AMD EPYC 4245P vs Intel Core Ultra 5 245T Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data reveals a surprisingly lopsided contest between the AMD EPYC 4245P and the Intel Core Ultra 5 245T. Out of the 17 recorded head-to-head comparisons, the AMD part secures 14 wins, while Intel manages only 3. The overall average benchmark scores, 39215 for the EPYC versus 38194 for the Core Ultra, confirm that the EPYC holds a narrow aggregate lead of about 2.7%. Both processors sit at the 86th percentile among all CPUs in the database, indicating they occupy a similar performance tier overall, but the distribution of wins tells a more nuanced story.

The closest contests occur in the Cinebench suite, where the EPYC 4245P edges ahead by a consistent 1.6% margin. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the EPYC scores 26618 against Intel's 26208, a difference of just 410 points. Single-core results follow the same pattern: the EPYC delivers 3757 in R23 single-core versus 3699 for the Core Ultra, again a 1.6% advantage. The R20 tests mirror this, with the EPYC scoring 11179 multi-core and 1577 single-core, while the Core Ultra posts 11007 and 1553, respectively. Even the older R15 benchmark shows the same tight spread: 2682 versus 2641 in multi-core and 378 versus 372 in single-core. These margins, while consistent, are small enough to be within run-to-run variance, yet the pattern across every Cinebench iteration is unbroken.

The Passmark suite exposes far larger gaps, and here the two chips split along expected lines. The EPYC 4245P dominates in several workloads. Its passmark data compression score of 339408 crushes the Core Ultra's 283812, a 19.6% advantage. Extended instructions see the EPYC at 26547 against 22071, a 20.3% lead. Integer math favors the EPYC by 7.3% (95120 versus 88676), while random string sorting shows a 14.3% gap (39916 versus 34931). The EPYC also wins the multithread test narrowly at 31063 versus 30833 (0.7% ahead) and physics by a more decisive 15.8% (2637 versus 2278). Single-thread performance in Passmark favors the EPYC by 4.8% (4575 versus 4367).

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245T fights back in three specific workloads, and its victories are not marginal. Floating point math is a landslide for Intel: 108499 versus 57965, a 46.6% advantage. This is the single largest delta in the entire comparison. Data encryption also goes strongly to Intel at 23656 versus 18466, a 21.9% lead. The find prime numbers test produces the most lopsided result in Intel's favor: 324 versus 193, a 40.4% gap. These three wins highlight a clear division: Intel's architecture handles floating-point and encryption workloads with far greater efficiency, while AMD's Zen 5 design excels at integer, compression, and sorting tasks.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU wins more benchmark comparisons overall?

A: The AMD EPYC 4245P wins 14 of the 17 head-to-head tests, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 245T wins only 3. The EPYC also holds a higher average benchmark score of 39215 compared to Intel's 38194.

Q: How large is the performance gap in Cinebench multi-core tests?

A: The EPYC 4245P leads by 1.6% in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core tests. In R23, the scores are 26618 for the EPYC versus 26208 for the Core Ultra, a difference of 410 points.

Q: In which workloads does the Intel Core Ultra 5 245T outperform the EPYC?

A: Intel wins in three specific Passmark tests: floating point math (108499 versus 57965, a 46.6% lead), data encryption (23656 versus 18466, a 21.9% lead), and find prime numbers (324 versus 193, a 40.4% lead).

Q: How do the two processors compare in single-thread performance?

A: The EPYC 4245P has a consistent edge. Passmark single-thread shows 4575 versus 4367, a 4.8% lead. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 3757 versus 3699, a 1.6% lead.

Q: Do both CPUs have the same performance percentile ranking?

A: Yes, both the AMD EPYC 4245P and the Intel Core Ultra 5 245T sit at the 86th percentile among all CPUs in the database, despite their different benchmark distributions.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each processor?

A: The AMD EPYC 4245P has an average benchmark score of 39215, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 245T has an average score of 38194. The EPYC is roughly 2.7% higher.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies, and the benchmark data reflects those choices. The AMD EPYC 4245P is built on the Zen 5 architecture with the codename Grado, part of the EPYC 4005 series. It uses a 4 nm process from TSMC and packs 8,315 million transistors into a 70.6 mm² die. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245T uses the Arrow Lake architecture (Arrow Lake-S), part of the Core Ultra Series 2, and is manufactured on a more advanced 3 nm process, also from TSMC. Intel's die is significantly larger at 243 mm² and contains 17,800 million transistors, more than double AMD's transistor count.

