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 250KF Plus review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£180PassMark multi-core score:51115N. of physical cores:18CPU boost clock speed:5.3 GHzCPU socket:LGA1851TDP (Thermal design power):125 W

Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus Review: Compare 168 technical specifications and 2 best-of lists to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus
8.1/10

Overall score

Score
8.1/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists, owners and ratings from across the web.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 15%, Sentiment score 10%, User 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 94% of models
Score components

40%

8.7

Technical score

25%

?

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

15%

8.3

List score

10%

?

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

10%

8.4

User score

★Better than 94% of processors
8.5

Value for money

Value for money
8.5/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 97% of models
Score components

70%

8.1

Overall score

30%

9.6

Price

★Better than 97%
8.7

Technical score

Technical score
8.7/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 97% of models
Score components

60%

9.3

Performance

18%

8.0

Architecture

10%

9.2

Memory & PCIe

7%

5.2

Power & Thermal

4%

8.3

Platform

1%

4.0

Integrated graphics

★Better than 97%
?

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
▼
<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.
Ratings from across the web count in the User score, not in this score.
No expert tests yet
8.4

User score

User score
8.4/ 10
✕
What it is
How happy buyers are with this model, based on ratings from across the web.
How we count it
Enough data: A model needs at least 1 rating from across the web. Without one, it counts as 8.4, the mark of a weaker rated model in this category.
Share: User score counts 10% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 54% of models

80%

9.2

Rating

20%

5.0

Popularity

▼Worse than 54%
8.3

List score

List score
8.3/ 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 15% 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 (2)
List score: in 2 of 21 lists (10%)
★Better than 93%
  • intel-core-ultra-5-250kf-plus
  • intel-core-ultra-5-250kf-plus
  • intel-core-ultra-5-250kf-plus
  • intel-core-ultra-5-250kf-plus
  • intel-core-ultra-5-250kf-plus
intel-core-ultra-5-250kf-plus
intel-core-ultra-5-250kf-plus
intel-core-ultra-5-250kf-plus
intel-core-ultra-5-250kf-plus
intel-core-ultra-5-250kf-plus
Best prices
    N/A~ £180
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...

Processors model ranking

Ranked #392 of 558 models in Processors (Overall score)

Technical Specifications of processor Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus

Technical score
Technical score
8.7/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 97% of models
Score components:

60%

9.3

Performance

18%

8.0

Architecture

10%

9.2

Memory & PCIe

7%

5.2

Power & Thermal

4%

8.3

Platform

1%

4.0

Integrated graphics

8.7
Reviews score
7.2
User score
8.4
List score
8.3
Value for money
Value for money
8.5/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 97% of models
Score components:

70%

8.1

Overall score

30%

9.6

Price

8.5
Processor type
desktop
This processor belongs to the desktop processor class, which is more advanced than that of 54.7% of processors and equal to that of 39.5% 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 800 Series
This processor supports Intel 800 Series chipsets, which is broader compatibility than 90.3% of processors and equal to that of 0.2% 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
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
18
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 18 CPU cores, which is more than 94.7% of processors and equal to 0.4% of processors.
CPU threads
18
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 18 CPU threads, which is more than 83.7% of processors and equal to 0.5% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
5.3 GHz
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 5.3 GHz which is higher than that of 91.9% of processors and equal to that of 2.3% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
6x 4.2 GHz & 12x 3.3 GHz
PassMark multi-core score
51,115
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor scores 51,115 in PassMark, which is higher than 95.6% of processors.
Show more
Semiconductor size
3 nm
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor uses a 3 nm process node, which is more advanced than that of 94.6% of processors and equal to that of 4.6% of processors.
Foundry
TSMC 3 nm
This processor is built on the TSMC 3 nm foundry process, which is more advanced than that of 95.7% of processors and equal to that of 4.3% of processors.
L3 cache
30 MB
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 30 MB which is larger than that of 86.9% of processors and equal to that of 2% of processors.
L2 cache
30 MB
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 30 MB which is larger than that of 95.9% of processors and equal to that of 0.2% of processors.
L1 cache
?
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
7,200 MHz
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 7,200 MHz, which is higher than that of 90.6% of processors and equal to 0.1% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
DDR5-7200 MHz
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
?
Maximum memory capacity
256 GB
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
This processor supports up to 256 GB of memory, which is more than 89% of processors and equal to 8.8% of processors.
Show more
Integrated graphics
no
This processor does not include integrated graphics. 85.4% of processors offer this.
Integrated GPU model
N/A
Integrated GPU execution units
N/A
Integrated GPU base frequency
N/A
Integrated media encoders/decoders
N/A
Show more
TDP (Thermal design power)
125 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 125 W which is higher than that of 91.7% of processors and equal to that of 2.9% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
125 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 125 W which is higher than that of 91.7% of processors and equal to that of 2.9% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
159 W
Market range: <25 W – >150 W
This processor has a boost power of 159 W which is higher than that of 86.8% of processors and equal to that of 0.6% of processors.
Tau (power duration limit)
?
Configurable TDP
?
Show more

Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
  • 4.13x higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (21,502 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    21,502 vs 5,209
  • 4.46x higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (51,115 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    51,115 vs 11,469
  • 12 more CPU cores
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (18 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    18 vs 6
  • 87.3% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (4,790 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    4,790 vs 2,558
  • 2.04x higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (3,135 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    3,135 vs 1,535
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Arrow Lake vs Kaby Lake).
    Arrow Lake vs Kaby Lake
  • 20.5% higher boost clock
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (5.3 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    5.3 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • 10 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (18 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    18 vs 8
  • 16.2% better value for money
    Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has better value for money than the average processor (8.52 vs 7.3).
    8.52 vs 7.33
  • 15.1% higher user score
    User score
    8.4/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    How happy buyers are with this model, based on ratings from across the web.
    How we count it
    Enough data: A model needs at least 1 rating from across the web. Without one, it counts as 8.4, the mark of a weaker rated model in this category.
    Share: User score counts 10% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ▼ Worse than 54% of models

    80%

    9.2

    Rating

    20%

    5.0

    Popularity

    8.4 vs 7.3
  • Modern CPU socket
    This processor uses a more modern CPU socket than the average processor (LGA1851 vs FP5).
    LGA1851 vs FP5
  • 6 years newer release date
    This processor has a newer release date than the average processor (2026 vs 2020).
    2026 vs 2020
  • Supports heterogeneous scheduling
    This processor uses heterogeneous multi-processing, while the average processor does not. 24.8% of processors use it.
  • 4.13x higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (21,502 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    21,502 vs 5,209
  • 4.46x higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (51,115 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    51,115 vs 11,469
  • 12 more CPU cores
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (18 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    18 vs 6
  • 87.3% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (4,790 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    4,790 vs 2,558
  • 2.04x higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (3,135 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    3,135 vs 1,535
  • 20.5% higher boost clock
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (5.3 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    5.3 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • 10 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (18 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    18 vs 8
  • Unlocked for overclocking
    This processor has an unlocked multiplier, while the average processor does not. 22.6% of processors offer this.
  • 2 more performance cores
    This processor has more performance cores than the average processor (6 vs 4). The average processor has 4 performance cores.
    6 vs 4
  • 14 higher clock multiplier
    This processor has a higher clock multiplier than the average processor (42 vs 28). The average processor has a clock multiplier of 28.
    42 vs 28
  • 2x higher bus transfer rate
    This processor has a higher bus transfer rate than the average processor (16 GT/s vs 8 GT/s). The average processor offers bus transfer rate of 8 GT/s.
    16 GT/s vs 8 GT/s
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Arrow Lake vs Kaby Lake).
    Arrow Lake vs Kaby Lake
  • 10x larger L2 cache
    This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (30 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    30 MB vs 3 MB
  • 75% smaller process node
    This processor has a lower process node than the average processor (3 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
    3 nm vs 12 nm
  • More advanced foundry
    This processor uses a more advanced foundry process than the average processor (TSMC 3 nm vs Intel 14 nm).
    TSMC 3 nm 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.
  • 3.33x larger L3 cache
    This processor has a higher L3 cache than the average processor (30 MB vs 9 MB). The average processor has L3 cache of 9 MB.
    30 MB vs 9 MB
  • 3.6x more transistors
    This processor has more transistors than the average processor (17.8 billion vs 4.95 billion). The average processor has 4.95 billion transistors.
    17.8 billion vs 4.95 billion
  • Newer PCIe version
    This processor supports a newer PCIe version than the average processor (5 + 4 vs 3).
    5.0 + 4.0 vs 3.0
  • 8 more PCIe lanes
    This processor has more PCIe lanes than the average processor (24 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
    24 vs 16
  • 4x more memory capacity
    This processor has more maximum memory capacity than the average processor (256 GB vs 64 GB). The average processor supports 64 GB of memory.
    256 GB vs 64 GB
  • 2.46x higher memory bandwidth
