OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Processors Methodology v3.0
Processors Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Processors Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Processors Methodology v3.0

Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£250PassMark multi-core score:10285N. of physical cores:8CPU boost clock speed:4.2 GHzCPU socket:LGA1851TDP (Thermal design power):15 W

Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL Review: Compare 74 technical specifications to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

7.2/10

Overall score

Score
7.2/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 66% of models
Score components

40%

7.0

Technical score

25%

?

Reviews scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.2, the mark of a weaker model in this category

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

?

Sentiment scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.0, the mark of a weaker model in this category

â–²Better than 66% of processors
7.8

Value for money

Value for money
7.8/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 77% of models
Score components

70%

7.2

Overall score

30%

9.2

Price

â–²Better than 77%
7.0

Technical score

Technical score
7.0/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 68% of models
Score components

60%

6.5

Performance

18%

7.4

Architecture

10%

7.9

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.7

Power & Thermal

4%

8.7

Platform

1%

7.8

Integrated graphics

â–²Better than 68%
?

Reviews score

Reviews score
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Grades by review (0)
We have not found an independent test of this model yet. Until we do, its review part counts as 7.2.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
No expert tests yet
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • No image
No image
Where to buy
    N/A~ £250
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
    Loading category ranking...

    Technical Specifications of processor Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL

    Technical score
    Technical score
    7.0/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
    Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
    Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–² Better than 68% of models
    Score components:

    60%

    6.5

    Performance

    18%

    7.4

    Architecture

    10%

    7.9

    Memory & PCIe

    7%

    7.7

    Power & Thermal

    4%

    8.7

    Platform

    1%

    7.8

    Integrated graphics

    7.0
    Reviews score
    7.2
    List score
    ?
    Value for money
    Value for money
    7.8/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
    When it matters
    When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–² Better than 77% of models
    Score components:

