Ultra 5 225F vs 3020e
Primary details
Comparing 3020e and Core Ultra 5 225F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2133 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | AMD Raven Ridge (Ryzen 2000 APU) | no data |
| Power efficiency | 24.01 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Dali (Zen) (2020) | Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025) |
| Release date | 4 August 2020 (4 years ago) | January 2025 |
Detailed specifications
3020e and Core Ultra 5 225F basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.
| Physical cores | 2 (Dual-core) | 10 (Deca-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 10 |
| Base clock speed | 1.2 GHz | 3.3 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.6 GHz | 4.9 GHz |
| L1 cache | 192 KB | 112 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 3 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 4 MB | 21 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 3 nm |
| Die size | no data | 243 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 105 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 17,800 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | no data |
Compatibility
Information on 3020e and Core Ultra 5 225F compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.
| Number of CPUs in a configuration | no data | 1 |
| Socket | FT5 | 1851 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 6 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by 3020e and Core Ultra 5 225F. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SME | no data |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| FMA | + | - |
| AVX | + | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| TSX | - | + |
Security technologies
3020e and Core Ultra 5 225F technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by 3020e and Core Ultra 5 225F are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by 3020e and Core Ultra 5 225F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 | DDR5 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon RX Vega 3 ( - 1000 MHz) | N/A |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by 3020e and Core Ultra 5 225F.
| PCIe version | no data | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 20 |
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 2 | 10 |
| Threads | 2 | 10 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 3 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 6 Watt | 65 Watt |
3020e has 983.3% lower power consumption.
Ultra 5 225F, on the other hand, has 400% more physical cores and 400% more threads, and a 366.7% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between 3020e and Core Ultra 5 225F. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that 3020e is a notebook processor while Core Ultra 5 225F is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between 3020e and Core Ultra 5 225F, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Similar processor comparisons
We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.
