6252

Core Ultra 5 225T

The Core Ultra 5 225T is manufactured by Intel. It was released in Janeiro 2025 (recentemente). It is based on the Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025) architecture. It features 10 cores and 10 threads. Base frequency is 2.5 GHz, with boost up to 4.9 GHz. L3 cache: 20 MB (total). L2 cache: 3 MB (per core). Built on 3 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1851. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-6400. Passmark benchmark score: 26,874 points. Launch price was $299.

Xeon Gold 6252

The Xeon Gold 6252 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2 April 2019 (6 years ago). It is based on the Cascade Lake (2019−2020) architecture. It features 24 cores and 48 threads. Base frequency is 2.1 GHz, with boost up to 3.7 GHz. L3 cache: 35.75 MB. L2 cache: 24 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA3647. Thermal design power (TDP): 150 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2933. Passmark benchmark score: 27,148 points. Launch price was $3,655.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core Ultra 5 225T packs 10 cores / 10 threads, while the Xeon Gold 6252 offers 24 cores / 48 threads — the Xeon Gold 6252 has 14 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.9 GHz on the Core Ultra 5 225T versus 3.7 GHz on the Xeon Gold 6252 — a 27.9% clock advantage for the Core Ultra 5 225T (base: 2.5 GHz vs 2.1 GHz). The Core Ultra 5 225T uses the Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025) architecture (3 nm), while the Xeon Gold 6252 uses Cascade Lake (2019−2020) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core Ultra 5 225T scores 26,874 against the Xeon Gold 6252's 27,148 — a 1% lead for the Xeon Gold 6252. L3 cache: 20 MB (total) on the Core Ultra 5 225T vs 35.75 MB on the Xeon Gold 6252.

Feature	Core Ultra 5 225T	Xeon Gold 6252
Cores / Threads	10 / 10	24 / 48+140%
Boost Clock	4.9 GHz+32%	3.7 GHz
Base Clock	2.5 GHz+19%	2.1 GHz
L3 Cache	20 MB (total)	35.75 MB+79%
L2 Cache	3 MB (per core)	24 MB+700%
Process	3 nm-79%	14 nm
Architecture	Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025)	Cascade Lake (2019−2020)
PassMark	26,874	27,148+1%
Geekbench 6 Single	2,677	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	8,943	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core Ultra 5 225T uses the LGA1851 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Xeon Gold 6252 uses LGA3647 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core Ultra 5 225T	Xeon Gold 6252
Socket	LGA1851	LGA3647
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+67%	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-6400	—
Max RAM Capacity	256 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	24	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d (Core Ultra 5 225T) / not specified (Xeon Gold 6252). The Core Ultra 5 225T includes integrated graphics (Arc Graphics (16EU)), while the Xeon Gold 6252 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core Ultra 5 225T targets Budget. Direct competitor: Core Ultra 5 225T rivals Ryzen 5 9600X.