    70%

    7.2

    Overall score

    30%

    9.2

    Price

    7.8
    Processor type
    embedded
    This processor belongs to the embedded processor class, which is less advanced than that of 93.1% of processors and equal to that of 6.9% of processors.
    CPU socket
    LGA1851
    This processor uses the LGA1851 CPU socket, which is newer than that of 98.1% of processors and equal to that of 1.9% of processors.
    Chipset
    Intel 700 Series
    This processor supports Intel 700 Series chipsets, which is broader compatibility than 80.7% of processors and equal to that of 0.3% of processors.
    CPU architecture
    x86-64
    This processor uses the x86-64 architecture, which is more advanced than that of 1.8% of processors and equal to that of 98.2% of processors.
    Instruction sets
    MMX, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES
    This processor supports MMX, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES instruction sets, which is narrower support than 74.8% of processors and equal to that of 1.6% of processors.
    Show more
    N. of physical cores
    8
    Market range: <2 – >12
    This processor has 8 CPU cores, which is more than 61.2% of processors and equal to 13.9% of processors.
    CPU threads
    10
    Market range: <4 – >24
    This processor offers 10 CPU threads, which is more than 52.4% of processors and equal to 0.6% of processors.
    CPU boost clock speed
    4.2 GHz
    Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
    This processor reaches a boost clock of 4.2 GHz which is lower than that of 54.4% of processors and equal to that of 4.2% of processors.
    CPU base clock speed
    2x 1.5 GHz & 4x 1 GHz
    This processor has a base clock of 2x1.5 GHz & 4x1 GHz which is lower than that of 79.7% of processors.
    PassMark multi-core score
    10,285
    Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
    This processor scores 10,285 in PassMark, which is lower than 52.7% of processors.
    Show more
    Semiconductor size
    7 nm
    Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
    This processor uses a 7 nm process node, which is more advanced than that of 70.4% of processors and equal to that of 10.5% of processors.
    Foundry
    ?
    L3 cache
    10 MB
    Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
    This processor has an L3 cache of 10 MB which is larger than that of 51.3% of processors and equal to that of 0.6% of processors.
    L2 cache
    ?
    L1 cache
    608 KB
    Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
    This processor has an L1 cache of 608 KB which is larger than that of 73.5% of processors.
    Show more
    DDR memory version
    DDR5
    This processor supports DDR DDR5, which is newer than that of 64.2% of processors and equal to that of 12.8% of processors.
    Maximum memory speed
    5,600 MHz
    Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
    This processor supports memory speeds up to 5,600 MHz, which is higher than that of 77.9% of processors and equal to 4.6% of processors.
    Max memory speed (JEDEC)
    DDR5-5600 MHz
    This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to DDR5-5600 MHz, which is higher than that of 77.4% of processors and equal to 6.2% of processors.
    Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
    ?
    Maximum memory capacity
    96 GB
    Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
    This processor supports up to 96 GB of memory, which is more than 53.4% of processors and equal to 5.8% of processors.
    Show more
    Integrated graphics
    yes
    This processor includes integrated graphics. 14.7% of processors offer this.
    Integrated GPU model
    Intel Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 48EU
    This processor uses the Intel Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 48EU integrated GPU, which is more advanced than that in 84.2% of processors and equal to that in 0.2% of processors.
    Integrated GPU execution units
    32
    Market range: <6 – >64
    This processor has 32 GPU execution units, which is more than 70.1% of processors and equal to 10.1% of processors.
    Integrated GPU base frequency
    300 MHz
    Market range: <300 MHz – >800 MHz
    This processor has an integrated GPU clock of 300 MHz which is lower than that of 57.8% of processors and equal to that of 38.4% of processors.
    Integrated media encoders/decoders
    AV1 (HW encode)
    This processor supports AV1 (HW encode) media codecs, which is narrower support than 61.2% of processors.
    Show more
    TDP (Thermal design power)
    15 W
    Market range: <15 W – >90 W
    This processor has a TDP of 15 W which is lower than that of 79.2% of processors and equal to that of 15.1% of processors.
    Base power (PL1)
    15 W
    Market range: <15 W – >90 W
    This processor has a base power of 15 W which is lower than that of 78.3% of processors and equal to that of 15.6% of processors.
    Boost power (PL2)
    ?
    Tau (power duration limit)
    28 seconds
    Market range: <8 seconds – >28 seconds
    This processor has a turbo duration of 28 seconds which is longer than that of 4.4% of processors and equal to that of 85.3% of processors.
    Configurable TDP
    yes
    This processor supports configurable TDP. 46.4% of processors offer this.
    cTDP: 35-54 W
    Show more

    Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL vs the average processor

    246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
    • More advanced microarchitecture
      This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Meteor Lake vs Kaby Lake).
      Meteor Lake vs Kaby Lake
    • 4x more L2 per core
      This processor has more L2 cache per core than the average processor (2 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core). The average processor provides 0.5 MB/core of L2 cache per core.
      2 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
    • 32.2% better single-core performance
      This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,382 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
      3,382 vs 2,558
    • Mixed big and small cores
      This processor uses a big.LITTLE design, while the average processor does not. 22.6% of processors use one.
      P-cores + E-cores
    • 91% higher memory bandwidth
      This processor has a higher memory bandwidth than the average processor (89.6 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s). The average processor offers memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s.
      89.6 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s
    • Newer PCIe version
      This processor supports a newer PCIe version than the average processor (4 vs 3).
      4 vs 3
    • 66.7% lower base power
      This processor has a lower base power draw than the average processor (15 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
      15 W vs 45 W
    • Supports memory overclocking
      This processor supports memory overclocking, while the average processor does not. 43.9% of processors support memory overclocking.
    • Modern CPU socket
      This processor uses a more modern CPU socket than the average processor (LGA1851 vs FP5).
      LGA1851 vs FP5
    • 4 years newer release date
      This processor has a newer release date than the average processor (2024 vs 2020).
      April 2024
      2024 vs 2020
    • Supports heterogeneous scheduling
      This processor uses heterogeneous multi-processing, while the average processor does not. 24.8% of processors use it.
    • More extensive crypto acceleration
      This processor offers more extensive crypto acceleration than the average processor (AES, SHA, PCLMULQDQ vs AES, SHA).
      AES, SHA, PCLMULQDQ vs AES, SHA
    • 32.2% better single-core performance
      This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,382 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
      3,382 vs 2,558
    • 2 more CPU cores
      This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (8 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
      8 vs 6
    • 2 more CPU threads
      This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (10 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
      10 vs 8
    • 2 wider front-end design
      This processor has a higher front-end width than the average processor (6 vs 4). The average processor uses front-end width of 4.
      6 vs 4
    • More advanced microarchitecture
      This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Meteor Lake vs Kaby Lake).
      Meteor Lake vs Kaby Lake
    • 4x more L2 per core
      This processor has more L2 cache per core than the average processor (2 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core). The average processor provides 0.5 MB/core of L2 cache per core.
      2 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
    • Mixed big and small cores
      This processor uses a big.LITTLE design, while the average processor does not. 22.6% of processors use one.
      P-cores + E-cores
    • 41.7% smaller process node
      This processor has a lower process node than the average processor (7 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
      7 nm vs 12 nm
    • 58.3% larger L1 cache
      This processor has a higher L1 cache than the average processor (608 KB vs 384 KB). The average processor has L1 cache of 384 KB.
      608 KB vs 384 KB
    • 91% higher memory bandwidth
      This processor has a higher memory bandwidth than the average processor (89.6 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s). The average processor offers memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s.
      89.6 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s
    • Newer PCIe version
      This processor supports a newer PCIe version than the average processor (4 vs 3).
      4 vs 3
    • Supports memory overclocking
      This processor supports memory overclocking, while the average processor does not. 43.9% of processors support memory overclocking.
    • 75% higher memory speed
      This processor has a higher maximum memory speed than the average processor (5,600 MHz vs 3,200 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 3,200 MHz.
      5,600 MHz vs 3,200 MHz
    • 4 more PCIe lanes
      This processor has more PCIe lanes than the average processor (20 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
      20 vs 16
    • Newer DDR support
      This processor supports a newer DDR generation than the average processor (DDR5 vs DDR4).
      DDR5 vs DDR4
    • Higher JEDEC memory speed
      This processor has a higher JEDEC memory speed than the average processor (DDR5-5600 MHz vs DDR4-3200 MHz). The average processor supports JEDEC memory speed of DDR4-3200 MHz.
      DDR5-5,600 MHz vs DDR4-3,200 MHz
    • 50% more memory capacity
      This processor has more maximum memory capacity than the average processor (96 GB vs 64 GB). The average processor supports 64 GB of memory.
      96 GB vs 64 GB
    • Better integrated GPU
      This processor uses a better integrated GPU than the average processor (Intel Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 48EU vs Intel UHD Graphics 630).
      Intel Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 48EU vs Intel UHD Graphics 630
    • 1 more supported displays
      This processor has more supported displays than the average processor (4 vs 3). The average processor supports 3 displays.
      4 vs 3
    • 66.7% lower base power
      This processor has a lower base power draw than the average processor (15 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
      15 W vs 45 W
    • 5 °C higher temperature limit
      This processor has a higher temperature limit than the average processor (105 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor can run up to 100 °C.
      105 °C vs 100 °C
    • 66.7% lower TDP
      This processor has a lower TDP than the average processor (15 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
      15 W vs 45 W
    • Narrower instruction support
      This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
      MMX, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
    • 32.4% less L3 per core
      This processor has less L3 cache per core than the average processor (1.3 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
      1.25 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
    • Lower base clock
      This processor has a lower base clock than the average processor (2x1.5 GHz & 4x1 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
      2x1.5 GHz & 4x1 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
    • Narrower media codec support
      This processor supports fewer media codecs than the average processor (AV1 (HW encode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)).
      AV1 (HW encode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)
    • 5 °C higher CPU temperature
      This processor has a higher CPU temperature than the average processor (105 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor runs at a CPU temperature of 100 °C.
      105 °C vs 100 °C
    • 4.5% lower boost clock
      This processor has a lower boost clock speed than the average processor (4.2 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
      4.2 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
    • 13 lower clock multiplier
      This processor has a lower clock multiplier than the average processor (15 vs 28). The average processor has a clock multiplier of 28.
      15 vs 28
    • 10.3% lower PassMark score
      This processor has a lower PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (10,285 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
      10,285 vs 11,469
    • Narrower instruction support
      This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
      MMX, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
    • Lower base clock
      This processor has a lower base clock than the average processor (2x1.5 GHz & 4x1 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
      2x1.5 GHz & 4x1 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
    • 4.5% lower boost clock
      This processor has a lower boost clock speed than the average processor (4.2 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
      4.2 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
    • 13 lower clock multiplier
      This processor has a lower clock multiplier than the average processor (15 vs 28). The average processor has a clock multiplier of 28.
      15 vs 28
    • 10.3% lower PassMark score
      This processor has a lower PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (10,285 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
      10,285 vs 11,469
    • 32.4% less L3 per core
      This processor has less L3 cache per core than the average processor (1.3 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
      1.25 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
    • Narrower media codec support
      This processor supports fewer media codecs than the average processor (AV1 (HW encode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)).
      AV1 (HW encode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)
    • 5 °C higher CPU temperature
      This processor has a higher CPU temperature than the average processor (105 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor runs at a CPU temperature of 100 °C.
      105 °C vs 100 °C

