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 5 125U review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£320PassMark multi-core score:16901N. of physical cores:12CPU boost clock speed:4.3 GHzCPU socket:FCBGA2049TDP (Thermal design power):15 W

Intel Core Ultra 5 125U 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 68% of models
Score components

40%

7.1

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 68% of processors
7.7

Value for money

Value for money
7.7/ 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 71% of models
Score components

70%

7.2

Overall score

30%

8.8

Price

â–²Better than 71%
7.1

Technical score

Technical score
7.1/ 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 70% of models
Score components

60%

6.8

Performance

18%

7.7

Architecture

10%

7.5

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.8

Power & Thermal

4%

7.5

Platform

1%

8.2

Integrated graphics

â–²Better than 70%
?

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~ £320
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 5 125U

Technical score
Technical score
7.1/ 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 70% of models
Score components:

60%

6.8

Performance

18%

7.7

Architecture

10%

7.5

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.8

Power & Thermal

4%

7.5

Platform

1%

8.2

Integrated graphics

7.1
Reviews score
7.2
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.7/ 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 71% of models
Score components:

70%

7.2

Overall score

30%

8.8

Price

7.7
Processor type
mobile
This processor belongs to the mobile processor class, which is more advanced than that of 6.9% of processors and equal to that of 47.7% of processors.
CPU socket
FCBGA2049
This processor uses the FCBGA2049 CPU socket, which is older than that of 67.9% of processors and equal to that of 1.7% of processors.
Chipset
N/A
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
SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2
This processor supports SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2 instruction sets, which is narrower support than 88.2% of processors and equal to that of 9.7% of processors.
Show more
N. of physical cores
12
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 12 CPU cores, which is more than 79.9% of processors and equal to 5.7% of processors.
CPU threads
14
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 14 CPU threads, which is more than 67.3% of processors and equal to 1.6% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
4.3 GHz
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 4.3 GHz which is lower than that of 51.5% of processors and equal to that of 2.9% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
2x 1.3 GHz & 10x 0.8 GHz & 2x 0.7 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 2x1.3 GHz & 10x0.8 GHz & 2x0.7 GHz which is lower than that of 62% of processors and equal to that of 0.1% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
16,901
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor scores 16,901 in PassMark, which is higher than 62.2% 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
Intel 4
This processor is built on the Intel 4 foundry process, which is more advanced than that of 94.2% of processors and equal to that of 1.4% of processors.
L3 cache
12 MB
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 12 MB which is larger than that of 52% of processors and equal to that of 9.3% of processors.
L2 cache
12 MB
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 12 MB which is larger than that of 83.1% of processors and equal to that of 2.9% of processors.
L1 cache
704 KB
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 704 KB which is larger than that of 77% of processors and equal to that of 0.5% 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
7,467 MHz
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 7,467 MHz, which is higher than that of 90.8% of processors and equal to 1.4% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
LPDDR5X-7467 MHz
This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to LPDDR5X-7467 MHz, which is higher than that of 92.1% of processors and equal to 0.9% of processors.
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
N/A
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 64EU
This processor uses the Intel Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU integrated GPU, which is more advanced than that in 84.5% of processors and equal to that in 1.3% of processors.
Integrated GPU execution units
64
Market range: <6 – >64
This processor has 64 GPU execution units, which is more than 86.7% of processors and equal to 3.9% 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 decode/encode)
This processor supports AV1 (HW decode/encode) media codecs, which is narrower support than 59.6% of processors and equal to 1.5% 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)
57 W
Market range: <25 W – >150 W
This processor has a boost power of 57 W which is lower than that of 56.4% of processors and equal to that of 2% of processors.
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: 12 W
Show more