    This processor has a higher memory bandwidth than the average processor (115.2 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s). The average processor offers memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s.
    115.2 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s
  • 2.25x higher memory speed
    This processor has a higher maximum memory speed than the average processor (7200 MHz vs 3200 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 3200 MHz.
    7,200 MHz vs 3,200 MHz
  • Newer DDR support
    This processor supports a newer DDR generation than the average processor (DDR5 vs DDR4).
    DDR5 vs DDR4
  • 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
  • Lower base clock
    This processor has a lower base clock than the average processor (6x4.2 GHz & 12x3.3 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    6x4.2 GHz & 12x3.3 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • 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
  • 2.78x higher base power
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (125 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    125 W vs 45 W
  • 2.48x higher boost power
    This processor has a higher boost power draw than the average processor (159 W vs 64 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 64 W.
    159 W vs 64 W
  • No simultaneous multithreading
    This processor does not support simultaneous multithreading, while the average processor does. 73.8% of processors support it.
  • Lower JEDEC memory speed
    This processor has a lower JEDEC memory speed than the average processor (DDR5-7200 MHz vs DDR4-3200 MHz). The average processor supports JEDEC memory speed of DDR4-3200 MHz.
    DDR5-7,200 MHz vs DDR4-3,200 MHz
  • 37.3% larger die size
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (243 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    243 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • 2.78x higher TDP
    This processor has a higher TDP than the average processor (125 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    125 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
  • More limited crypto acceleration
    This processor offers more limited crypto acceleration than the average processor (AES vs AES, SHA).
    AES vs AES, SHA
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TDT vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TDT vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • Lower base clock
    This processor has a lower base clock than the average processor (6x4.2 GHz & 12x3.3 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    6x4.2 GHz & 12x3.3 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • No simultaneous multithreading
    This processor does not support simultaneous multithreading, while the average processor does. 73.8% of processors support it.
  • 37.3% larger die size
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (243 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    243 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • Lower JEDEC memory speed
    This processor has a lower JEDEC memory speed than the average processor (DDR5-7200 MHz vs DDR4-3200 MHz). The average processor supports JEDEC memory speed of DDR4-3200 MHz.
    DDR5-7,200 MHz vs DDR4-3,200 MHz
  • No integrated graphics
    This processor does not include integrated graphics, while the average processor does. 85.4% of processors include integrated graphics.
  • 2.78x higher base power
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (125 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    125 W vs 45 W
  • 2.48x higher boost power
    This processor has a higher boost power draw than the average processor (159 W vs 64 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 64 W.
    159 W vs 64 W
  • 2.78x higher TDP
    This processor has a higher TDP than the average processor (125 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    125 W vs 45 W
  • 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

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

Overview video

Third-party reviews

What we like about Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus

  • 18 physical cores handle heavy multitasking well.
  • A boost clock of 5.3 GHz keeps single tasks quick.
  • The 3 nm chip is built on a modern process.
  • 30 MB of L3 cache helps with repeated data.
  • The chip is unlocked, so you can tune it.
  • It supports DDR5 memory up to 256 GB.

What we don't like about Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus

  • It draws 125 W at base and up to 159 W when it boosts, so it runs hot.
  • There is no built-in graphics, so a separate graphics card is required.
  • Multithreading is turned off, so each core runs only one thread.
  • You need a good cooler, because no cooler is included.
  • The power draw means a stronger power supply is needed.

Verdict

Eighteen cores on a 3 nm chip make the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus a strong pick for a desktop that runs many programs. Its PassMark single-core score of 4790 and boost of 5.3 GHz make everyday tasks feel quick, and 30 MB of L3 cache keeps data close to the cores. The chip is unlocked, so anyone who knows how to tune one can push it further. The trade-off is heat and power: it draws 125 W at base and up to 159 W when it boosts. Multithreading is off, which is unusual for a chip of this type, and there is no built-in graphics, so a separate card is needed. It suits a buyer who builds a desktop around a dedicated graphics card and wants a fast processor with a good cooler.

Compare Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus 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 250KF Plus and other processors

No results found