Core configurations differ dramatically. The EPYC 4245P has 6 cores and 12 threads, relying on simultaneous multithreading to double its thread count. The Core Ultra 5 245T has 14 cores but only 14 threads, meaning it uses a hybrid architecture without hyperthreading. Despite having more than twice the core count, Intel's chip does not translate that into a multithreaded benchmark win, as the EPYC's 12 threads stay competitive or ahead in most multi-core tests.

Cache hierarchies also diverge. The EPYC 4245P offers 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 32 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 5 245T provides 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, but only 24 MB of shared L3. Intel's larger per-core caches help in certain workloads, while AMD's larger shared L3 pool benefits others. Memory bandwidth goes to Intel at 102.4 GB/s versus AMD's 89.6 GB/s, and both support dual-channel DDR5 with ECC memory.

PCIe connectivity differs as well. The EPYC 4245P offers 24 CPU-only Gen 5 lanes, while the Core Ultra 5 245T provides 20 Gen 5 lanes. Both use different sockets: AMD Socket AM5 for the EPYC, Intel Socket 1851 for the Core Ultra. Integrated graphics also differ: the EPYC includes Radeon Graphics, while Intel ships Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU. The EPYC targets the server and workstation segment, while the Core Ultra is a desktop part. Release timing is close, with the EPYC launching on 2025-05-12 and the Core Ultra on 2025-01-06.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear but workload-dependent conclusion. For general multi-core productivity, the AMD EPYC 4245P is the stronger choice. It wins the multithread Passmark test (31063 versus 30833) and dominates data compression (19.6% ahead), extended instructions (20.3% ahead), integer math (7.3% ahead), and random string sorting (14.3% ahead). Its physics score is 15.8% higher, and its single-thread performance is 4.8% better in Passmark. Every Cinebench test, from R15 to R23, single-core and multi-core, goes to the EPYC by a 1.5% to 1.6% margin.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245T is the pick only if the workload leans heavily toward floating-point math, encryption, or prime-number computation. Its 46.6% lead in floating point math is enormous, and its 21.9% edge in data encryption and 40.4% lead in find prime numbers are equally decisive. These are not minor wins; they are category-defining advantages. Any application that spends significant time on such operations will run substantially faster on the Intel chip.

For a server or workstation buyer, the EPYC 4245P offers the more balanced portfolio of strengths. For a desktop user whose tasks involve scientific computing, cryptography, or heavy math, the Core Ultra 5 245T's specialized advantages may outweigh its losses elsewhere. The overall average scores, 39215 versus 38194, favor the EPYC, but the margin is modest. Both chips sit at the 86th percentile, so neither is a weak performer. The choice comes down to whether the user needs the EPYC's broad multi-core dominance or the Core Ultra's specialized compute strengths.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD EPYC 4245P | Intel Core Ultra 5 245T |

|---|---|---|

| Series | EPYC 4005 series | Core Ultra Series 2 |

| Cores | 6 | 14 |

| Threads | 12 | 14 |

| Base Clock | 3.90 GHz | 2.20 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.40 GHz | 5.10 GHz |

| Socket | AMD Socket AM5 | Intel Socket 1851 |

| Architecture | Zen 5 | Arrow Lake |

| Codename | Grado | Arrow Lake-S |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | TSMC |

| Transistors | 8,315 million | 17,800 million |

| Die Size | 70.6 mm² | 243 mm² |

| L1 Cache (per core) | 80 KB | 192 KB |

| L2 Cache (per core) | 1 MB | 3 MB |

| L3 Cache (shared) | 32 MB | 24 MB |

| Memory Bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | 102.4 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 24 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 20 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon Graphics | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU |

| Market Segment | Server/Workstation | Desktop |

| Release Date | 2025-05-12 | 2025-01-06 |

| Launch MSRP | $239 | $270 |

| Part Number | 100-000001555 | SRVFF |

Both processors share several traits: dual-channel DDR5 memory support, ECC memory capability, a 65 W TDP, and a locked multiplier. Neither offers an unlocked clock multiplier for overclocking. The EPYC 4245P carries a launch MSRP of $239, while the Core Ultra 5 245T launches at $270. The EPYC's higher boost clock of 5.40 GHz against Intel's 5.10 GHz, combined with its 3.90 GHz base clock versus 2.20 GHz, helps explain its single-thread advantage despite Intel's more advanced 3 nm process. Intel's larger die and higher transistor count do not translate into benchmark wins outside of specialized workloads, as the EPYC's smaller, denser design proves more effective in the majority of tests.