    Third-party reviews

    What customers like about Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL

    • High power efficiency with a low 15W base TDP, leading to excellent battery life in thin-and-light laptops.
    • Strong integrated graphics performance for its class, utilizing the Intel Arc Xe-LPG architecture (48EUs).
    • Significant multi-threaded performance boost (approx. 24%) compared to previous-gen entry-level mobile chips like the i3-1315URE.
    • Includes a dedicated Neural Processing Unit (NPU) for localized AI tasks, offering up to 11 TOPS.
    • Support for modern high-speed memory (DDR5-5600) and large capacities (up to 96GB).
    • Consistent performance even when running on battery power compared to being plugged in.

    What customers don't like about Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL

    • Lower number of performance cores (only 2 P-cores) compared to higher-tier Ultra 5 or 7 models.
    • Relatively high memory latency, which can impact performance in certain high-demand gaming scenarios.
    • Single-core performance still trails behind some competitors from Apple and AMD in the same segment.
    • Integrated graphics lack the ubiquity and software support of NVIDIA's DLSS ecosystems.
    • Locked multiplier prevents any traditional overclocking for enthusiasts.

    Verdict

    The Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL is an entry-level, 8-core processor from the Meteor Lake-PS family, featuring a hybrid architecture with 2 Performance-cores and 6 Efficiency-cores (including 2 low-power E-cores) supporting 10 threads. It operates at a base frequency of 1.5 GHz with a turbo boost up to 4.2 GHz and a 10MB L3 cache, all while maintaining a highly efficient 15W base TDP (scalable to 57W). Its primary advantages include an integrated Arc Xe-LPG GPU with 48 execution units, support for high-speed DDR5-5600 memory, and a dedicated NPU for localized AI acceleration. However, notable drawbacks include a locked multiplier that prevents overclocking, a limited number of performance cores for heavy professional workloads, and the requirement of the newer LGA 1851 socket.

    Compare Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL with other processors

    1Product to compare no. 1
    VS
    2Product to compare no. 2
    VS
    3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

    Graphic comparison of Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL and other processors

    No results found