Intel Core Ultra 5 125U 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
  • 6 more CPU cores
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (12 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    12 vs 6
  • 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.
    E-core module: 2 MB shared
    2 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
  • 4x larger L2 cache
    This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (12 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    12 MB vs 3 MB
  • 6 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (14 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    14 vs 8
  • 2.33x higher memory speed
    This processor has a higher maximum memory speed than the average processor (7,467 MHz vs 3,200 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 3,200 MHz.
    7,467 MHz vs 3,200 MHz
  • More advanced foundry
    This processor uses a more advanced foundry process than the average processor (Intel 4 vs Intel 14 nm).
    Intel 4 vs Intel 14 nm
  • 37.7% higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (2,113 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    2,113 vs 1,535
  • Supports heterogeneous scheduling
    This processor uses heterogeneous multi-processing, while the average processor does not. 24.8% of processors use it.
  • 3 years newer release date
    This processor has a newer release date than the average processor (2023 vs 2020).
    December 2023
    2023 vs 2020
  • 6 more CPU cores
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (12 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    12 vs 6
  • 6 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (14 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    14 vs 8
  • 27.1% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,252 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    3,252 vs 2,558
  • 37.7% higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (2,113 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    2,113 vs 1,535
  • 47.4% higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (16,901 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    16,901 vs 11,469
  • 45.4% higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (7,572 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    7,572 vs 5,209
  • 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.
    P-core 6, E-core 6
    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 larger L2 cache
    This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (12 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    12 MB vs 3 MB
  • 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.
    E-core module: 2 MB shared
    2 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
  • More advanced foundry
    This processor uses a more advanced foundry process than the average processor (Intel 4 vs Intel 14 nm).
    Intel 4 vs Intel 14 nm
  • 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 + LP 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
  • 83.3% larger L1 cache
    This processor has a higher L1 cache than the average processor (704 KB vs 384 KB). The average processor has L1 cache of 384 KB.
    704 KB vs 384 KB
  • 2.33x higher memory speed
    This processor has a higher maximum memory speed than the average processor (7,467 MHz vs 3,200 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 3,200 MHz.
    7,467 MHz vs 3,200 MHz
  • 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
  • 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 (LPDDR5X-7467 MHz vs DDR4-3200 MHz). The average processor supports JEDEC memory speed of DDR4-3200 MHz.
    LPDDR5X-7467 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 64EU vs Intel UHD Graphics 630).
    Intel Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU vs Intel UHD Graphics 630
  • 2.67x more GPU execution units
    This processor has more GPU execution units than the average processor (64 vs 24). The average processor has 24 GPU execution units.
    64 vs 24
  • 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
  • 10 °C higher temperature limit
    This processor has a higher temperature limit than the average processor (110 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor can run up to 100 °C.
    110 °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 (SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • 45.9% less L3 per core
    This processor has less L3 cache per core than the average processor (1 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    1 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • Narrower media codec support
    This processor supports fewer media codecs than the average processor (AV1 (HW decode/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 decode/encode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)
  • 10 °C higher CPU temperature
    This processor has a higher CPU temperature than the average processor (110 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor runs at a CPU temperature of 100 °C.
    110 °C vs 100 °C
  • 15 lower clock multiplier
    This processor has a lower clock multiplier than the average processor (13 vs 28). The average processor has a clock multiplier of 28.
    13 vs 28
  • Lower base clock
    This processor has a lower base clock than the average processor (2x1.3 GHz & 10x0.8 GHz & 2x0.7 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    2x1.3 GHz & 10x0.8 GHz & 2x0.7 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • 2.3% lower boost clock
    This processor has a lower boost clock speed than the average processor (4.3 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    4.3 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • 28% more expensive
    Intel Core Ultra 5 125U is more expensive than the average processor (£320 vs £250).
    £320 vs £250
  • 28% more expensive
    Intel Core Ultra 5 125U is more expensive than the average processor (£320 vs £250).
    £320 vs £250
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • 15 lower clock multiplier
    This processor has a lower clock multiplier than the average processor (13 vs 28). The average processor has a clock multiplier of 28.
    13 vs 28
  • Lower base clock
    This processor has a lower base clock than the average processor (2x1.3 GHz & 10x0.8 GHz & 2x0.7 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    2x1.3 GHz & 10x0.8 GHz & 2x0.7 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • 2.3% lower boost clock
    This processor has a lower boost clock speed than the average processor (4.3 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    4.3 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • 45.9% less L3 per core
    This processor has less L3 cache per core than the average processor (1 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    1 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • Narrower media codec support
    This processor supports fewer media codecs than the average processor (AV1 (HW decode/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 decode/encode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)
  • 10 °C higher CPU temperature
    This processor has a higher CPU temperature than the average processor (110 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor runs at a CPU temperature of 100 °C.
    110 °C vs 100 °C

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Intel Core Ultra 5 125U

  • Excellent battery life in light tasks, with some users reporting over 10 hours in power-saving modes.
  • Efficient performance for office workloads, enterprise tasks, and academic study.
  • Integrated Arc graphics offer a noticeable improvement over previous Iris Xe generations for casual gaming.
  • Support for modern connectivity standards including Wi-Fi 7 and Thunderbolt 5 in compatible laptops.
  • Operates with low power consumption (15W base TDP), making it ideal for thin and light portable designs.

What customers don't like about Intel Core Ultra 5 125U

  • Significant multi-core performance gap compared to the Core Ultra 5 125H variant.
  • Mixed power efficiency results on Windows compared to Linux, with some users seeing much shorter runtimes.
  • Performance regressions in specific gaming scenarios due to latency issues compared to older Raptor Lake chips.
  • Integrated 4-core Arc GPU is still not powerful enough for demanding modern games at high settings.
  • Laptops featuring this chip often have soldered memory, limiting future upgrade potential.

Verdict

The Intel Core Ultra 5 125U is a mid-range Meteor Lake mobile processor featuring a 12-core, 14-thread architecture (2 Performance cores, 8 Efficient cores, and 2 Low Power Efficient cores) with a max turbo frequency of 4.3 GHz and 12 MB of L3 cache. Built on a 7nm process with a 15W base power (scaling up to 57W), it integrates a dedicated AI Boost NPU for neural workloads and a 4-core Intel Arc Graphics unit capable of 1.85 GHz. Main pros include high power efficiency for long battery life, native support for fast LPDDR5x-7467 memory, and advanced AI acceleration for productivity tasks. However, it suffers from a reduced L3 cache compared to higher-tier Ultra models and slower integrated graphics performance than the 'H' series counterparts, making it less suitable for intensive gaming.

Compare Intel Core Ultra 5 125U 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 5 125U and other processors

No results found