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 7 165U review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£560PassMark multi-core score:16761N. of physical cores:12CPU boost clock speed:4.9 GHzCPU socket:FCBGA2049TDP (Thermal design power):15 W

Intel Core Ultra 7 165U Review: Compare 74 technical specifications and 1 expert reviews 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%

7.2

Technical score

25%

7.2

Reviews score

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
7.3

Value for money

Value for money
7.3/ 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–¼ Worse than 51% of models
Score components

70%

7.2

Overall score

30%

7.6

Price

â–¼Worse than 51%
7.2

Technical score

Technical score
7.2/ 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 71% of models
Score components

60%

6.8

Performance

18%

7.6

Architecture

10%

7.5

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.8

Power & Thermal

4%

7.8

Platform

1%

8.4

Integrated graphics

â–²Better than 71%
7.2

Reviews score

Reviews score
7.2/ 10
✕
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
â–¼ Worse than 59% of models

7.2

Mark 7.3 is below the typical mark 7.6 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

80%

7.9

Average grade

20%

5.0

Popularity

Grades by review (1)
1 review, with a printed score. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
â–¼Worse than 59%
?

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~ £560
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 #1 of 558 models in Processors (Overall score)

Technical Specifications of processor Intel Core Ultra 7 165U

Technical score
Technical score
7.2/ 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 71% of models
Score components:

60%

6.8

Performance

18%

7.6

Architecture

10%

7.5

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.8

Power & Thermal

4%

7.8

Platform

1%

8.4

Integrated graphics

7.2
Reviews score
7.2
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.3/ 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–¼ Worse than 51% of models
Score components:

70%

7.2

Overall score

30%

7.6

Price

7.3
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
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
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
4.9 GHz
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 4.9 GHz which is higher than that of 73.7% of processors and equal to that of 4.7% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
2x 1.7 GHz & 10x 1.2 GHz & 2x 0.7 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 2x1.7 GHz & 10x1.2 GHz & 2x0.7 GHz which is higher than that of 57.8% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
16,761
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor scores 16,761 in PassMark, which is higher than 61.6% of processors and equal to 0.1% 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
10 MB
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 10 MB which is larger than that of 79% of processors and equal to that of 1.8% of processors.
L1 cache
1,184 KB
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 1,184 KB which is larger than that of 88.7% 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
?
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
?
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: 12-15 W
Show more

Intel Core Ultra 7 165U 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.
    2 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
  • 55.2% higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (2,383 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    2,383 vs 1,535
  • 3.33x larger L2 cache
    This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (10 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    10 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
  • 52.9% higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (7,967 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    7,967 vs 5,209
  • 11.4% higher boost clock
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (4.9 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    4.9 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • 7.5% higher review score
    Reviews score
    7.2/ 10
    ✕
    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
    â–¼ Worse than 59% of models

    7.2

    Mark 7.3 is below the typical mark 7.6 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    7.9

    Average grade

    20%

    5.0

    Popularity

    Grades by review (1)
    1 review, with a printed score. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    7.2 vs 6.7
  • More extensive crypto acceleration
    This processor offers more extensive crypto acceleration than the average processor (AES, SHA, RSA/PKA vs AES, SHA).
    AES, SHA, RSA/PKA vs AES, SHA
  • 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
  • 55.2% higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (2,383 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    2,383 vs 1,535
  • 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
  • 11.4% higher boost clock
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (4.9 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    4.9 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • 52.9% higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (7,967 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    7,967 vs 5,209
  • 28.3% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,281 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    3,281 vs 2,558
  • 46.1% higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (16,761 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    16,761 vs 11,469
  • 27.6% higher Cinebench R20 single-core score
    This processor has a higher Cinebench R20 single-core score than the average processor (625 vs 490). The average processor scores 490 in Cinebench R20 single-core.
    625 vs 490
  • 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 8
    6 vs 4
  • 4x higher bus transfer rate
    This processor has a higher bus transfer rate than the average processor (32 GT/s vs 8 GT/s). The average processor offers bus transfer rate of 8 GT/s.
    32 GT/s vs 8 GT/s
  • Higher base clock
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (2x1.7 GHz & 10x1.2 GHz & 2x0.7 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    2x1.7 GHz & 10x1.2 GHz & 2x0.7 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • 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
  • 3.33x larger L2 cache
    This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (10 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    10 MB vs 3 MB
  • 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
  • 3.08x larger L1 cache
    This processor has a higher L1 cache than the average processor (1,184 KB vs 384 KB). The average processor has L1 cache of 384 KB.
    1,184 KB vs 384 KB
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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
  • 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 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
  • 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
  • 2.24x more expensive
    Intel Core Ultra 7 165U is more expensive than the average processor (£560 vs £250).
    £560 vs £250
  • 11 lower clock multiplier
    This processor has a lower clock multiplier than the average processor (17 vs 28). The average processor has a clock multiplier of 28.
    17 vs 28
  • 2.24x more expensive
    Intel Core Ultra 7 165U is more expensive than the average processor (£560 vs £250).
    £560 vs £250
  • 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
  • 11 lower clock multiplier
    This processor has a lower clock multiplier than the average processor (17 vs 28). The average processor has a clock multiplier of 28.
    17 vs 28
  • 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
  • 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

Video reviews

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

Not graded

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

8.8
notebookcheck.com
✓ explicit
28/04/2024
Lab test · Business 2-in-1 laptop
Verdict
The Intel Core Ultra 7 165U in the Dell Latitude 9450 2-in-1 is only slightly faster than its predecessor and throttles quickly under sustained load.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Intel Core Ultra 7 165U

  • Improved power efficiency compared to previous 13th Gen 'U' series processors in specific mobile workloads.
  • Strong single-core performance due to high boost frequencies (up to 4.9 GHz).
  • Enhanced memory support, now compatible with faster DDR5 and LPDDR5x standards.
  • Integrated Neural Processing Unit (NPU) provides a dedicated hardware foundation for AI-based tasks.
  • Native support for modern standards including Thunderbolt 4, Wi-Fi 6E, and AV1 hardware encoding/decoding.

What customers don't like about Intel Core Ultra 7 165U

  • Underwhelming multi-core performance compared to AMD Ryzen 7 7840U and Intel's own 'H' series counterparts.
  • Reduced L3 cache (12MB) compared to the higher-tier Core Ultra 7 155H/165H models.
  • Inconsistent performance in Linux environments, often attributed to immature firmware or power management issues.
  • Integrated graphics (4-core Arc) are significantly weaker than the 8-core versions found in 'H' series chips.
  • Reported performance struggles in heavy multitasking or demanding apps like Microsoft Teams during screen sharing.

Verdict

The Intel Core Ultra 7 165U is a high-end Meteor Lake processor featuring 12 cores (2 Performance, 8 Efficient, and 2 Low Power Efficient) and 14 threads with a max turbo frequency of 4.90 GHz. Built on the Intel 4 process (7nm), it includes a dedicated AI Boost NPU for local AI tasks and integrated Intel Graphics with 4 Xe-cores. Its main pros include exceptional power efficiency with a 15W base TDP (up to 57W turbo), robust multi-threaded performance for thin-and-light laptops, and advanced vPro Enterprise security features. However, its integrated graphics are significantly less powerful than the 8-core Arc versions found in 'H' series chips, and its limited Performance core count can restrict its peak single-threaded output compared to higher-wattage alternatives.

Compare Intel Core Ultra 7 165U 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 7 165U and other processors

No results found